Wednesday, November 28, 2018

What Is And, More Importantly, What Is Not Going On In The Emoluments Clause Case In Maryland?

<https://twitter.com/SethBTillman/status/1067322710018195456>
History of motions in DC & MD v. Trump (D. Md.) (Messitte, J.)

Oral argument on the DOJ's motion to dismiss was held: Jan 25, 2018. [Judge] Messitte issued an opinion on standing within 2 months, and a second opinion resolving all other issues after 6 months--6 months to the day.
/1
11:42 pm - 26 Nov 2018
1 reply .
    1. New conversation





    1.  @SethBTillman
       
      23 hours ago
      The DOJ filed its reply brief on Sep 26, 2018 in regard to its S.1292 motion seeking interlocutory appeal. No argument was held. Judge Messitte issued an opinion in less than 6 weeks.
      /2
      1 reply .





  •  @SethBTillman
     
    23 hours ago
    President Trump's private counsel filed a motion to dismiss. His reply was filed Mar 25, 2018. No oral argument has been scheduled or held. A timely decision was due Nov 25, 2018. No such opinion has been issued--although all the prior opinions were timely.
    /3
    1 reply .





  •  @SethBTillman
     
    23 hours ago
    The President has not had his day in court--before Judge Messitte or anyone else. DOJ does not represent the President: it represents the United States in the name of the President. It appears that the court is about to issue a discovery order ...
    /4
    1 reply .





  •  @SethBTillman
     
    23 hours ago
    If the court issues a discovery order against the President, without even having heard his motion and without resolving it, then Trump and a great many in the public will see this as gross judicial overreach.
    /5
    1 reply .





  •  @SethBTillman
     
    23 hours ago
    Judge Messitte has complete judicial independence. He is free to grant or deny the President's motion. Why would Messitte allow it to go past 6 months due after the reply was filed, without calling oral argument & without issuing a decision?
    /6
    1 reply .





  •  @SethBTillman
     
    21 hours ago
    Statistics involving judicial efficiency are reported under the aegis of the Civil Justice Reform Act. Judge Messitte reported in 2017 that he had a clean 6-month list: ie, no motions older than 6 months after the completion of briefing and oral argument.
    /7
    1 reply .





  •  @SethBTillman
     
    21 hours ago
    Judge Messitte reported in 2016 that he had a clean 6-month list: ie, no motions older than 6 months after the completion of briefing and oral argument.
    /8
    1 reply .





  •  @SethBTillman
     
    21 hours ago
    Judge Messitte reported in 2015 that he had a clean 6-month list: ie, no motions older than 6 months after the completion of briefing and oral argument.
    /9
    1 reply .





  •  @SethBTillman
     
    21 hours ago
    It is a good thing that in 2015, 2016, and 2017, Judge Messitte kept pace with his court's work. It is a good thing that the President should not receive any special consideration. But he should not receive any less either. The President's motion [to dismiss] should be heard and resolved.
    /10
  • Welcome Instapundit readers. Have a look at New Reform Club; my co-bloggers do good work.
  • Seth Barrett Tillman, What Is And, More Importantly, What Is Not Going On In The Emoluments Clause Case In Maryland?, New Reform Club (Nov. 28, 2018, 5:00 PM) <https://reformclub.blogspot.com/2018/11/what-is-and-more-importantly-what-is.html> 
    • at

    No comments:

    Post a Comment