The Trump administration moved quickly to respond to a judge’s Monday decision against it in the Don McGahn case, with a notice Tuesday morning that it was appealing the ruling and a request that the judge pause her ruling for the appeal.
U.S. District Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson had issued a sweeping decision that ripped apart the Trump administration’s claim that “absolute” immunity protected the former White House counsel from even showing up for subpoenaed testimony in front of the House. Brown ordered that McGahn comply with the subpoena.
In its stay request, the Justice Department nonetheless argued that it had a “likelihood” of success on appeal — one of the thresholds that must be met for a lower court decision to be paused.
The Justice Department also argued that the circumstances met the “irreparable harm” standard of granting a stay, because “if Mr. McGahn testifies before Congress, the absolute immunity from compelled congressional testimony would be vitiated.”
Additionally, the administration compared the case to a case arising from the George W. Bush administration, involving the testimony of a top official, and pointed out that the lower court’s decision backing the subpoena in that case was stayed for its appeal.
Read the stay request below:
OK so now we have reached the point where tRump’s interests are the public interest. NONSENSE, in any world where Bill Barr does not run the justice department… OR where the ruling would be against Democratic interests.
In its stay request, the Justice Department nonetheless argued that it had a “likelihood” of success on appeal — one of the thresholds that must be met for a lower court decision to be paused.
I wonder how many bottles of whiskey someone had to down while writing that argument!
Well, it sounds bad when you phrase it like that.
The reality is, though, that a stay is almost guaranteed, because the DoJ is correct…if McGahn is compelled to testify, no Court can undo that.
It is, however, extremely unlikely that Trump wins on appeal.
Q: “Why does the bar association code of ethics prevent sex between lawyers and their clients?”
A: “To prevent clients from being billed twice for essentially the same service.”
I think Judge Brown should be confident in her well-reasoned, legally strong opinion and tell them to fuck off.
The next Judge up is a Republican. So we have a “likelihood” of success.