This is a pretty extraordinary filing by the gov't in the USAID foreign assistance case. Long story short, in spite of the court's grant of a TRO last week, the USG is still freezing and canceling foreign assistance. www.courtlistener.com/docket/69627... - ThreadSky

sranderson.bsky.social • 3 days ago

This is a pretty extraordinary filing by the gov't in the USAID foreign assistance case.

Long story short, in spite of the court's grant of a TRO last week, the USG is still freezing and canceling foreign assistance.

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69627654/22/aids-vaccine-advocacy-coalition-v-united-states-department-of-state/

Comments

rosieogrady53.bsky.social•2 days ago

This is an ongoing well-designed & executed GOP Coup. The notion that Trump 2.0 was going to follow laws or norms from a govt they dismiss as illegitimate should have been dispelled during his campaign 2016...
As when we were reassured Bill Barr would reign it all in,
WAKE UP, Lawfare!

sisu64.bsky.social•3 days ago

And not paying for work from last year!

haveelections.bsky.social•3 days ago

Excellent analysis all the way through. Hopefully, the Judge will see through these shenanigans and offer an appropriate remedy, including an explicit authorization for USAID COs to implement the TRO terms and requiring the government to comply with the prompt payment act.

sranderson.bsky.social•3 days ago

The USG is arguing that the TRO doesn't bar it from exercising contract terms that allow it to halt or terminate work.

And that nothing it's done so far to implement the President's assistance freeze EO has been contrary to those contracts, so none is affected by the TRO.

sranderson.bsky.social•3 days ago

It does note certain activities have been halted instead of terminated, but flags that this may not be permissible under the TRO unless it permits the USG to exercise statutory and regulatory authorities.

So it asks the court to clarify the TRO to permit this, or threatens to terminate them.

sranderson.bsky.social•3 days ago

This is an incredibly bad faith way to read the court's TRO, which expressly bars USAID and State from implementing the EO.

Of course the TRO doesn't enjoin reliance on the EO and cable as the USG argues, as EOs and cables don't give any authority. Agencies use other authorities to implement them.

sranderson.bsky.social•3 days ago

The court's discussion of other contract terms in the TRO is clearly meant to permit actions "to enforce the terms of particular contracts...."

Reading that as allowing the USG to continue to exercise any contract rights, including those contrary to the TRO's directives, is absurd.

sranderson.bsky.social•3 days ago

The declaration from F acting director Peter Marocco points to the type of authorities they are relying on.

Notable in my mind that these legal arguments are coming in his declaration, not in DOJ's brief. A little odd.

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69627654/22/1/aids-vaccine-advocacy-coalition-v-united-states-department-of-state/

sranderson.bsky.social•3 days ago

The real long-term strategy, though, gives itself away in Marocco's discussion of alternative remedies.

The USG wants to cast this as a bunch of contract disputes properly addressed through alternate procedures that may eventually yield damages—not as a unified policy subject to review as such.

starbuckler.bsky.social•2 days ago

Sounds like the judge needs to hold someone in contempt.

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply