Rao and Walker hold that Boasberg must "terminate" the contempt inquiry. In an 80-page dissent, Childs makes the case — without saying so directly — for en banc review.
I appreciate your making these matters of fairness and consequence more accessible to The People in your summaries. We are being inundated from many sides by a relentless push for executive power.
Neomi Rao has placed herself as the James Ho of the DC Circuit, tossing her hat in as a potential Scotus Justice nominee. I mean, Rao's "reasoning" on her published pro-trump rulings has put her in a stratum occupied by a few dozen other district and appellate judges nominated by trump/Federalist Society, later to be confirmed by the GOP-majority Senate.
"We are not 'political hacks' ", cries J Coney Bryant...uh-huh.
I love that Boesburg is like "you're not the boss of me, you don't address my duty to decide the merits altogether. I will proceed because if I don't, knowing this set of facts, then my duty to justice is only theoretical. But thank you for your 'input' uhbuhbye"
It's like the kind of discretion a soldier who is told to execute civilians has to say "no"
Boasberg is an unelected, lowly District court judge attempting to rule the country using a veto from the bench. It's about time this partisan hack was cut down to size
Thank you for attempting to “dumb” these decisions down so non-legal types can try to understand what is happening. I always assume that the government’s position is wrong and any judge ruling for them is too. Seems to work well. Speaking of “relief”:
Has anyone else besides Abrego been returned from CECOT? It’s been more than a year in that living hell.
They were released to Venezuela in a prisoner exchange between El Salvador and Venezuela in July 2025. A judge ordered some of them returned to the US to allow them to pursue asylum claims. Of course DHS wants to deport them to 3rd countries in Africa.
Once again the DC Circuit is being ruled by a rump reactionary minority in a case of enormous consequence. The liberals tried to play nice last go round; if they don’t take this en banc they’re as dysfunctional as Congress.
So, who exactly has standing to move/request an *en banc* hearing? Very keen on learning the mechanics of how a 3-judge appellate panel ruling can later be elevated to a appellate-court majority rehearing.
Normally the losing party before the panel can ask for en banc rehearing. Here the losing “party” is the district court, represented by lawyers who appear to represent the plaintiffs in the underlying case (at least one of whom is ACLU).
Corrupt as fuck. We can't assume judges are beyond corruption and we need to have trials for their anti- Constitution ruling. I over it. This country f****** sucks.
I appreciate your making these matters of fairness and consequence more accessible to The People in your summaries. We are being inundated from many sides by a relentless push for executive power.
Power to the people!
Neomi Rao has placed herself as the James Ho of the DC Circuit, tossing her hat in as a potential Scotus Justice nominee. I mean, Rao's "reasoning" on her published pro-trump rulings has put her in a stratum occupied by a few dozen other district and appellate judges nominated by trump/Federalist Society, later to be confirmed by the GOP-majority Senate.
"We are not 'political hacks' ", cries J Coney Bryant...uh-huh.
I love that Boesburg is like "you're not the boss of me, you don't address my duty to decide the merits altogether. I will proceed because if I don't, knowing this set of facts, then my duty to justice is only theoretical. But thank you for your 'input' uhbuhbye"
It's like the kind of discretion a soldier who is told to execute civilians has to say "no"
Boasberg is an unelected, lowly District court judge attempting to rule the country using a veto from the bench. It's about time this partisan hack was cut down to size
Thank you for attempting to “dumb” these decisions down so non-legal types can try to understand what is happening. I always assume that the government’s position is wrong and any judge ruling for them is too. Seems to work well. Speaking of “relief”:
Has anyone else besides Abrego been returned from CECOT? It’s been more than a year in that living hell.
They were released to Venezuela in a prisoner exchange between El Salvador and Venezuela in July 2025. A judge ordered some of them returned to the US to allow them to pursue asylum claims. Of course DHS wants to deport them to 3rd countries in Africa.
America voted for mass deportations and that's what we demand.
Power to the people and their elected representatives.
Not power to unelected judges trying to rule the country using veto power from the bench.
nothing like an appeals court holding that a district court can't look into facts.
Once again the DC Circuit is being ruled by a rump reactionary minority in a case of enormous consequence. The liberals tried to play nice last go round; if they don’t take this en banc they’re as dysfunctional as Congress.
So, who exactly has standing to move/request an *en banc* hearing? Very keen on learning the mechanics of how a 3-judge appellate panel ruling can later be elevated to a appellate-court majority rehearing.
Normally the losing party before the panel can ask for en banc rehearing. Here the losing “party” is the district court, represented by lawyers who appear to represent the plaintiffs in the underlying case (at least one of whom is ACLU).
Corrupt as fuck. We can't assume judges are beyond corruption and we need to have trials for their anti- Constitution ruling. I over it. This country f****** sucks.
You are correct. Boasberg is extremely corrupt.