LOL! These guys--they try the most ridiculous stuff:
lawandcrime.com
After boldly suing an entire district court and its judges and losing, the Trump administration immediately moved to appeal. But when the calendar turned to 2026, the DOJ reversed course and tried to back away while still claiming a win. An appeals court has now responded with a no.
The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday issued a brief order stating that the DOJ's motion to dismiss its appeal as moot and request to vacate its loss in the court below were both denied.
"The case is not moot," the 4th Circuit order said, reinstating a briefing schedule in the case rather than siding with the DOJ's wishes.
Former U.S. Solicitor General Paul Clement wrote that his clients didn't "object to dismissal of this appeal" but that Cullen's word on the matter should stand because the "Executive has expressly reserved the right to sue all over again."
"Defendants have no interest in prolonging this litigation, which never should have been brought. But while the Executive has decided to dismiss this appeal in light of the issuance of the Second Amended Standing Order, it has expressly reserved the right to challenge that order facially via affirmative litigation (rather than as-applied in an individual case)—even though any such effort would plainly be barred several times over by the decision below," the judges' attorneys countered. "The parties' dispute accordingly remains very much live."
Clement said the DOJ shouldn't be rewarded for abandoning its appeal, as that would "effectively give the Executive the relief it would obtain if it prevailed[.]"
The DOJ and the Department of Homeland Security over the summer forged ahead with the "unprecedented" move to sue the whole U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland over automatic two-day stays in habeas corpus cases. The government claimed that Chief U.S. District Judge George Russell III's "standing orders" in response to an "influx of habeas petitions" were evidence of "judicial overreach" purporting to thwart President Donald Trump's "executive authority" and his 2024 election mandate to swiftly carry out deportations.
Those claims ran into a brick wall in August, when U.S. District Judge Thomas T. Cullen, a Trump appointee, dismantled the "novel and potentially calamitous" lawsuit and criticized Trump administration cabinet members for calling members of the judiciary "rogue" and "activists."
DOJ quietly tried to end appeal in lawsuit against entire court, but judges weren't having it
When the calendar turned to 2026, the DOJ tried to back away from the failed lawsuit while still netting a win. An appeals court has now responded with a no.
lawandcrime.com
After boldly suing an entire district court and its judges and losing, the Trump administration immediately moved to appeal. But when the calendar turned to 2026, the DOJ reversed course and tried to back away while still claiming a win. An appeals court has now responded with a no.
The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday issued a brief order stating that the DOJ's motion to dismiss its appeal as moot and request to vacate its loss in the court below were both denied.
"The case is not moot," the 4th Circuit order said, reinstating a briefing schedule in the case rather than siding with the DOJ's wishes.
Former U.S. Solicitor General Paul Clement wrote that his clients didn't "object to dismissal of this appeal" but that Cullen's word on the matter should stand because the "Executive has expressly reserved the right to sue all over again."
"Defendants have no interest in prolonging this litigation, which never should have been brought. But while the Executive has decided to dismiss this appeal in light of the issuance of the Second Amended Standing Order, it has expressly reserved the right to challenge that order facially via affirmative litigation (rather than as-applied in an individual case)—even though any such effort would plainly be barred several times over by the decision below," the judges' attorneys countered. "The parties' dispute accordingly remains very much live."
Clement said the DOJ shouldn't be rewarded for abandoning its appeal, as that would "effectively give the Executive the relief it would obtain if it prevailed[.]"
The DOJ and the Department of Homeland Security over the summer forged ahead with the "unprecedented" move to sue the whole U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland over automatic two-day stays in habeas corpus cases. The government claimed that Chief U.S. District Judge George Russell III's "standing orders" in response to an "influx of habeas petitions" were evidence of "judicial overreach" purporting to thwart President Donald Trump's "executive authority" and his 2024 election mandate to swiftly carry out deportations.
Those claims ran into a brick wall in August, when U.S. District Judge Thomas T. Cullen, a Trump appointee, dismantled the "novel and potentially calamitous" lawsuit and criticized Trump administration cabinet members for calling members of the judiciary "rogue" and "activists."
