So, there’s a bit less ground to cover this evening, as I’m not trying to cram three-plus days’ worth of litigation news into one column, but that doesn’t mean Tuesday was completely uneventful.
There was another Supreme Court decision handed down in the case of Monsalvo Velazquez v. Bondi. This one also has to do with immigration, but I think some folks are reading too much into it. It involves 2021 removal proceedings against the petitioner (the case only involves Pam Bondi since she is the current Attorney General — previously, Merrick Garland was the named defendant), and whether his 60-day deadline to reopen his removal proceedings ended on a Saturday or the following Monday. In a nutshell, it’s a ruling about when the “i” gets dotted.
And here is Tuesday’s round-up of the ongoing cases challenging the Trump administration’s executive actions:
- Abrego Garcia v. Noem – 8:25-cv-00951 – (case challenging removal of plaintiff — a/k/a “Maryland father” — to El Salvador) — The Trump administration filed its Tuesday status report with the court. This one, however, was under seal…so we’re left guessing as to its contents (for now, at least). In the meantime, the parties are sparring over the expedited discovery, and we’re learning a bit more about the particulars of Abrego Garcia’s case, namely, that, while “’approximately $6 million’ has been made available to the Government of El Salvador (GOES) to be used by the GOES for its law enforcement needs, including ‘for the detention of these [Venezuelan] foreign terrorists,’ the United States has not provided any specific assistance with respect to the detention of Abrego Garcia or any other Salvadoran national.” (emphasis mine) Judge Paula Xinis (Maryland) has now issued an order regarding the discovery dispute long on directives and short on patience. She does require the plaintiffs to narrow a couple of their requests, but largely, her ruling is addressed to the government, overruling the majority of its objections and giving it until 6:00 p.m. Wednesday to beef up its responses and its bases for objections.
- Community Legal Services in East Palo Alto v. HHS – 3:25-cv-02847 – (case challenging contract termination of funding allocated to legal services for unaccompanied children in immigration proceedings) — District Court Judge Araceli Martínez-Olguín (Northern District of California) entered an order on Monday denying the administration’s motion to dissolve her prior entered TRO and stay the proceedings pending appeal. A hearing on the plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction is set for Wednesday.
- Widakuswara v. Lake – 1:25-cv-01015 – (case challenging dismantling of United States Agency for Global Media (USAGM)) — On Tuesday, District Court Judge Royce Lamberth (D.C.) entered an order granting in part and denying in part the plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction. He granted it as to Voice of America, Radio Free Asia, and Middle East Broadcasting Network, but denied it as to Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and Open Technology Fund because their current agreements/grant funding status differs from the first three entities.
RELATED: New: 9th Circuit Puts District Court in Check After It Holds Up Trump Admin Immigration Efforts
Supreme Court Hears Major Parental Rights Case Over School System’s Mandatory LGBTQ ‘Instruction’
And here is a sampling of the latest lawsuits filed:
- Public Citizen v. USAID (regarding FOIA request directed to USAID “for records relating to USAID’s purge of programs and employees”)
- Learning Resources v. Trump (regarding tariffs imposed by the administration)
And…hold onto your socks for this one:
- America First Legal Foundation v. Roberts (regarding FOIA request directed to Chief Justice John Roberts (as Presiding Officer of the Judicial Conference of the United States) and Robert Conrad (as Director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts) seeking records of communications between the agencies and Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), Representative Hank Johnson (D-GA), or any member of their staff). This has to do with efforts by Whitehouse and Johnson to pursue ethics charges against Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito and whether the judicial conference and administrative office are “executive offices,” subject to FOIA or not.
You can check out prior installments of The Evening Docket series here.
Editor’s Note: Radical leftist judges are doing everything they can to hamstring President Trump’s agenda to make America great again.
Help us hold these corrupt judges accountable for their unconstitutional rulings. Join RedState VIP and use promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your membership.
