The judge threatened to sanction the IG lawyers if they didn’t immediately rescind the request for an emergency hearing because she’s so busy with other cases caused by Trump.

  • @minnow
    link
    86 days ago

    So putting a stop, even temporarily, to plainly illegal actions by government official(s) is unreasonable if the illegal actions aren’t illegal enough? And “illegal enough” doesn’t include “taking one of the biggest ever steps to remove one of the largest barriers to corruption”

    And that’s… Reasonable?

    • vortic
      link
      56 days ago

      I think the point is, the plaintiffs are telling the judge “this is of the utmost urgency” 21 days after the fact. The judge feels that, if the plaintiffs really felt that it was that urgent they should have acted with urgency themselves. So the judge is giving their request the same level of urgency that they did themselves.

      If they had made a similar motion the day after the firing took place, their motion might have been granted, but this seems like a case of “too little too late”.

      • @Uruanna
        link
        46 days ago

        Fuck the judge’s feelings though, “if it really was that important you should have complained harder” is an insane take from the worst kind of bad teacher attitude.

        • vortic
          link
          76 days ago

          It has nothing to do with the jusldge’s feelings.whats the point in issuing a Temporary Restraining Order 21 days after the fact when it is moot 30 days after? A TRO on day 1 would have made sense. A TRO on day 21 does nothing but add to the chaos. They are still going forward with other legal arguments but the TRO served no purpose at this point.

    • @FlowVoid
      link
      English
      4
      edit-2
      6 days ago

      The judge hasn’t yet decided whether the actions are illegal. If they are, then they will ultimately be put to a stop.

      But for now, the question at hand is whether there is an emergency. That is a completely separate from whether the actions are illegal.

      And if you wait three weeks to declare an emergency, then it’s not an emergency.

      • @minnow
        link
        26 days ago

        In comparison, Reyes said, Trump needs only to provide Congress with 30 days’ notice and a written explanation to remove an inspector general.

        She cites the legal procedure in her comments declining the motion. If that’s not an acknowledgement of the illegality of what happened instead, what is?

        • @FlowVoid
          link
          English
          5
          edit-2
          6 days ago

          Everyone agrees IGs can be removed after 30 days notice.

          The legal question is whether in some cases they can be removed without 30 days notice. Team Trump argues they can, the IGs argue the only way they can be removed is with 30 days notice.

          The judge has to decide who’s right. Probably the IGs, but at this point it’s too late to reinstate them. So instead the IGs will have to argue for money damages.