Transcription
Hi everyone, Harry here to talk about the latest in this neverending, longstanding dispute involving Judge Jed Booseberg and the whole Trump administration and their earliest efforts. This is in March 2025, to basically, uh, or so it would seem. It's what he wants to, uh, get to the bottom of, uh, actually evade his orders, uh, be arguably in contempt, and it has been going on and on. And Booseberg, to his credit, has just not let it go.
Here's the latest. Uh, you may remember a few months ago, Judge Noam Ralph. I said it then, and I'll repeat it now, in an opinion that seemed to me designed as a set audition piece for the Trump administration and Trump himself to choose her for the next Supreme Court nomination. Totally trashed Booseberg's continuing efforts and ordered them to be shut down. Boom. Period.
And at the time, I predicted that this would be, uh, a motion to, uh, take that opinion on bonk. In other words, to have it revisited and reheard by the entire court of appeals. And that is indeed what has happened, somewhat strangely. It's done gone completely under the radar. The actual, uh, date on which it occurred, quietly, and nobody in the media seems to have picked this up yet, was June 22nd, when the full court for the DC Circuit issued this quiet notice that, as I say, you will not find in the newspapers or in legacy media at all. It simply says, "Procurium order. This case, it shall be reheard by the court sitting on bonk." And they further order that the Ralph opinion, which I'm going to get back into, is vacated.
So, as of now, as I speak, that order is off the books, and it lays out a briefing schedule. You've got, we're going to hear it again, and the, uh, petitioner brief is going to be by July 22nd, and then, uh, you will hear back by August 21st. A pretty long and, and, uh, comfortable, if you will, uh, not, uh, rushed briefing schedule. And then the, uh, hearing will be Tuesday, September 29th.
Now, um, that quiet, laconic order conceals quite a lot of judicial drama. Back to March 15, 2025. This is when Emil Bo, now a third circuit judge, said, uh, according to a whistleblower, "We don't care what the court says. Those planes are going to land in Venezuela." This was the whole initial effort to just dragnet, uh, certain people who they thought were deportable in some instances. It turned out they were wrong, like Kilmargo Garcia, whose life they've tried to make miserable ever since because they got it wrong. But he was on the plane, even though there was an order saying, "Do not send him to El Salvador." And lawyers for him and for others got wind of this, like, hours before it was supposed to happen. Rushed into the court of Jeb Booseberg, who at that time was chief judge of the DC District Court, and, uh, to get his hands around it, he said, "I'm issuing an order. First, those planes should not land in El Salvador." And, uh, second, we're going to figure out what happens, uh, next.
That, that written order was followed by an oral order, and all kinds of hygiene, squirreliness, and obfuscation ensued from the administration, which did land the planes there, which did then put Kilmargo Garcia and everyone else in this, uh, secot prison, a hellhole. He, he has since been, um, released, and there's all kinds of things going on, you may remember, with him in the states. Other people are still there. Um, but Booseberg issued an order, it, uh, saying, "Don't do it." His overall order went up to the Supreme Court, which basically approved it but said it has to be done by habeas corpus for each individual prisoner. Which the administration, uh, never fails to say that he was reversed by the Supreme Court. Complete sophistry.
But anyway, there was every reason to believe, including the testimony of a whistleblower who had been one of the lawyers on the case and basically got sacked for telling the truth, who said, "I was in a room with Emil and at least in part Todd Blanch." And they, in essence, said they, in very words, said, "Those planes are going to land, and we may have to say [ __ ] you to the court. We may have to actually just, uh, be contemptuous about their order. We're pleasing Donald Trump. This is our first big move in the immigration space. And I don't care what the judge says." That, at least, there's very good reason to believe that happened.
And Booseberg, to his credit, and over all kinds of resistance, has said from way back when, "I want to get to the bottom of whether or not you acted contemptuously and you defied court orders." And the administration has been squirrely and bobbing and weaving ever since. "Oh, this is, there's going to be state secrets here. Give it up." "Oh, just give it up, Booseberg." "Oh, this is now moot," which it's not. The contempt part is not moot. Really, they have done everything to avoid having to face the music and do just what Booseberg wants to do. Not yet. Hold them in contempt, but get the facts. Todd Blanch, did you say this? I think arguably even Emil Bo, notwithstanding that he's sitting on the third circuit, should have to, uh, face the inquiry and give answers. And it's so easy, and he's been given eight tries to just let it go, and he won't. And I think it's really laudable. It would be so much easier.
But at the time, I think one of the dynamics here is he sees himself as representing the DC District Court, which, if you take a step back and think about it, has been completely screwed. They spent three years adjudicating, one at a time, each of these January 6 offenders. Biggest, uh, overall operation in DOJ history. And these guys, of course, they were all guilty. Most of them pleaded guilty. Others were found guilty. There's really not a single instance of someone being, um, exonerated on the merits. And notwithstanding which, Trump comes into office and with a, a stroke of his corrupt magic presidential, uh, pen, just makes them all go away. The DC District Court, in other words, has been treated really shabbily, and it's all, it's gargantuan efforts in support of the public. That's what they do. Especially with this case of the January 6 marauders, have been just completely sidelined by Trump.
And moreover, adding real insult to injury, if they, initially way back when in March 15, 2025, just completely, uh, thumbed their nose at Booseberg's order, Booseberg saying that remains, and we're going to get to the bottom of it and see whether there is contempt. Um, the administration has tried several times, in its latest time successfully, to go emergency, emergency in the DC Circuit. They drew Noam Ralph, who not only shut down Booseberg but did it in a very insulting and unprofessional way. When a, when a court of appeals tells a district court to stand down, first, they have very good legal reasons, which she doesn't. But then, second, it's the learned district court perhaps was overzealous. Blah, blah, blah. That wasn't this order. She just trashed him. Really insulting him.
And I've said this again and again. Booseberg, a judge's judge, hugely respected on both sides of the aisle, roomed with Brett Kavanaugh in, uh, law school and the like. And I don't see any way to say this other than Noam Ralph wanted to get the attention of the White House, White House Counsel's office to say, "I'm your person. I'm your partisan." There's no justification otherwise for the rhetorical, um, overkill of her opinion, which, as I say, is now defunct. It's now vacated. And I said at the time that the, um, rhetorical unprofessional insulting of Booseberg, whom everyone who in that courthouse, including on the courts of appeals, knows well, is one reason why the opinion is likely to be vacated. Even a judge who's not totally in Trump's pocket, uh, and who thinks that the contempt maybe shouldn't go forward, I don't know why, but who thinks that, uh, nevertheless would be, I think, stunned and understand what was going on to encounter this inflammatory language from Ralph. So I think that could only have, um, pushed them, the whole court. We don't know, we don't have a vote breakdown. We just have the whole court to, uh, vacate Ralph's really intemperate, really imprudent, and to my mind, really political opinion trashing Booseberg.
So the whole thing remains live and, and, um, really, it could go on and on. They're going to hear the whole thing in, uh, September. There's going to be opinions, maybe more than one, and eventually it gets sent back down to Booseberg, who is ready to say, "This is really important," and it is. I mean, for the country, it is. Did this administration come in ready to break the laws and completely run roughshod over district courts? Those are the stakes here. We may not go through them at all, depending on what they do. Or it may be, you know, we're talking 2027. But Booseberg is ready, and the system should be ready. And after the onbanc court hears this, if they reverse, my best guess is they will, and send it back down to Booseberg, the clock will start again. Uh, and the wheels of justice grind slow, but they grind fine. And you have, uh, Booseberg ready to really take up, and by then, old but really important issue that is deeply illuminating of the Trump administration when it came into office.
Talk to you later. Thanks for watching Talking Feds. If you enjoyed this video, please remember to like and subscribe. And for a lot more content, all of my essays, ad-free podcasts, and weekly ask me anything Q&A sessions, check out the Talking Feds Substack, and please subscribe there as well. Talk to you later.