Dear listeners,
Until recently, attorney Julie Le had been detailed from the Department of Homeland Security to represent the government in various immigration-related cases in court in Minnesota. She wasn’t enjoying it. “This job sucks,” she told Judge Jerry Blackwell, in a hearing where she explained that she was trying to get her client to comply with court orders, but that it was very hard, due to a combination of this administration being both overwhelmed and uninterested in complying with certain laws. She also noted that, as a non-white person, she shared concerns about the government’s actions in the Minneapolis area.
You can see a full transcript here — it’s remarkable.
Ken and I discuss what you should do if you’re a lawyer whose client is frustratingly non-compliant and taking actions that bother you; venting to the judge is the wrong course of action, but there are other options available. We talk about how judges can handle the Trump Administration’s learned helplessness, and what escalating remedies they are increasingly looking towards. And we look at the DOJ’s efforts to manage the fact that lawyers are fleeing its offices.
That’s for all listeners. Paying subscribers get our takes on other topics, including:
Judge Kate Menendez’s ruling that denied Minnesota the preliminary injunction it sought against Operation Metro Surge. As we expected, the state’s novel theory that federal government’s actions are a 10th Amendment violation was a bridge too far, even for a judge who seemed to be looking for some avenue to rein in the operation.
Judge Ana Reyes’s grant of a temporary restraining order on the grounds that the Trump Administration may have violated the Administrative Procedure Act by revoking Temporary Protected Status for hundreds of thousands of Haitians, and the limits of using the APA to litigate substantive questions about immigration policy.
Bill and Hillary Clinton’s emerging deal to testify before the House Oversight Committee and avoid the otherwise-likely prospect of contempt of congress prosecutions.
Former Minnesota Vikings offensive tackle Matt Kalil’s lawsuit against his ex-wife Haley, over her disclosure on a podcast that his incredibly large penis made their sex life impractical and was a major driver of their divorce. He says this was an invasion of privacy; she argues in a motion to dismiss that the story is about her sex life too and she’s free to tell whoever she wants. Is this the first case of a reverse Streisand Effect, where you litigate because you want to draw more attention to an allegation that’s been made about you? What even are the damages at issue here? Would Matt Kalil like to visit Fire Island this summer? Ken and I discuss.
We hope you enjoy the episode,
Josh
