Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Re: Matt Whitaker. Here's the legal brief currently filed with the Supreme Court
by attorney Tom Goldstein, opposing his appointment. Goldstein is among only 10 attorneys who have won more than one case in front of SCOTUS.
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/11/29/tom-goldstein-matt-whitaker-appointment-is-a-constitutional-crisis.html
KEY POINTS
One of the most prominent attorneys in the country told the U.S. Supreme Court that the appointment of acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker has caused a “constitutional crisis.”
“It is a constitutional crisis even if we are distracted from and dulled to it,” Tom Goldstein, co-founder of SCOTUSBlog, wrote in a brief with the court.
Goldstein filed the brief on behalf of his client Barry Michaels, in a case about whether prohibitions on the possession of guns for convicted felons are lawful. Goldstein brought the case to the court in June.
Legal experts have said the motion against Whitaker is unlikely to succeed because it amounts to an attempt to settle a constitutional question in a case that’s not related to the underlying issue.
One of the most prominent attorneys in the country told the U.S. Supreme Court that the appointment of acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker has caused a “constitutional crisis.”
“It is a constitutional crisis even if we are distracted from and dulled to it,” Tom Goldstein, co-founder of SCOTUSBlog, wrote in a brief with the court.
Goldstein filed the brief on behalf of his client Barry Michaels, in a case about whether prohibitions on the possession of guns for convicted felons are lawful. Goldstein brought the case to the court in June.
Legal experts have said the motion against Whitaker is unlikely to succeed because it amounts to an attempt to settle a constitutional question in a case that’s not related to the underlying issue.
https://www.jurist.org/news/2018/11/supreme-court-asked-to-block-appointment-of-whitaker-as-ag/
Lawyer Tom Goldstein on Friday asked the US Supreme Court to appoint Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein as the acting Attorney General, replacing Matthew Whitaker.
Goldstein claims that Whitaker was illegally installed as the temporary successor of former attorney general Jeff Sessions, and that Rosenstein is the legal and constitutional successor to Sessions. The motion argues that as the Senate-confirmed Deputy Attorney General, Rosenstein automatically succeeded to the role of Acting Attorney General under 28 USC § 508(a) and the Appointments Clause in Article II of the Constitution.
The motion calls for the court to resolve this dispute immediately. The Attorney General has a number of responsibilities, including appointing immigration judges, determining whether to enforce federal statutes and overseeing the investigation of Special Counsel Robert Mueller.
If the court does not resolve this dispute immediately, then decides later that Whitaker’s appointment was always invalid, then unwinding all of Whitaker’s orders would be “a fraught and disruptive exercise,” Goldstein argues
Goldstein claims that Whitaker was illegally installed as the temporary successor of former attorney general Jeff Sessions, and that Rosenstein is the legal and constitutional successor to Sessions. The motion argues that as the Senate-confirmed Deputy Attorney General, Rosenstein automatically succeeded to the role of Acting Attorney General under 28 USC § 508(a) and the Appointments Clause in Article II of the Constitution.
The motion calls for the court to resolve this dispute immediately. The Attorney General has a number of responsibilities, including appointing immigration judges, determining whether to enforce federal statutes and overseeing the investigation of Special Counsel Robert Mueller.
If the court does not resolve this dispute immediately, then decides later that Whitaker’s appointment was always invalid, then unwinding all of Whitaker’s orders would be “a fraught and disruptive exercise,” Goldstein argues
THE MOTION TO SUBSTITUTE ROD ROSENSTEIN FOR JEFF SESSIONS
http://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Motion-to-Substitute.pdf
THE BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/18/18-496/73590/20181128194042495_Reply%20Final.pdf
