Okay, lets assume it is Nov 3rd, and there are a whole bunch of people outside a poling place waiting to vote.
Feds come in, start arresting people on “probable” cause, refusing to answer any questions due to if being a federal matter.
What is the remedy for those who were denied the chance to vote?
Yes, they apparently violated his civil rights, perhaps assault. Which is where the courts come in. Lawsuits have been filed. Insurrection is not the answer. However- who did it? The Police have said “not us”. The Customs and Border Protection have said “not us”.
They would follow orders unless the courts said otherwise. And again- the order is not clearly illegal.
Or, perhaps let the AG of Ore and the ACLU sue them and make them stop.
So, even worse, they are leaving themselves in such a way as to not be identified. Even more reason they need to be confronted at the time of the kidnapping, not later in a court where everyone can deny any connection to it.
Okay, so on November 4th, the injunction to stop arresting people at voting booths goes into place.
Do all the people who were not allowed to vote get a redo?
If things get to that point, IMHO it would come down to John Roberts deciding the post-election court case(s). Worst case would be the SCOTUS finding in favor of Biden only for Trump to order federal law enforcement to ignore the ruling or take Roberts into custody. At that point it would probably come down to the military either siding with ICE, DHS, and Border Patrol, with fascism as the result, or siding against them with a Civil War as the result.
At the rate things are going, I wouldn’t put it past Trump to try something like this.
What are the chances that the judge was appointed by Donald Trump?
As indeed, Judge Michael Mosman is currently asking DHS in consideration of a motion of preliminary injunction against that agency.
You can read the federal government formally defend its presence in Portland through their brief, filed this morning. They claim that they were in the right - the federal officers sufficiently identified themselves with insignia and “police” markings, that it has not been proven that federal officers arrested anyone without probable cause, that the federal government did not and does not intend to intimidate protestors who are peacefully exercising their First Amendment rights, etc.
Rosenblum v. John Does 1-10, et al., 3:20-cv-01161-MO (D. Or. 2020)
~Max
Normally, I think detaining for questioning can only take place if you don’t move the detainee. If you’re forcibly transporting them to a different site, that’s not detaining them for questioning, it’s an arrest. I might be wrong though, especially if the feds claim that the protest site is too dangerous for normal detainment procedure.
~Max
Zero percent. The current judge for the District of Oregon, Michael Mosman, was appointed by Bush II in '03.
~Max
The courts can move quickly when they need to. The fight you want to follow is for the preliminary injunction, which should be decided at the district level in a number of days. The federal government doesn’t get to just ignore a preliminary injunction. Even the staunchest of Republicans would consider that a bright red line. Even President Trump backed down after a federal judge killed his travel ban.
The only precedent I can think of would be Lincoln’s suspension of habeas corpus with regards to John Merryman. He basically ignored the circuit court (Chief Justice Taney presiding) See Ex parte Merryman.
~Max
And who stops them if they do anyway?
Yeah, that was like week 1 of the presidency. You don’t think that he hasn’t gotten both far more bold and more desperate at this time?
I am not a lawyer, which will soon be obvious.
But aren’t there legal instruments that can force people or entities to STOP what they are doing, and then bring the entire matter to court, where the argument is decided.
Don’t they wake up judges in the wee hours to sign warrants and other legal “things” which can intervene?
Injunctions, ceast-and-desist, whatever else? I do apologize for abusing the Holy Language of Law.
But the instruments in the past have stopped bulldozers, demolitions, deportations. Sometimes the courts give the eventual okie-dokie to blow stuff up, but there is a period of time when nothing happens.
MSNBC has just announced breaking news that Trump and Barr together plan to announce sending federal agents to other major cities.
We need some sort of legal action to tell these guys to knock this shit off.
~VOW
Yes, and they have asked for injunctions.
The party who obtained the preliminary injunction would appeal to the judge who granted the injunction. The judge would again order the relevant federal agents to stop. If they refuse, or if the judge gets ticked off, the judge may hold said agents in contempt of court. At that point, the judge asks the United States Marshals to take said agents into custody.
The U.S. Marshals are technically part of the DoJ. In the case where the Marshals refuse or are unable to enforce the court’s citation of contempt, you get a full-blown constitutional crisis. Ideally, that is where Congress quickly impeaches all officers involved. In practice there is no precedent except Ex parte Merryman.
~Max
That, and the travel ban earlier in Trump’s presidency. It was reported that the U.S. Marshals in Southern California refused to serve a court order to CBP agents at LAX, who were in turn refusing to acknowledge that the order existed.
~Max
Reminds me of Mr VOW’s crazy family who all run around pointing and screaming, “I disinherit you!”
Their threats are meaningless, since not a single one of them has two nickels to rub together.
~VOW
Of course you are right, however it seems some gesture is appropriate.
So, yesterday, Tammy Duckworth said, “Don’t even think about it” in response to Trump’s threat to send federal law enforcement to Chicago.
Today, Trump says he is going to do this very thing.
I notice he’s bullying and provoking liberal areas that won’t vote for him, and that act should curry favor with those who want to see him, “hurt the right people.”
Seems to me that a good case can be made for a charge of conspiracy to violate civil rights.
I’m incredibly late to this party but…
Don’t the National Guard et al show up when the governors ask for help? IIRC the Governor of Illinois, Pritzker, isn’t exactly buddies with Trump so…? Sorry if I missed it upthread but here’s his take: