"As for why the Justice Department has been ignoring Judge Currie's ruling, which stated that Halligan's appointment was "defective" and that all of her actions were thus "unlawful exercises of executive power," it feels like a combination of technicalities and "because we don't think anyone will stop us," which is par for the course when it comes to the Trump administration's constant testing of the boundaries of whether they can be constrained by any kind of law."
"In his own ruling this week, he acknowledged that the Justice Department had appealed the dismissal of the Comey and James indictments, but said that because the order had not been paused during appeal, Currie's ruling on Halligan remained "the binding precedent of the district, and is not subject to being ignored.""
The Justice Department has not complied with Judge Currie's ruling that Halligan's appointment was defective and that her actions were unlawful exercises of executive power. The Department appealed the dismissal of the Comey and Letitia James indictments but did not request a stay of Currie's ruling. The Department allowed Halligan to continue performing duties, reasoning that Currie's ruling did not expressly remove her from office. Judge Novak noted that because the order was not stayed on appeal, Currie's decision remains binding precedent in the district and cannot be ignored. The case may set precedent limiting how readily courts allow the Justice Department to disregard judicial orders.
Read at Jezebel
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]