Archive for category: Law

As you will recall, there was an important hearing in the Northern District of California District Court (NDCA), Judge Vaughn Walker presiding, on June 3. There were significant briefs from both the plaintiffs al-Haramain and the defendant government filed a few days before the hearing. As MadDog pointed out, Judge Walker has subsequently issued a briefing order on June 5 making more specific the lay of the land.

The reports from the hearing were that it was one for the ages and there were calls for a transcript. I now have one in my hot little hands. I am sorry, but I cannot post the entire transcript; they are the proprietary product of the individual court reporters, and the preparation of transcripts is a source of income to them. Court reporters have a difficult job and they are entitled to this protection, and I will respect it.

The foregoing having been said, this hearing was a rare thing; an amazing blend of seriousness and comedy presided over by a Judge both firmly in control of difficult proceedings and wielding a fine and dry sense of humor. In the passages that follow, the following will be the pertinent abbreviations: JW is Judge Vaughn Walker, JE is al-Haramain attorney Jon Eisenberg and TC is DOJ/Government’s attorney Anthony Coppolino.

[JW] Well, Counsel, I’ve read your papers and now have a much better sense of that old expression about ships passing in the night.

And this really is true, but it is not just the parties’ ships that are crossing in the night, the government is sailing blindly and willfully by the court too. Coppolino could literally have just held up a paddle every time he was to speak, like those golf course marshals, with the words "Same Old Shit Judge!" printed on it. He really is a broken record and is willing to do anything, including insulting the court’s intelligence, to get a ruling he can appeal immediately. Here is a prime example:

[TC] I think, you know, you talk about two ships passing in the night, and I certainly think that’s an apt description, I think we now have ships passing, again, in different directions, because the issue — the issue of standing and whether there is a genuine issue of fact and whether we could dispute their allegations of standing, of course, would turn on information we have, Read more →

I am still waiting for a report from the scene, but the hearing in Judge Walker’s court in al-Haramain on the Order to Show Cause is over and here is Walker’s order:

PROCEEDINGS:
Order to Show Cause Hearing.

RESULTS:
The Court heard argument from counsel.
Plaintiff shall file a motion for summary judgment.
Hearing is set for 9/1/09 at 10:00 am.

Now, as MadDog noted, the AP is already reporting on the afternoon’s events, including the al-Haramain order. Here is the key language from the AP report:

Also Wednesday, Walker deferred a decision on how to deal with the government’s continued refusal to turn over an apparent log of telephone calls that the U.S.-based arm of an Islamic charity says shows it was the subject of warrantless wiretaps.

The Obama administration insists in court filings that release of the document will create "intolerable risks" to national security, the same stance taken by the Bush administration.
Walker ordered Department of Justice lawyers and attorneys for the charity to return Sept. 1 for further arguments.

Gee, nothing here, Walker just continued the hearing until September 1st. Ta ta now, move along.

Guess they didn’t see this line in the order (in spite of the fact it was the only other one substantively there):

Plaintiff shall file a motion for summary judgment.

Uh, hey guys, that line means something. It means that Walker has decided, after submission by the plaintiffs last Friday (see here and here), to go ahead down this path, and is encouraging the plaintiffs to lay out the desired factual predicate and exact law basis for how they want summary judgment entered. Now, this does not mean a final decision on awarding summary judgment is issued by the court, far from it, but it is damn clear that is exactly what is being contemplated.

As we have already discussed in relation to the earlier order on the states suits and telco claims, there is so much more here than meets the eye. And certainly than seems to have not met the AP’s eye. Crikey, and they’re going to sue us, for using their content?? You gotta be kidding me.