Virginia Just Filed A Contempt Motion Against Trump Over Immigration Order
Source: Huffington Post
The Commonwealth of Virginia asked a federal judge late Wednesday night to force President Donald Trump, U.S. Customs and Border Protection and top government officials to show why they shouldnt be held in contempt for failing to obey a lawful court order.
The temporary restraining order issued Saturday night by U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema of the Eastern District of Virginia required Customs and Border Protection to allow attorneys access to legal permanent residents that CBP had detained at Dulles International Airport as a result of Trumps executive order blocking people from seven Muslim-majority nations from traveling to the U.S. Saturdays court order also forbade CBP from deporting any of the legal permanent residents ― also known as green-card holders ― detained at Dulles for seven days. When federal judges rule against the government, any official implicated in the order, including the president, is supposed to obey ― even if they believe the courts order is incorrect.
But as The Huffington Post reported this weekend, CBP did not comply with the courts order. The border agency never let attorneys near the people it was detaining. And when Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.) and at least four other members of Congress tried to get CBP to comply at various points over the weekend, CBP defied them.
Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/virginia-trump-contempt_us_5892bb6ae4b070cf8b80b621?
I hope this is the beginning of the unraveling...
Contempt of court is universally recognized because it backs up the law
and without it we have no laws
Hold them in contempt and toss their asses in jail. Every.last.one.
I have this fond mental picture of the idjit in chief being perp walked out of the White House, while a crowd, nation-wide, numbering in the hundreds of thousands all chant "Lock Him UP".
"First, could a court (any court) hold the President in contempt? The answer would seem to be yes, as the Court implied in the famous Watergate tapes case, United States v. Nixon. At issue there was whether President Nixon was required to turn over the tapes which plainly revealed that he know of the Watergate break-in and was involved in its cover-up. The Court held that a federal court could order the President to turn over the tapes, and thus implicitly held that the court could hold the President in contempt if he did not. (Whether a sitting President could actually be criminally prosecuted is a different matter, and most people believe that would be unconstitutional.)
...could the House initiate impeachment proceedings on this basis? Absolutely. And the charge of failing to follow (or ignoring) binding federal law probably would not be any different than an actual contempt finding. Ultimately, "high crimes and misdemeanors" are "political crimes" -- crimes against the Republic and its political well being. If the President is defying the obligations of his office (or a majority of the House believes so), that is grounds for impeachment."
Last edited Sun Feb 5, 2017, 03:25 PM - Edit history (1)
Aziz v. Trump (E.D.Va.)
By Travis Fain
January 31, 2017, 7:42 PM
Virginia has asked to join a lawsuit against President Donald Trump's immigration executive order, which Attorney General Mark Herring called "unlawful, unconstitutional and un-American" Tuesday.
The state filed a motion to intervene in Aziz v. Trump, a suit sitting in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. A spokesman for the U.S. Attorney's Office there said he expects an initial hearing in the case next week. It was initially filed by Virginia attorneys representing a pair of Yemeni brothers and roughly 60 other people who were detained at, and in some cases deported from, Dulles International Airport over the weekend.
From today's Richmond Times-Dispatch:
Posted: Thursday, February 2, 2017 12:30 pm
BY ANDREW CAIN Richmond Times-Dispatch
A federal lawsuit challenging the Trump administration over how it treated detainees at Washington Dulles International Airport is on hold. ... Lawyers for the plaintiffs and the federal government have a signed agreement to resolve the petitioners' claims, according to a joint request they filed in federal court Wednesday, asking a judge to "hold claims in abeyance."
On Tuesday Virginia filed a motion asking to join the lawsuit in Virginia's Eastern District against the president - Aziz v. Trump - over his Friday order restricting immigration and suspending admission of refugees. ... The suit charges that on Saturday customs officials at the airport in Northern Virginia forced two brothers who were flying from Yemen - lawful permanent U.S. residents - to give up their green cards.
The new filing says the agreement may take several days to fully implement. The parties asked the court to put the case on hold so that they could "focus the effort on resolving this case without further litigation." ... Earlier Wednesday, lawyers for the state filed another motion, seeking answers about whether customs officials at Dulles complied with a temporary restraining order that U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema issued Saturday night.
Her order barred for one week the removal from the U.S. of green card holders arriving at Dulles. It also required that lawful permanent residents who were detained at the airport have access to legal counsel.