Federal Judge Cullen throws out Trump lawsuit against Maryland judges
A federal judge rejected the Trump administration trial on Tuesday against the entire federal bench of Maryland on an order of the chief judge who arrested the immediate deportation of migrants contesting their moves.
The American district judge Thomas Cullen granted the judges to launch the case at the request, claiming that to do otherwise “would run against the precedent overwhelming, would deviate from the long -standing constitutional tradition and would offer the rule of law”.
“In their wisdom, the editors of the Constitution joined three branches of coordinates to establish a single sovereign,” wrote Mr. Cullen. “This structure can sometimes generate clashes between two branches and the encroachment by a branch on the authority of another. But the mediation of these disputes must occur in a way that respects the constitutional role of the judiciary. ”
The White House had no immediate comments.
Mr. Cullen was appointed to the federal bench by Mr. Trump in 2020. He served in the Western district of Virginia, but he was used to supervise the case because the 15 federal judges of Maryland are appointed defendants, a very unusual circumstance which reflects the severe response of the republican administration which slows down or stops its policies.
During a hearing in August, Mr. Cullen expressed his skepticism about the trial. He asked why the Trump administration had to continue all the judges to contest the order.
Signed by the district judge of Maryland George L. Russell III, the order prevents the Trump administration from immediately deporting any immigrant requesting an examination of their detention before the district court of Maryland. He blocks their withdrawal until 4 p.m. on the second working day after the deposit of their Habeas Corpus petition.
The ordinance indicates that it aims to maintain the existing conditions and the potential jurisdiction of the court, to ensure that the petitioners of immigrants can participate in legal proceedings and access lawyers, and to give the government “the complete opportunity to brief and to present arguments to its defense”.
The Ministry of Justice, which filed the complaint in June, said that the automatic break violates a decision of the Supreme Court and obstructs the authority of the president to enforce immigration laws. The department has become more and more frustrated by decisions blocking Mr. Trump’s agenda, repeatedly accusing the federal judges of having incurred his powers.
The trial was an extraordinary legal maneuver, withdrawing the fight of the administration with the federal judicial power.
The lawyers for the judges of Maryland argued that the trial was to limit the power of the judiciary to examine certain immigration procedures while the Trump administration is pursuing a mass expulsion program.
“The executive power seeks to bring a trial on behalf of the United States against a co-equal branch of the government,” said lawyer Paul Clement at the hearing. “There is really no precursor for this costume.”
Mr. Clement is an eminent conservative lawyer who was a general lawyer for republican president George W. Bush. He listed several other avenues that the administration could have taken to contest the order, such as the filing of an appeal in an individual habeas case.
The prosecutor of the Ministry of Justice, Elizabeth Themins Hedges, said that the government simply demanded a repair of a legal roadblock preventing the effective application of immigration.
“The United States is an applicant here because the United States is injured,” she said.
In a modified order of deportations, Mr. Russell said that the court had received an influx of petitions from Habeas after hours which “led to precipitated and frustrating hearings to obtain clear and concrete information on the location and status of petitioners are elusive.” Habeas’ petitions allow people to contest their detention by the government.
Lawyers of the Trump administration accused the judges of Maryland of prioritizing a regular schedule, by writing in legal documents according to which “a feeling of frustration and a desire for greater convenience do not give the defendants a license to flee the law”.
Among the judges appointed in the Paula Xinis, who found the Trump administration in March, he illegally expelled Kilmar Abrego Garcia in El Salvador – a case that has quickly become a flash point in the repression of Mr. Trump’s immigration. Mr. Abrego Garcia was held in a notorious Salvadoran megaprison, where he claims to have been beaten and tortured.
Trump was born against unfavorable judicial decisions and, in one case, called for the dismissal of a federal judge in Washington who ordered that planeloads of expelled immigrants was returned. In July, the Ministry of Justice filed a complaint for fault against the judge.
This story was reported by the Associated Press.
