Thanks TPM. I was just about to post the youtube audio.We all should know how much bullshit the government lawyers under a Trump administration will try to dish out in the course of this hearing. So far its like they’re saying, pay no attention to the man behind the curtain. Regarding who can bring this case related to standing…Trump’s lawyers seem to be saying the state doesn’t have a constitutional vested interest. That’s quite an lame argument I must say.
Judges are hammering the gov’t lawyer who is word salading some of their questions or deflecting.
The judges are asking good questions. It appears that DOJ is trying to argue that the states (Washington and Minn) don’t have standing in this case. The judges are questioning this argument pointedly and heatedly.
States rights for red states not for blue states. No states rights for you.
Mrs. Von Holst lost the live stream.
Can someone with a JD (or trying to get one) paying closer attention than I am answer a simple question?
Am I correct that they’re actually appealing entry of a T.R.O. and not a preliminary injunction? I mean, did they really do that? Did they really decide it made more sense to appeal from the TRO than to have the PI hearing and appeal from that if they lost? Are they really that fucking stupid? Or did I just miss the PI hearing?
that was all Greek to me, but just read this:
Cecillia Wang ‏@WangCecillia 4m4 minutes ago
WA SG starts with technical issue - DOJ made legal error, can’t appeal from TRO. Should go mandamus. J. Clifton says why should we care.
Thanks for that info. I went to review the comments and saw this little gem in part of the discussion.
Holy shit.
Saw that. Wow. Three co-equal branches, you fascists.
from what I can tell, that’s right (no PI hearing yet – this is challenging the TRO).
They’re not dummies at the DoJ. if they screwed up something that basic, either they were ordered to or they were ordered to and didn’t bother to explain why it was a jurisdictional mistake that would likely get their appeal bounced back to the trial court.
I almost feel sorry for the DOJ lawyer. Long silence because they knew they were trapped into a completely insupportable answer.
Are you listening? Well, obviously. Never mind.
Cognizable interest. Wow. Trump’s lawyer really are trying desperately to make mincemeat out of simple fruit pie. Word salad doesn’t begin to describe Trump’s lawyer’s verbal diarrhea.
Now for the state’s lawyer’s turn representing the interests of the immigrants. Why shouldn’t it be a writ of mandamus or judicial writ as a statutory duty? Ummm…maybe because the purpose of this immigration ban wasn’t based on the example of a communicable disease, like a need to minimize its spread like the judge suggests, but was intended to discriminate against an entire group of immigrants based on their religious background, as stated several times by the President and his henchmen as their intent. And because it has the effect of harming the economy of the state from which the ban has been suddenly implemented for no other reason but to stop those of Muslim background from countries that never carried out harm on our soil…Or doesn’t any of that have any fucking relevance? Those immigrants that hail from Washington state have standing, don’t ya think?
How many are affected from Washington the judge asks? 60,000 to 100,000 from the country at large its been reported have been affected…even though the gov’t lied and said it was only 109 (they LIED!) How many work in the tech industry on work visas? A good percentage I would guess.
I don’t know who this fucking asshole judge is that is asking questions minimizing how many Muslims come from those countries from the entire global Muslim population…as if that’s important. He figures its on 15%. So? What’s this guy’s point? He sounds like a total numbnut to me, full of accusations.
I could never be a lawyer, even if I do love to argue…I’d end up throwing something at the bench and be taken out in contempt.
Me? No, I’m basing that on the tweet upthread that quoted that event.
OK. I’m listening on Twitter.
you have greater empathy than me. Squirm you little maggots!
I have no doubt that someone explained to trump that there would be a PI hearing in 14 days. but you know how he is about “losing.” he was clearly incensed and ordered war in response. he’s ignorant and has no interest in fixing that.
I have zero doubt that that’s what happened. None whatsoever.
Ever been argued into a corner in a roomful of people? It will give you a bit of empathy when you see someone else put their heads in a noose like that.
Believe me, I love it that the DOJ got argued into that particular corner - they didn’t want to and it needed to be stated clearly.