Lightnews — Scholar-powered news

Roger Parloff @rparloff.bsky.social · 17h

... This is the appeal of Judge Immergut's orders blocking deployment federalized National Guard troops in Portland.

Roger Parloff @rparloff.bsky.social · 17h

Panel for Thursday's oral argument in Oregon v. Trump:
Judge Susan Graber (Clinton); Ryan Nelson (Trump); Bridget Bade (Trump)

4 15 57

Roger Parloff @rparloff.bsky.social · 23h

Molly takes you through DOJ's tortured theories of wrongdoing relating to the Norfolk, Brooklyn, & Jamaica (NY) properties. This one, re Jamaica, gives you the flavor. (Devastating piece.)

1 13 57

Roger Parloff @rparloff.bsky.social · 1d

"It’s hard to imagine a worse case than the one against James Comey—until you see the one against the [NYAG Letitia James]."
By my new @lawfaremedia.org colleague Molly L. Roberts (formerly of @washingtonpost.com )
www.lawfaremedia.org/article/next...

19 440 1.6K

Roger Parloff @rparloff.bsky.social · 1d

J: 11 am Friday?
[Attys]: yes that works
HEARING ADJOURNED.
If you found this thread helpful, please consider donating to support @lawfaremedia.org 's trial coverage team:
givebutter.com/journalism
49-end

Lawfare's Nonpartisan Journalism and Expert Analysis

Support the impactful and trustworthy coverage of Lawfare

givebutter.com

14 25 210

Roger Parloff @rparloff.bsky.social · 1d

J: and I'm not going to make petitioner amend, simply because it's a moving target. hearing will be on Eswatini [because nothing else in on the table, Molina acknowledges].
S-M: we'd request 5pm deadline.
J: on Wed, yes. and 24-hr notice for witnesses.

/48

1 7 160

Roger Parloff @rparloff.bsky.social · 1d

J: we'll get an order out today. something to effect govt shall produce evidence to petitioner by wed relating to any efforts to remove petitioner to a 3d country. including dates & times. geared to whether there's significant likelihood of removal to eswatini in reasonable future.

/47

2 10 120

Roger Parloff @rparloff.bsky.social · 1d

S-M: evidence ... we'd ask to give them 48 hrs to produce it and hold a hearing Friday or so.
J: same timeline i was thinking. at hearing govt can also call witnesses *with knowledge* & with notice to petitioner. ...
/46

1 8 120

Roger Parloff @rparloff.bsky.social · 1d

Molina: we've not been informed on that. ... court can set a deadline to present whatever documentary evidence it can put up in lieu of evidentiary hearing. we need time to get it.
J: petitioner?
S-M: one moment. (conferring with colleagues)
S-M: if govt's representing that there's more

/45

1 3 96

Roger Parloff @rparloff.bsky.social · 1d

J: you said Eswatini
M: well, things can happen ...to change that
J: why not remove to Costa Rica
M: he's said he fears there
J: he said he feared it till he got reassurance against refoulement. Now he doesn't. Any efforts to button that up & have him go to Costa Rica?

/44

4 5 150

Roger Parloff @rparloff.bsky.social · 1d

Simon Sandoval-Moshenberg (for Abrego): we're ready to go forward now.
O'H: [we're not prepared for merits hearing] ...
Molina: this is case where court might hear testimony from field office director ... people making actual contact efforts to find a location
J: find a location?
/43

1 7 130

Roger Parloff @rparloff.bsky.social · 1d

J: Petitioner saying if they don't have anything, we don't need discovery.
Bridget O'Hickey: we weren't coming to court today prepared [on this question]
J: i'm asking for really basic info. you're the lawyer for clients. have you had any conversations?

/42

5 11 160

Roger Parloff @rparloff.bsky.social · 1d

J: you raised in your motion privilege questions -- how can you know that when you dont know if there's any info to be had.
M: that goes to discovery to put forward at evidentiary hearing in future.
J: your response to why petitioners should not get any discovery. ...

/41

1 3 110

Roger Parloff @rparloff.bsky.social · 1d

Molina: 1. stay. 2. discovery. 3. TK
Judge: but your arguments on discovery were responsive to this question: petitioners dont need discovery because no real removal looming. remarkable ot me you're saying you can't find a soul who'll give you additional info. that suggests there is none.
/40

3 13 170

Roger Parloff @rparloff.bsky.social · 1d

Judge Xinis back on bench.
J: respondents, where are we?
Molina: i did reach out ... unable to reach anyone that could provide an answer. dont' know if it's because of govt furlough or other reasons. in light of that, i'd urge court -- court outlined 3 things as topic for today

/39

1 8 130

Roger Parloff @rparloff.bsky.social · 1d

Clerk says we're about to resume.

/38

1 2 97

Roger Parloff @rparloff.bsky.social · 1d

Also, the third DOJ atty, whose name I didn't get initially—it wasn't included on any of the most recents rounds of filings—is Ernesto H. Molina, Jr., the deputy director of DOJ's Office of Immigration Litigation. But he's a career guy who has appeared in the case before.

/37

4 7 130

Roger Parloff @rparloff.bsky.social · 1d

(That explanation is approximate.)
The discovery requests, which I thought would be the main focus of the hearing, appear to have fallen by the wayside today. I think that's because Abrego's removal to Uganda (now defunct) or to Eswatini appears to be inchoate if not hypothetical or chimerical

/36

9 11 180

Roger Parloff @rparloff.bsky.social · 1d

Here, there are questions about whether to count the period Abrego already was in custody in 2019, between about March and October. In any case, given that the govt does not even seem to have formally initiated the 3d country removal, Xinis isn't sure even 90 days is permitted. ...
/35

3 9 170

Roger Parloff @rparloff.bsky.social · 1d

There's is a statute that says DHS is allowed 90 days of mandatory detention after an order of removal plus a discretionary period thereafter. But SCOTUS held in Zadvydas that there's a presumptive maximum of 180 days all together, absent extraordinary circumstances. ...

/34

1 7 130

Roger Parloff @rparloff.bsky.social · 1d

The judge is focusing on Abrego's claim that under Zadvydas v Davis (2001), he should be released from custody right now. This is a due process claim. DHS isn't allowed to keep an alien in custody indefinitely. Removal must be imminent ...
/33
supreme.justia.com/cases/federa...

Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678 (2001)

Zadvydas v. Davis

supreme.justia.com

3 21 160

Roger Parloff @rparloff.bsky.social · 1d

Molina: if court would afford us a short break we'll [make efforts to find out what other information we can provide].
30 minutes?
Judge Xinis allows 30 minutes.
IN RECESS TILL ~11:15 ET.

/32

2 8 160

Roger Parloff @rparloff.bsky.social · 1d

Molina: ... other evidence of efforts being made by govt to remove Abrego.
J: we can take a break for you to find out if there's more ... but if you haven't even made any diplomatic [overtures to eswatini] ...
[DOJ attys conferring among themselves]

/31

1 5 120

Roger Parloff @rparloff.bsky.social · 1d

J: what comms have you had with DHS--if you want to remove him, let's get this done and go to Costa Rica?
S-M: can't think of c'lly permissible reason to fight to send him across atlantic ocean when they could send him this afternoon to Costa Rica.
Molina: we can make efforts to produce ...

/30

2 3 120

Roger Parloff @rparloff.bsky.social · 1d

S-M: with regard to Zadvydas claim. it does create 90 day presumption but only permissible purpose is to carry out that removal order. can't be used as punitive measure. or back-end measure for criminal detention when criminal judge has denied detention.

/29

2 8 130