With this line, "Ms. Halligan and anyone who joins her on a pleading containing the improper moniker subjects themselves to potential disciplinary action in this Court pursuant to the Court’s Local Rules," a gauntlet is thrown down leaving Halligan not standing alone but in good company between the two leads of the DOJ, Bondi and Blanche. Would love to see that "disciplinary action" taken against Bondi and Blanche.
Just another example of Trump's planned chaos. He probably has expectations of taking this matter to the Supremes for their rubber stamp under their unitary executive theory. When I say "he," I don't really mean Trump. He wouldn't understand this. I mean the minions that are operating the puppet DJT, you know, the little wizards behind the screen.
Good for Judge Novak, except for that benefit of the doubt bit at the end. We all learned as children that "Ignorance is no excuse for the law." Surely, then, Halligan's ignorance - whether from lack of experience or just having learned nothing in law school - is no excuse for the law. Being a member of the bar means she must hold herself to a standard that includes knowing how courts work and and what the law says, and if she does not know, then studying up , _before_ she enters a courtroom or grand jury room. Sparing her disciplinary proceedings at this point pushes the judiciary a long way down the slippery slope of self-destruction.
Likewise, Judge Novak's letting off Bondi and Blanche with a stern opinion but not citing them for contempt of court, despite their 'vitriol' as well as the lies and the profound disrespect for the judicial branch of government and Novak himself, is inappropriate, to put it very gently. Unlike Halligan those two can't pretend ignorance nor inexperience. True, much of their experience has been for a client who, instead of a moral compass, lives by "Try and stop me" but that does not excuse their putting their signatures on that unprofessional (to put it mildly) brief. Lawyers are expected to keep their clients from breaking the law but those two seem only to have adopted their client's view that he who bothers to obey the law is a stupid wuss. The court has a responsibility to disabuse them of that, if only to protect the judiciary, the Constitution, and the rule of law.
Any obstinate lawless attorney deserves to be referred to the bar for disciplinary action. What is the point and cost of another bar member, in this instance Judge Novak, coddling & unilaterally exonerating Halligan?
OK. But what is the Chief Judge of the Eaastern District trying to do? She seems to be inventing some kind of doctrine that allows for serial interim attorneys, like a new one every 120 days. That’s some weird sh uh stuff.
Interesting position from the judge. You are so utterly unqualified that I am not referring you to your bar for disciplinary action.
I love your second sentence. It sounds so ominous! Perhaps a small, dark jail cell?
yet he said. that appeared to me to be the predicate for including pam bondage anc taod blanch
Many thanks to Judge Novak for his sizzlingly clear message to Blanche, Bondi and Halligan.
Now I'll be humming the theme song from "Charade" all afternoon.
Good post. Thank you Adam. And KUDOS to Judge Novak!
Judge Novak, a tour de force!
With this line, "Ms. Halligan and anyone who joins her on a pleading containing the improper moniker subjects themselves to potential disciplinary action in this Court pursuant to the Court’s Local Rules," a gauntlet is thrown down leaving Halligan not standing alone but in good company between the two leads of the DOJ, Bondi and Blanche. Would love to see that "disciplinary action" taken against Bondi and Blanche.
I’ve been awaiting this day with bated breath.
My mom used to use “call curtains.” Lindsey Halligan deserved worse but Judge Novak slam dunked her 🔥🙌💪
Just another example of Trump's planned chaos. He probably has expectations of taking this matter to the Supremes for their rubber stamp under their unitary executive theory. When I say "he," I don't really mean Trump. He wouldn't understand this. I mean the minions that are operating the puppet DJT, you know, the little wizards behind the screen.
And another day when the Epstein files, and Jack Smith's testimony, are not front and center.
I love this for her.
Good for Judge Novak, except for that benefit of the doubt bit at the end. We all learned as children that "Ignorance is no excuse for the law." Surely, then, Halligan's ignorance - whether from lack of experience or just having learned nothing in law school - is no excuse for the law. Being a member of the bar means she must hold herself to a standard that includes knowing how courts work and and what the law says, and if she does not know, then studying up , _before_ she enters a courtroom or grand jury room. Sparing her disciplinary proceedings at this point pushes the judiciary a long way down the slippery slope of self-destruction.
Likewise, Judge Novak's letting off Bondi and Blanche with a stern opinion but not citing them for contempt of court, despite their 'vitriol' as well as the lies and the profound disrespect for the judicial branch of government and Novak himself, is inappropriate, to put it very gently. Unlike Halligan those two can't pretend ignorance nor inexperience. True, much of their experience has been for a client who, instead of a moral compass, lives by "Try and stop me" but that does not excuse their putting their signatures on that unprofessional (to put it mildly) brief. Lawyers are expected to keep their clients from breaking the law but those two seem only to have adopted their client's view that he who bothers to obey the law is a stupid wuss. The court has a responsibility to disabuse them of that, if only to protect the judiciary, the Constitution, and the rule of law.
When federal judges stop short of enforcing the law...?
Any obstinate lawless attorney deserves to be referred to the bar for disciplinary action. What is the point and cost of another bar member, in this instance Judge Novak, coddling & unilaterally exonerating Halligan?
Very interesting. Who would apply ? It will be exciting to see who fills the vacancy.
OK. But what is the Chief Judge of the Eaastern District trying to do? She seems to be inventing some kind of doctrine that allows for serial interim attorneys, like a new one every 120 days. That’s some weird sh uh stuff.
ALOHA.. On the ONE FINGER COCONUT WIRELESS. ...................................................................................