Contempt Continued: Rubio, Bondi Attempt To Stonewall Court Inquiry With Bullshit ‘State Secrets’ Response

from the clownshow dept

In Mike’s thorough post yesterday on the topic of the Trump administration’s naked contempt for judicial oversight, the main theme and takeaway from it was a simple one: this authoritarian regime would much rather waste everyone’s time trying to play procedural and semantic games with the courts than actually participate in honest deliberations with them. This is no small thing and it portends so much more about how this adminisration is going to behave across the government. Trump and his complicit cabinet, some members of which will inevitably be hung out to dry eventually when things go wrong enough, have no time for process. No time for rules. Or truth. Or honest dialogue. There is only the end goal that has been demanded by the mad king. Any norms or rules that get in the way of the goal are to be routed around in as contemptious a manner possible.

So it goes in the ongoing case before federal judge James Boasberg. This is the case in which the court ordered what the administration calls “deportations” — though since they are without any form of due process it’s more accurate to call them human trafficking — conducted as a result of Trump’s invoking the Alien Enemies Act of 1798. Boasberg issued verbal and written orders that the rendition flights be stopped and that any planes that hadn’t arrived at their destination, including those in the air, be returned until Boasberg could evaluate the legitimacy of the use of the centuries old law.

But some of the planes didn’t stop, and not all in the air were ordered to turn around. With no due process, there is no assurance that the government’s claim as to who the people on these planes are is accurate. Even as the judge demanded information on the timelines at play to determine if his orders were violated or ignored, administration officials as high up as the Secretary of State Marco Rubio jeered gleefully on social media sites with retweets and the like. Boasberg, a decidedly conservative judge, was falsely mocked as a “radical left lunatic.”

But the contempt doesn’t stop there. Several days ago, the court was adamant that it would determine whether its order was violated.

US District Judge James Boasberg vowed on Friday to find out whether officials in the Trump administration violated his orders temporarily blocking the use of an 1798 law for deportations by refusing to turn two flights around last weekend.

“I will get to the bottom of whether they violated my order – who ordered this and what the consequences will be,” Boasberg said near the end of an hourlong hearing over whether he should lift the pair of orders he issued last Saturday.

Rather than participate with a coequal branch of government, however, Marco Rubio, Kristi Noem, and Pam Bondi have instead decided to play more childish games. Transparently childish, too, by any honest reading of their response. As had been speculated in previous news on the case, the government has decided to attempt to invoke state secrets privilege over the information the court has demanded. Which, again, is solely information about the timing of the order for the takeoff and the eventual landing of deportation flights that the court had temporarily ordered to be ceased. And because this administration can’t help itself, it did so with the vocabulary of a teenager refusing to go to bed on time.

The Court has all of the facts it needs to address the compliance issues before it,” Attorney General Pam Bondi and other top DOJ officials wrote in a filing to US District Judge James Boasberg. “Further intrusions on the Executive Branch would present dangerous and wholly unwarranted separation-of-powers harms with respect to diplomatic and national security concerns that the Court lacks competence to address.”

“The information sought by the Court is subject to the state secrets privilege because disclosure would pose reasonable danger to national security and foreign affairs,” the officials wrote in the 10-page filing.

Among the questions Boasberg wanted the Justice Department to answer are ones concerning the exact timing of when the two planes took off from US soil and left US airspace that day, as well as the specific times individuals deported under Trump’s proclamation were transferred out of US custody that day.

Since the CNN post couldn’t be bothered to be so direct, allow me to: the Trump administration is full of shit. They know they’re full of shit. They know we know they’re full of shit. But they also are more than happy to wield what they think is a power card, believing they’ve found some procedural loophole. We just make this claim, they seem to think, and it lets us do whatever we want!

But that isn’t how asserting this privilege works at all. The judge will now have the opportunity to review whether the government’s assertion is warranted.

He told the government last week that it could submit the information under seal or invoke the privilege, though he said if DOJ decides to shield the information, he “is obligated to ‘determine whether the circumstances are appropriate for the claim of privilege.’”

The Trump administration appears to want it both ways. It wants to claim it has not violated any court order while also blocking the information to validate that it had not. There is nothing about what the government previously falsely called routine deportations that should have any play in state secrets. When did the planes take off, when did they land, and who did they contain? If those are state secrets, then anything can be a state secret.

And that’s the danger here. It’s the reason the administration must lose this game. If any judicial oversight can be routed around simply by putting a few complicit signatures on a piece of paper that says “state secrets,” then there simply is no judicial oversight.

And, in that negation of a coequal branch of government, you have the end of our Republic.

Filed Under: , , , , , , , ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Contempt Continued: Rubio, Bondi Attempt To Stonewall Court Inquiry With Bullshit ‘State Secrets’ Response”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
24 Comments
This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
MrWilson (profile) says:

Re:

It won’t stop even after that. They’ll just call the contempt orders judicial activism and call for the judges to be impeached. Any given official is just more fodder for the undercarriage of the bus, so they don’t care if someone actually gets jailed for it. It’s just more fuel for their fake outrage at being held the least bit accountable or forced to not violate the Constitution quite as quickly and thoroughly as they want to.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
NerdyCanuck (profile) says:

Re: Re:

Now Johnson is talking about defunding or eliminating district courts, because they dare to keep ruling against Trump.

So it definitely won’t stop there… they are straight up drunk with power.

TPM covers that topic, plus has new reporting on how they extensively planned these “deportations” (I say they’re KIDNAPPINGS) for months, and purposely did it in a way to avoided judicial review. Super worth reading:

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/how-the-alien-enemies-act-deportations-were-orchestrated-to-keep-the-courts-unaware

That One Guy (profile) says:

Re: Re:

I would say that as far as I’m aware presidential pardons are limited to federal crimes and therefore cannot be used on anything less, but given how much of the ongoing overthrow of the government has been based upon bluffs/lies about how much power the office of the president has(‘unlimited’ to be precise) it would not surprise me in the least if he’d attempt to pardon anyone for any crime/charge, federal or not, as long as he believed that doing so served his interest that particular minute.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Tanner Andrews (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: crimes and civil contempt

I would say that as far as I’m aware presidential pardons are limited to federal crimes

The pardon power reaches to all Federal crimes. For instance, sheriff Crazy Joe was pardoned for criminal contempt.

The power does not reach to civil matters. Thus, the president cannot “pardon” himself for civil judgments.

Neither can he pardon civil contempt, which is coercive rather than punitive in nature. Normally it is said that the contemnor “holds the key to the jailhouse door in his pocket” by having the power to do whatever the court ordered. So, if these folks were to announce the times that the airplanes flew, then they would purge the civil contempt.

If it turned out that the planes flew after the order without turning around, then you would have criminal contempt. That would be the subject of pardons. The optics might not be good, but this administration appears to care little for such things.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Yes, I Know I'm Commenting Anonymously says:

One of the biggest problems with politics is that politicians have never lost. this makes them think they’re always right. (once a politician goes down to a bad position they quickly quit before they can be held accountable, rendering them no longer a politician.)

This makes these politicians much more likely to play these word games (they always managed to weasel their way out of a tough spot this way). It also makes them think they can `survive’ taking up a trump-cabinet position (they have never taken a position they did not hold successfully).

This is an inherent flaw in the political / party-political system, which can be mitigated by a vigilant populace and/or independent journalism that critically reports on politics to the populace.

That One Guy (profile) says:

'Damnit they said the magic words...'

Thankfully the US court system has a long and extensive history of treating claims of ‘state secrets’ and ‘national security’ by the government with extreme skepticism and not just immediately rolling over and giving the government what it wants rather that dispute the claim.

So long as the judge here continues to play along and treat the government as acting in good faith they will continue to be made a mockery of on a national level by a regime that clearly and not without reason sees the legal system as entirely toothless and without the guts to actually hold the powerful accountable.

Tanner Andrews (profile) says:

Re: bad choice of words

US court system has a long and extensive history of treating claims of ‘state secrets’ and ‘national security’ by the government with extreme skepticism

The word you want is “deference” not “skepticism”. Totten v. United States, 92 U.S. 105 (1875), and far too many cases following even where inappropriate.

Anonymous Coward says:

And that’s the danger here. It’s the reason the administration must lose this game. If any judicial oversight can be routed around simply by putting a few complicit signatures on a piece of paper that says “state secrets,” then there simply is no judicial oversight.

Does it matter? The planes are gone with all the people on them. No amount of judicial hand-wringing can invoke time travel. Whether anyone ends up accepting “signatures on a piece of paper” as an excuse or not is merely academic, a question of to what extent the veneer of judicial oversight will continue to perform for the cameras.

Any actual judicial oversight was dead and gone at the moment the judiciary learned that the planes took off and did not dispatch the marshals. If any judicial oversight can be routed around simply by the judiciary slow-walking its response until such time as it no longer matters, there’s still no judicial oversight. Merely cosplay.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Get all our posts in your inbox with the Techdirt Daily Newsletter!

We don’t spam. Read our privacy policy for more info.

Ctrl-Alt-Speech

A weekly news podcast from
Mike Masnick & Ben Whitelaw

Subscribe now to Ctrl-Alt-Speech »
Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...