Judge Beryl Howell is overseeing Perkins Coie’s case against the Trump administration over the wild Executive Order targeting the firm. The list of constitutional violations the lawsuit advances against the EO is epic and the firm sought a temporary restraining order preventing the administration from enforcing key provisions. Judge Howell worked quickly granting the TRO, finding the “retaliatory animus” is clear from both the EO and related fact sheet. “This is viewpoint discrimination plain and simple,” Howell wrote. The overly broad EO is also a likely violation of the firm’s due process rights, noting the order creates a “badge of infamy,” and no process was given to the firm.
And for doing her job and upholding the constitution, Howell has been subjected to attacks from the right. And, as a result, the Department of Justice moved to have her removed from the case. Yesterday, Howell ruled that the DOJ cannot make “ad hominem attacks” against her in order to force her off the case. And of course that’s the correct legal standard — could you imagine the chaos if every time a litigant lost a motion they could insult the judge and boot them from the case?
“This strategy is designed to impugn the integrity of the federal judicial system and blame any loss on the decision-maker rather than fallacies in the substantive legal arguments presented,” Howell said.
“The parties will have the opportunity to present relevant evidence and legal arguments, which will receive full, fair, and impartial consideration, as does every case before this court,” Howell continued. And frankly this is a pretty measured response from Judge Howell, given the questionable tactics the DOJ has advanced in the case.
Of course, Howell’s order seems unlikely to keep the far right from attacking judges and the entire legal system. But I guess that’s what you have to do when repeatedly advancing policies that are unconstitutional.
Kathryn Rubino is a Senior Editor at Above the Law, host of The Jabot podcast, and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer. AtL tipsters are the best, so please connect with her. Feel free to email her with any tips, questions, or comments and follow her on Twitter @Kathryn1 or Mastodon @Kathryn1@mastodon.social.
The post Trump Admin Learns You Can’t Insult A Judge In Order To Force Them Off A Case appeared first on Above the Law.
Judge Beryl Howell is overseeing Perkins Coie’s case against the Trump administration over the wild Executive Order targeting the firm. The list of constitutional violations the lawsuit advances against the EO is epic and the firm sought a temporary restraining order preventing the administration from enforcing key provisions. Judge Howell worked quickly granting the TRO, finding the “retaliatory animus” is clear from both the EO and related fact sheet. “This is viewpoint discrimination plain and simple,” Howell wrote. The overly broad EO is also a likely violation of the firm’s due process rights, noting the order creates a “badge of infamy,” and no process was given to the firm.
And for doing her job and upholding the constitution, Howell has been subjected to attacks from the right. And, as a result, the Department of Justice moved to have her removed from the case. Yesterday, Howell ruled that the DOJ cannot make “ad hominem attacks” against her in order to force her off the case. And of course that’s the correct legal standard — could you imagine the chaos if every time a litigant lost a motion they could insult the judge and boot them from the case?
“This strategy is designed to impugn the integrity of the federal judicial system and blame any loss on the decision-maker rather than fallacies in the substantive legal arguments presented,” Howell said.
“The parties will have the opportunity to present relevant evidence and legal arguments, which will receive full, fair, and impartial consideration, as does every case before this court,” Howell continued. And frankly this is a pretty measured response from Judge Howell, given the questionable tactics the DOJ has advanced in the case.
Of course, Howell’s order seems unlikely to keep the far right from attacking judges and the entire legal system. But I guess that’s what you have to do when repeatedly advancing policies that are unconstitutional.
Kathryn Rubino is a Senior Editor at Above the Law, host of The Jabot podcast, and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer. AtL tipsters are the best, so please connect with her. Feel free to email her with any tips, questions, or comments and follow her on Twitter @Kathryn1 or Mastodon @[email protected].
