3/ Emptywheel: One other wrinkle of the conflict over the AEA deportations: Two members of the ACLU team, Ashley Gorski and Patrick Toomey, are the two lawyers most persistently challenging FISA shenanigans in the last 10 years--recently got a big 702 win. They've butted heads w/ and over […] - ThreadSky

GottaLaff.mstdn.social.ap.brid.gy • 7 days ago

3/ Emptywheel:

One other wrinkle of the conflict over the AEA deportations: Two members of the ACLU team, Ashley Gorski and Patrick Toomey, are the two lawyers most persistently challenging FISA shenanigans in the last 10 years--recently got a big 702 win.

They've butted heads w/ and over […]

Comments

GottaLaff.mstdn.social.ap.brid.gy•7 days ago

4/ And here on Mastodon, Joshua Friedman is live posting.

Follow his posts. That way I don't have to live post others.

Here you go:

https://fed.brid.gy/r/https://bsky.app/profile/did:plc:qrllvid7s54k4hnwtqxwetrf/post/3lkm2wkcs7227

GottaLaff.mstdn.social.ap.brid.gy•7 days ago

5/ And @Nonilex too!

https://masto.ai/@Nonilex/114179840622384028

#Boasberg gets the #DOJ to confirm the 5 individual named plaintiffs, which were the subject of his first TRO, are still here.

Boasberg asks "How many planes departed the US at any point on Saturday carrying any people being […]

GottaLaff.mstdn.social.ap.brid.gy•7 days ago

6/ DOJ says it's all classified.

Boasberg: Let me tell you the questions I wish you to answer:

mattblaze.federate.social.ap.brid.gy•7 days ago

@GottaLaff I don't envy the government lawyers at that hearing. A tightrope between sanctions and being fired, possibly both.

GottaLaff.mstdn.social.ap.brid.gy•7 days ago

@mattblaze Only if they comply. These lawyers seem to be the types who would just ignore the judge. The judge would then, hopefully, send them to jail for contempt... or fine them, or ...

mattblaze.federate.social.ap.brid.gy•7 days ago

@GottaLaff Yes. If they comply with the court, they'll likely be fired. If they don't, they get sanctions.

GottaLaff.mstdn.social.ap.brid.gy•7 days ago

7/ US: I would direct the court to page 42 of the transcript. The big issue is that this is a fast-moving case where there's a lot of operational natsec etc. at stake. "Oral statements are not injunctions." We do believe this is a good-faith interpretation of the court's written order.

GottaLaff.mstdn.social.ap.brid.gy•7 days ago

9/ Boasberg: You knew in the *morning* that there would be a hearing at 5 p.m., so any planes you were putting in the air, you knew you had that hearing coming! So you're saying that because my minute order was *pithier* ... That's a heck of a stretch, I think.

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply