Appeals court dismisses Mar-a-Lago Special Master.
Appeals court dismisses Mar-a-Lago Special Master.
Yep. It was a unanimous decision by Republican-appointed judges. They didn't just vacate the order that prevented the government from using the documents. They didn't just say that there could be no special master. They found that Judge Cannon never had equitable jurisdiction and that the entire civil case in the district court has to be dismissed. Even better, they made it clear that Judge Cannon's made up reasoning was so baseless that even Trump's attorneys didn't use some of her reasoning and used different (baseless) reasoning. They even suggested (IMO correctly) that she knew that she didn't have jurisdiction and had gone out of her way to make up reasons for finding she had jurisdiction. And they made it clear that Trump doesn't get special treatment. And, also, that Trump had not shown that the search and seizure were unconstitutional.BREAKING: The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals has DISMISSED Donald Trump's lawsuit over the FBI's Mar-a-Lago search.
They give a brief summation of what Trump’s lawyers thought, and what DoJ thought. Then the first slam of Cannon:This appeal requires us to consider whether the district court had jurisdiction to block the United States from using lawfully seized records in a criminal investigation. The answer is no
They said what Cannon did was just such a thing. There’s something called the “Richey Test” for establishing equitable jurisdiction. This case failed all four parts. So the 11th says:These disputes ignore one fundamental question—whether the district court had the power to hear the case. After all: “Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction. They possess only that power authorized by Constitution and statute, which is not to be expanded by judicial decree.” [bold mine]
They then tell the tale of the whole case. At one point, when discussing whether the TDFG suffered harm from the seizure of items from Mar-A-Largo like his passports, the 11th takes another dig at Cannon.In considering these arguments, we are faced with a choice: apply our usual test; drastically expand the availability of equitable jurisdiction for every subject of a search warrant; or carve out an unprecedented exception in our law for former presidents. We choose the first option. So the case must be dismissed.
This is one of my favourite paragraphs:Plaintiff has made no such showing. His jurisdictional brief in the district court asserted that the government had improperly seized his passports and that its continued custody of “similar materials” was “both unnecessary and likely to cause significant harm.” But the passports had already been returned before he filed his first motion, and his jurisdictional brief did not explain what “similar materials” were at issue or why he needed them.
The district court was undeterred by this lack of information. [bold mine] It said that “based on the volume and nature of the seized material, the Court is satisfied that Plaintiff has an interest in and need for at least a portion of it…
They conclude:Only one possible justification for equitable jurisdiction remains: that Plaintiff is a former President of the United States. It is indeed extraordinary for a warrant to be executed at the home of a former president—but not in a way that affects our legal analysis or otherwise gives the judiciary license to interfere in an ongoing investigation. The Richey test has been in place for nearly fifty years; its limits apply no matter who the government is investigating. To create a special exception here would defy our Nation’s foundational principle that our law applies “to all, without regard to numbers, wealth, or rank.” State of Georgia v. Brailsford, 3 U.S. (3 Dall.) 1, 4 (1794).
Hehehehehe….The law is clear. We cannot write a rule that allows any subject of a search warrant to block government investigations after the execution of the warrant. Nor can we write a rule that allows only former presidents to do so. Either approach would be a radical reordering of our caselaw limiting the federal courts’ involvement in criminal investigations. And both would violate bedrock separation-of-powers limitations. Accordingly, we agree with the government that the district court improperly exercised equitable jurisdiction, and that dismissal of the entire proceeding is required.
The district court improperly exercised equitable jurisdiction in this case. For that reason, we VACATE the September 5 order on appeal and REMAND with instructions for the district court to DISMISS the underlying civil action.
One of the things that came across in the opinion was that Judge Cannon knew what the law was and didn't care. They pointed out that her immediate response to the motion that initiated the case was to ask what the basis was for equitable jurisdiction. She knew that it was a problematic issue. And they made it clear that she knew what the Richey factors and their requirements were. So, it comes across as her not being stupid or ignorant or incompetent but deliberately wrong in her analysis. The first factor alone, which she acknowledged was not met, was enough to make the entire case have to go away.the 11th takes another dig at Cannon.
I don't think anything will happen to her. Congress would have to impeach her, and they won't. In cases where there is an appearance of bias by a district court judge, a court of appeals can remand with instructions to have the case assigned to another judge. But, in this particular case, there is no need for reassignment because the appeals court ordered the dismissal of the entire case. I imagine that she wants to become an 11th Circuit judge or Supreme Court Justice some day. I'm sure this case and her appalling conduct will come up. Depending on who controls the Senate, it may not matter. It may even help her with some Senators.
Impeachment. The House has to impeach her and the Senate has to vote for it with a 2/3rds majority. Just like impeaching a President
Exactly. She was like a puppet for the Congress. They pulled her strings and she did exactly what they wanted her to do.
So the members of the Federalist Society who backed Trump backed a man who doesn't even believe the Constitution is the supreme law of the land.Trump calls for the termination of the Constitution in Truth Social
Just the parts he doesn't like....
The House select committee investigating the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol has decided to make criminal referrals to the Department of Justice, the panel’s chairman, Rep. Bennie Thompson, told reporters Tuesday.
Thompson, a Mississippi Democrat, said the committee has not narrowed down the universe of individuals who may be referred.
Asked whether Thompson believed any witnesses perjured themselves, he said, “that’s part of the discussion.”