Reply to Donnie Dumptruck says Mar-A-Lago's been searched by the FBI

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Donnie Dumptruck says Mar-A-Lago's been searched by the FBI"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Well this is embarrassing:

PAPERLESS ORDER: The Court is in receipt of 1 Plaintiff's Motion for Judicial Oversight and Additional Relief. To facilitate appropriate resolution, on or before August 26, 2022, Plaintiff shall file a supplement to the Motion further elaborating on the following: (1) the asserted basis for the exercise of this Court's jurisdiction, whether legal, equitable/anomalous, or both; (2) the framework applicable to the exercise of such jurisdiction; (3) the precise relief sought, including any request for injunctive relief pending resolution of the Motion; (4) the effect, if any, of the proceeding before Magistrate Judge Bruce E. Reinhart; and (5) the status of Plaintiff's efforts to perfect service on Defendant. Signed by Judge Aileen M. Cannon on 8/23/2022. (AMC) (Entered: 08/23/2022)

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/64911367/trump-v-united-states/

Seems like some of these issues would have been addressed if they had filed a complaint.  Judge is going soft on them.  [/quote]

This is the judge giving Trump's lawyers hints on how to pursue the case.  Notice she mentions "injunctive relief pending resolution," which Trump's brief very notably did not ask for.  And she raises anomalous jurisdiction.  Bad sign that this judge is not on the up and up.[/quote]

I think you are overreacting a bit.  Between the original pro se filing and the nature of the proceeding, it is appropriate for the judge to give a party an opportunity to address deficiencies in the original filing.  This happens all the time, even when things are not such a mess (e.g., when federal judges issue show cause orders sue sponte asking plaintiffs to address jurisdictional issues like amount in controversy requirements that the court feels are not adequately addressed in the pleadings).  Even for a judge inclined to rule against Trump on this, it makes sense to give him an opportunity to correct deficiencies to create a stronger record supporting a dismissal order on appeal. [/quote]

Trying to initiate a civil action without filing a complaint, when you are represented by counsel, strikes me as a bit more than a deficiency that can be corrected in a more typical case through an amended or supplemental complaint. [/quote]

My understanding is that if he were trying to file a motion for return of seized property under fed r crim p 43, that could be filed as a separate proceeding but would not be initiated with a complaint.  But since there is no clear articulation of the jurisdictional basis or proper articulation of the relief sought, it cannot be assumed that’s what trump was trying to do here.

All this goes to the bigger picture that this is a mess for a judge to rule on as is and why it is best for the court to ask for a supplemental filing.  For instance, without a clear explanation of the jurisdictional basis for the matter, it would be nightmare for the court to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction because it basically would need to guess at all the possible grounds and then explain why they’re not met.  But then if trump comes up with a new jurisdictional theory on appeal, it will get remanded for further consideration.  By asking for an explanation, the court can hold trump to a specific theory.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics