Summary

A federal judge criticized a Trump administration Justice Department lawyer who claimed they didn’t have to follow the judge’s oral order blocking deportations to El Salvador because it wasn’t in writing.

Judge Boasberg questioned why the administration ignored his directive to return immigrants to the US. The DOJ lawyer repeatedly refused to provide information about the deportations, citing “national security concerns.”

Frustrated, Boasberg ordered sworn declarations explaining what happened, quipping that he would issue a written order “since apparently my verbal orders don’t seem to carry much weight.”

  • BackgrndNoize@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    12 days ago

    Did he suffer any serious consequences, No, then why the fuck wouldn’t he disregard it and will continue to do so in the future. Why are people in power in this country either evil and inept or simply inept against the evil ones

  • Wren@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    13 days ago

    A federal judge criticized a Trump administration Justice Department lawyer

    If this is the only consequence of having done it- I’d say they didn’t think they could, they knew they could.

  • kescusay@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    13 days ago

    Throw. That. Lawyer. In. PRISON. There may be no way to enforce the law on Trump himself, but make lawyers afraid to do his dirty work.

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      13 days ago

      Throw everyone who implemented it in prison. Trump may have made himself an untouchable dictator but just himself.

      Remember that loyalty only goes one way, unless it’s in trumps personal interest such as profiting from it. Make him go on record as either pardoning the criminals or dropping them

      • ZK686@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        13 days ago

        What about all the hardcore criminals he sent out, should we bring them all back and release them?

        • de_nada@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          13 days ago

          Of course not. The normal justice system applies; assuming they are legitimately suspected of a crime, they are held until they can be given a fair trial and their fate determined by just means. That’s how the system works to punish the guilty and exonerate the innocent. Your assumption that these are all “hardcore criminals” is a media product; how has this been determined? It has not. The only just way to determine it is with a trial.

          • AA5B@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            12 days ago

            And even if found guilty and justly imprisoned after due process, that doesn’t mean they can legally be deported. If they’re legally in the country then they’re legally in the country

  • ZK686@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    13 days ago

    I’m just shocked that so many of you are okay with a judge deciding that all those criminals should remain in the US…I mean, this is why ya’ll lost the elections…

    • Psythik@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      13 days ago

      How do you know for sure that they’re criminals, just because they’re not American? None of them have even been charged with anything. Innocent until proven guilty.

      You should be more concerned about the convicted rapist with 34 felonies who is currently in the oval office. Also quit being a racist piece of shit.

    • AutistoMephisto@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      13 days ago

      Judge Boasberg does have one other card he can play, according to FRCJ Rule 4.1(b). If the US Marshal service is unable or unwilling to carry out a federal court order, the Judge who issued the order can deputize individuals to carry it out.

  • Verdant Banana@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    13 days ago

    way more than about Trump

    legal precedents that uphold other legal precedents are being dismantled like they already were being done away with before Trump

    more precedents that go away the more personal freedoms and civil liberties goes away

    need a revolution

  • Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    13 days ago

    ‘You felt you could disregard it?’

    Well, given that they disregarded it and are now standing before you arguing that they had the right to disregard it, I think it’s safe to say that yes, they felt they could disregard it. And given that the migrants were deported anyway, your orders were not only completely ignored, but were also being openly mocked on Twitter by Marco Rubio, and they will receive no punishment for doing so, I think it’s safe to say that they were right.

    Frustrated, Boasberg ordered sworn declarations explaining what happened, quipping that he would issue a written order “since apparently my verbal orders don’t seem to carry much weight.”

    He’s about to find out that his written orders carry even less. Remember, the Supreme Court ruled that he can’t even be questioned about official acts, much less investigated. Trump could go on his Twitter knock-off tomorrow and tell this guy to go fuck himself with a chainsaw and there’s fuck-all this judge can do about it.

    • ZK686@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      13 days ago

      It was disregarded because it was a vocal demand when the criminals were already halfway to their destination. If we allowed a federal judge to say “wait, don’t do that!” and express vocally their outrage, to the POTUS every time they disagreed, there would be no point in having a person voted as President.

      • Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        13 days ago

        It was disregarded because it was a vocal demand when the criminals were already halfway to their destination. If we allowed a federal judge to say “wait, don’t do that!” and express vocally their outrage, to the POTUS every time they disagreed, there would be no point in having a person voted as President

        You do realize this happens all the time, right? Death row inmates can be granted clemency literally while they’re strapped to the gurney. It’s literally a case of the judge, governor, POTUS, whoever saying “WAIT, DON’T DO THAT!”. And yes, this includes the judge verbally giving instructions and holding off the proceedings until a written order can be drafted.

        There was nothing stopping them from turning that plane around.

    • torrentialgrain@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      13 days ago

      This is kind of insane to witness unfold in real time. These fossils don’t understand that they’ve been stripped from their institutional powers. They are literally not able to understand what’s happening even if it’s totally transparent to anyone watching.