The full U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit said Friday that it would rehear the House’s Don McGahn subpoena case — a sign that the full court is inclined to reverse the ruling by a panel of judges on the court that stood to severely hamper congressional oversight of the Trump administration.
This was expected (by me anyway) but what was NOT expected was (1) they combined it with the House v Mnuchin case – where Judge Tervor “fluffing for the Don that appointed me” McFadden ruled that the house did not have standing to challenge Trump’s reallocation of funding to the Border wall.
Vote is not listed, but it was of interest that both Rao and Katsas (the two trump judges on the DC Cir) did not participate. That is really odd, perhaps both recused themselves. Usually if someone disagrees, they dissent from rehearing. Henderson and Griffith (who wrote the McGhan) opinion did not note a dissent.
They also set it for argument on April 28, 2020 which is warp speed for the appellate Courts.
The original opinion (written by Henderson and Griffiths) has gotten a lot of criticism, and en banc was almost a forgone conclusion, but the speed and including McFadden’s opinion into the en banc ways the DC Cir wants to clean this up quickly.
P.s. and the same Judge McFadden has been sitting for over a year on the House’s lawsuit for Trump’s taxes. I can’t but see this as a big shot across his bow in that case.
the full court is inclined to reverse the ruling
Of course they will. They know who they work for.
Will Trump and his minions Mnuchin and McGahn run to the SC (where they have Roy Kohns) if the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit reverse the three-judge appellate panel decision?
Let’s not forget who ushered and prepped Kavbeernaugh to the SC…it’s none other than McGahn!
The bigger question is will the SC take the case. If they don’t, something could happen before he is booted from office. Otherwise, not so much. Right?
Will the courts exist?
Today’s Happy Thought:
Trump’s term in office ends on January 20, 2021. There is no provision to extend it if there isn’t an election before then. In that unlikely case, the new President would be determined by the succession provisions, so not the VP (term also expired), likely Speaker of the House.
THAT WOULD BE AWESOME! 
On the flipside, that would probably mean most of us died in the Covid19 infection. So maybe we shouldn’t hope for that…?
Thanks…I needed that.
Thank you for what’s obviously an expert opinion. I, as a non-lawyer, thought the opinion by the three judge panel was a travesty, and a grave threat to our Constitutional order, particularly our system of checks and balances.
While I have no faith in this Supreme Court, I would hope Roberts, at least, would understand Republicans won’t be running the Executive Branch forever. That’s an argument he might understand. I don’t have any reason to believe he’d rule appropriately based on the laws enshrined in the Constitution.
After getting constant body shots all week,this is a refreshing way to end the bout.
" Full Appeals Court Will Rehear Two Major Separation Of Powers Cases"
Well, except that with no election, her term would have expired along with the rest of the House and 1/3 of the Senate, too.
But California’s got decent mail-in voting, right?
If McGahn prepped Kavanaugh, then Kavanaugh should recuse.
Yes, we do. And the entire nation should adopt vote by mail. It solves so many problems.
What I find even more odd is the sheer number of imPotus stonewalling appeal cases Rao finds herself on (3-judge panels out of a pool of 11). Sometimes a string of coincidence is just a string of coincidence, and sometimes I’m an armadillo.
Who decides selections to panels smaller than en banc?
Not really, but this guy is:
In my experience (as a one-year clerk to a judge on the Second Circuit Court of Appeals), the three-judge panels are established long before any cases are assigned. The Court first sets a calendar for what weeks during the year there will be oral arguments (usually once or twice a month), and the – internally and confidentially – assigns judges to sit during the various weeks on three-judge panels. This is so that judges can make travel plans to be available during the weeks they’re assigned (and the judges get some input as to when they are assigned, as well as where in a Circuit like the Ninth, where oral argument is heard all over, from Pasadena to Seattle). Then the cases are assigned to panels randomly based on a variety of factors – e.g. criminal cases often get heard sooner, likewise immigration cases, whereas regular civil appeals can get put to the back of the list. But in my experience, the assignment WAS random – we knew what weeks we’d be going with the judge to hear arguments in Manhattan, but it wasn’t until about eight weeks before the particular argument week that we’d get a batch of briefs for the cases that had been assigned to that week from the central clerk’s office.
We in the legal profession, knowone the most favored maxims, is “There is no right without a remedy”. So every lawyer knew the McGann decision was a con job. How would the House effectuate its subpoenas? As for the Supreme Court, you should consider EVERY case that goes there is lost. It may be 5-4 if that helps, but none of those POS individuals value their role in history more than they fear finding nerve agent on their front door handle. And that is what they are facing. Like Lindsey with his fear Pootie will release movies of Ms. Lindsey having sex with men, the Sup Court is owned and operated by Russian Compremot’ incorporated. What can we do? Watch Winter of Flame on Nyetflicksky, that’s what it takes.
