Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Tuesday, July 09, 2019

In a scalding order that called the Justice Department's motion to change lawyers "patently deficient," a federal judge in Manhattan on Tuesday blocked the move by the Justice Department to withdraw several of its attorneys from the census citizenship question case in New York.

Advertisement

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Dammit RCade, that's twice I beat you today on stories by less than 10 minutes.

It must be good to be king.... ;^)

#1 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-07-09 10:39 PM | Reply

You sound like Gracie.

#2 | Posted by REDIAL at 2019-07-09 10:45 PM | Reply

You sound like Gracie.

That really hurts....

#3 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-07-09 10:48 PM | Reply

My bad.

#4 | Posted by REDIAL at 2019-07-09 10:52 PM | Reply

I'm just kiddin'.

It was whiny --- wasn't it?

#5 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-07-09 10:56 PM | Reply

LOL.

#6 | Posted by REDIAL at 2019-07-09 11:00 PM | Reply

How does that saying go again?

"The -------- plans of rats often go awry."

#7 | Posted by Twinpac at 2019-07-09 11:57 PM | Reply

Wah wah!

#8 | Posted by aborted_monson at 2019-07-10 12:01 AM | Reply

The plaintiffs in the case ― a group of states and advocacy groups ― are also seeking sanctions against the department for allegedly misleading them about the way the citizenship question was added. Furman also ordered that the lawyers who want to withdraw be available for any proceedings around that request.

It's normal for attorneys to give reasons to "come and go on cases," said Justin Levitt, a former top official in the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division. But it was unusual to switch out an entire team of lawyers "in overtime, with no explanation," he added.

"It's not normal for a court to deny a request to swap out an entire trial team. It's not normal for either a President or an Attorney General to promise open defiance of the Supreme Court," he said. "No part of this is normal. No part of this is even normal-adjacent."

It is "exceptionally unusual" for a judge to deny a DOJ request to switch attorneys, said Sasha Samberg-Champion, another former Justice Department attorney. "Usually DOJ lawyers are treated as pretty fungible for representation purposes," he added.
The order, Samberg-Champion said, "suggests that Judge Furman is viewing these departing lawyers as, essentially, witnesses to potential misconduct whose testimony may be relevant to a sanctions motion."

Looks like somebody ticked off Judge Furman and he's throwing the book of law at them. The affidavits should be enlightening since the attorneys who refused to carry Trump's water any further have to tell the court the reason why under penalty of sanctions or worse.

Barr is going to severely segment the DOJ pitting attorney against attorney if this goes in the direction it's looking.

#9 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-07-10 12:03 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

TONY

"The affidavits should be enlightening since the attorneys who refused to carry Trump's water any further have to tell the court the reason why under penalty of sanctions or worse."

I recall that they cited "ethical concerns" which shouldn't be that hard to explain. I took that to mean they went as far as they could without exposing themselves to unethical accusations and possibly an end to their career.

Of course, that would mean nothing to Trump. He expects people to sacrifice all for his sake.

#10 | Posted by Twinpac at 2019-07-10 01:58 AM | Reply

Advertisement

Advertisement

IMHO, the snails pace of our Justice System takes away any sense of justice. Remedies should be quickly found, I think that our legal system is hindered by highly paid attorneys whose best interests are served by long, drawn out cases which could be decided much more quickly, inexpensively and justly. The greed of the legal representatives replaces justice with maneuvers which often prevent any real justice as in the case of Epstein.

#11 | Posted by danni at 2019-07-10 07:06 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

DANNI

Thank you. I've experienced the same thing myself for the past two years. It's nice to know you share my opinion.

#12 | Posted by Twinpac at 2019-07-10 07:23 AM | Reply

The government should be able to have who it wants to represent it. Who is this judge to tell the government who can represent them in court? Judicial activism from the bench.

#13 | Posted by boaz at 2019-07-10 08:07 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

"The government should be able to have who it wants to represent it. "

Not if the Judge suspects that the reasons for switching is subterfuge or some way to prevent the court from knowing what the true reason for the Census Citizenship question was. I applaud his decision, the people have a right to know that our leaders are trying to use the census as a weapon against Hispanics in this country. And, to most fair minded people, it was so obvious that he was virtually forced to make this decision or look like an accomplice.

#14 | Posted by danni at 2019-07-10 08:16 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

What gives a judge the power to tell another branch of government who they can appoint to plead a case before the Supreme Court? Prescience anyone? Bad idea, would you accept a judge telling you what lawyers you could use in an appeal?

#15 | Posted by docnjo at 2019-07-10 08:18 AM | Reply

Twin, when justice takes years it ceases to be justice, when legal expenses are so huge if prevents millions of us from even seeking justice. Donald Trump is the perfect example, when he refused to pay contractors and told them to take him to court knowing they couldn't afford the legal battle to get paid which would cost more, in many cases, than what they were owed. That Americans then knowingly voted for him???? What is wrong with those people???? I can understand the dumb ones who didn't understand but there are lots of people who did understand and agreed with Trump that ripping off contractors was just "smart." I hope and pray those same folks don't somehow win again in 2020, the nation won't survive it.

#16 | Posted by danni at 2019-07-10 08:20 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Who is this judge to tell the government who can represent them in court?

As usual, Boaz refuses to actually read the information and find the answer for himself. The answer is THE WITHDRAWAL PROCEDURE ITSELF requires that the retiring attorneys submit affidavits to the court stating the reason they want to take leave from the case.

On Tuesday, Furman raked the Justice Department over the coals for its failures to meet the procedural requirements for replacing its attorneys. He spelled out the local rule that required the Department to offer an "affidavit or otherwise of satisfactory reasons for withdrawal" for the judge to consider while he also considers the impact the withdrawal will have on the timing of the case.
That's why the judge called the government's motion patently deficient in the first place.

#17 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-07-10 08:33 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Bad idea, would you accept a judge telling you what lawyers you could use in an appeal?"

You wouldn't accept the ruling of a judge? Good luck with that stupid.

#18 | Posted by danni at 2019-07-10 08:41 AM | Reply

For those who don't know, the issue tied to the DOJ's attempted attorney swap is related to the predicate reason the government gave the court which claimed a hard, immutable deadline date for starting the Census printing (June 30) necessitated a rushed legal process to adjudicate the issues at hand. Now that that date has passed, the government is saying, "Well, we've still got time to make the changes we want," the court is demanding that the government explain the contradiction.

"As this Court observed many months ago, this case has been litigated on the premise -- based ‘in no small part' on Defendants' own ‘insist[ence]' -- that the speedy resolution of Plaintiffs' claims is a matter of great private and public importance," Furman said in his order Tuesday. "If anything, that urgency -- and the need for efficient judicial proceedings -- has only grown since that time."
)

#19 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-07-10 09:00 AM | Reply

#12 | Posted by Twinpac

Not sure what you are dealing with but I concur with both of you. I have seen case after case of friends and relatives drawn out for years when they should have been tried or settled in a couple months. I don't know if it is so much greed of the defense representatives all the time as much as a tactic to draw out proceedings to the point the people bringing suit quit, settle or run out of money. On the other hand I am absolutely sure sometimes it is pure greed. Bottom line is that either way it is wrong.

#20 | Posted by GalaxiePete at 2019-07-10 09:01 AM | Reply

DANNI

They were gaslighted. Just like what George Bush and Dick Cheney did when they lied about WMD to start a war (for oil) in Iraq.

Look how easy it was to send 5,000 American Soldiers to their death ... in Iraq. They created an enemy, hid their true motives, and convinced the public that something drastic had to be done to rid the world of the enemy they created.

Trump is on the same path. But on a grander scale. He creates these artificial enemies ~ the immigrants, the media, Democrats, blacks, Hillary, Obama, NATO, Europan allies, (the list isn't complete yet) to dogmatically and with constant repetition (propaganda) to steer the public down the path he needs to achieve his true motives.

Trump wants to be the most powerful dictator of the most powerful country on earth ~ a goal that far exceeds those of Vladimer Putin and Kim Jong-un. He wants to be Number One among them all.

Believe it or not, he's already started. Pompeo proclamation about a Human Rights study is only going to have one outcome. They'll build on that to eventually convince the public that the Constitution itself is archaic and needs to be re-constructed.

It's a workable plan. The public is easily frightened and easy to sway with the right propaganda. The DOJ has already been rendered useless, Congress has been cowed, and the Supreme Court will be completely co-opted by Trump's next appointment.

Red flags are waving all over the place and nobody is paying any attention.

#21 | Posted by Twinpac at 2019-07-10 09:02 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

PETE

I'm dealing with my mother's estate which is considerable. Attorneys see dollar signs and immediately assume they should be one of the heirs. So in my case, it's pure greed. I have to watch them like a hawk and put some strict rules in writing.

I've already fired one attorney for trying to do an end run and I'm about to fire another one. I don't care what the county clerk's office thinks. I'm the Administratrix and what I say goes. My job is to protect the assets of the estate and it appears the attorney's job is to grab as much of it as they can for themselves.

That doesn't work with me and I'm not cowed by their officiousness. As you can tell, I'm not anybody's favorite client.

#22 | Posted by Twinpac at 2019-07-10 09:17 AM | Reply

WTF gives a judge the power to say who your lawyer is?

#23 | Posted by Sniper at 2019-07-10 10:11 AM | Reply

WTF gives a judge the power to say who your lawyer is?

#23 | POSTED BY SNIPER

You can use your lawyer changing as an excuse to delay proceedings, and since a judge's main responsibility is to ensure that things proceed smoothly, he (or she) has power to prevent abuse of the system.

I am sure a refusal to allow a change in lawyers is grounds for an appeal, so a judge would be hesitant to refuse. Unless he (or she) thinks that anyone it would be appealed to would agree with their decision.

#24 | Posted by gtbritishskull at 2019-07-10 10:35 AM | Reply

Trump wants to be the most powerful dictator of the most powerful country on earth ~ a goal that far exceeds those of Vladimer Putin and Kim Jong-un. He wants to be Number One among them all.
Believe it or not, he's already started. Pompeo proclamation about a Human Rights study is only going to have one outcome. They'll build on that to eventually convince the public that the Constitution itself is archaic and needs to be re-constructed.
It's a workable plan. The public is easily frightened and easy to sway with the right propaganda. The DOJ has already been rendered useless, Congress has been cowed, and the Supreme Court will be completely co-opted by Trump's next appointment.
Red flags are waving all over the place and nobody is paying any attention.
#21 | POSTED BY TWINPAC

You're a dangerous nutter, on par with the Looney Left versions of Alex Jones, Rush Limbarf, Steve Bannon, and 'Obama is invading Texas'.

I want to see the nutter links feeding you this Kool-Aid. Post them, nutter. I COMMAND you.

#25 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-07-10 11:27 AM | Reply

#22 | Posted by Twinpac

I definitely agree in your case... My own dealings with lawyers have never been great, even with the one my wife used to work for.

As far as that goes our experiences with Immigration Lawyers (my wife is European) is part of what prompted her to explore being a lawyer. There is NO WAY they spent all the time claimed filling out paperwork on our behalf. We did all the leg work, answered all the questions in their pre-formatted standard questionnaire documents. I even provided them electronically so no typing was necessary. All at the same time being seemingly oblivious to what Immigration was looking for.

There was no advising us or explanations unless we asked and we had to ask thought out pointed questions to get the right answers. That actually got me active in immigration for a while a few years back. There were some great sites out there with real information about how to do things properly and what must get included so it doesn't get returned/flagged/rejected (which adds to the bill). We quit using and talking to lawyers pretty quickly - they were pretty obviously not working in our interest at all. There are some worth their salt but they cost twice what everyone else does. The government is a bureaucracy and wants what it wants just how it wants it. So if you go through the process once or twice you should KNOW what to do. Once we started doing our own paperwork everything went smoothly.

What I have watched in the cases of Family and Friends, well it is amazing. I watched an Age discrimination lawsuit playout over 8 years - it was a pretty slam dunk case that cost the employer a few million once it finally went to trial. I watched a construction lawsuit play out over 12 years - again it finally went to trial and the construction company lost. Heck I sat on a jury for a Child Abuse case that took almost 5 years to come to trial. Etc.

#26 | Posted by GalaxiePete at 2019-07-10 12:02 PM | Reply

WTF gives a judge the power to say who your lawyer is?

The local rules of the Southern District of New York which federal law allows them to impose.

Any other stupid questions, moron?

#27 | Posted by JOE at 2019-07-10 12:05 PM | Reply

You can use your lawyer changing as an excuse to delay proceedings

Exactly. And in this case, the government themselves demanded that the proceedings be expedited because the census just HAD to be printed by June 30. Now that they lost, they're backing off that position.

#28 | Posted by JOE at 2019-07-10 12:13 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

You can use your lawyer changing as an excuse to delay proceedings, and since a judge's main responsibility is to ensure that things proceed smoothly, he (or she) has power to prevent abuse of the system.
I am sure a refusal to allow a change in lawyers is grounds for an appeal, so a judge would be hesitant to refuse. Unless he (or she) thinks that anyone it would be appealed to would agree with their decision.
#24 | Posted by gtbritishskull

So you are saying the judge refused a lawyer change so his stooped decision stands?

#29 | Posted by Sniper at 2019-07-10 01:48 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2019 World Readable

Drudge Retort