Dem
47
GOP
53
Lots of news out of the courts yesterday. As readers will recall, the White House has been grossly abusing the process for appointing U.S. attorneys, so as to be able to put loyalists in key positions. The highest-profile incident (among many) involves Donald Trump's former (?) personal lawyer Alina Habba. He installed her as interim U.S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey. After 120 days, as is their right, the judges of that district rejected her continuance in that job. The administration effectively ignored that, naming Habba as "acting" attorney, which would theoretically give her another 210 days. What all these machinations tell you is that Habba is so problematic that even the pliant U.S. Senate might decide she's a bridge too far.
A trio of defendants, whose cases are being prosecuted by Habba's office, filed suit back in July, arguing that her work since the judges rejected her is illegal and invalid. And yesterday, Chief Judge of the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania Matthew Brann (a Republican appointed to the bench by Barack Obama) issued a 77-page ruling in which he said he agrees entirely. He found that Habba "is not lawfully holding the office of United States Attorney" and has been in the position without legal authority since July 1. This means that anything she has done since then "may be declared void." Since indictments from that office are generally issued in her name, that covers a LOT of territory.
Brann stayed his ruling so the Trump administration can appeal, which it is going to do very promptly. You never know what will happen with some of these judges, particularly the sextet of Republican appointees who sit on the Supreme Court. However, the case for Habba is extraordinarily weak. The arguments for her have been soundly rejected by a dozen judges at this point, starting with the group that refused to allow her to continue in her post. And the system is set up so that those judges, not to mention the U.S. Senate, get to be the deciders. If Trump can subvert that with bookkeeping tricks, that's a real problem.
Habba, for her part, responded to her defeat by running to Sean Hannity to whine. Trotting out a right-wing talking point that's now so old it's got gray hair, she blamed her misfortunes on "activist" judges. Habba also opined that they should "just be doing their job." And what, exactly, is "their job," you might ask? According to Habba, it is "respecting the president." Undoubtedly, this will be very helpful in illustrating that she's a fair-minded advocate for justice, and not a partisan hack who would be delighted to see the U.S. turned into a dictatorship.
If the White House loses its various appeals, it will have a real mess on its hands, for two reasons. The first is that there are several people "acting" as U.S. attorneys right now whose appointments would presumably be just as invalid as Habba's. The second is that if everything done by Habba (and the others) is not valid, then there will be an enormous mess to clean up. And every extra day means a bigger mess. The smart thing to do would be to tell Habba, et al. to take a nice vacation until everything is resolved. But, and maybe readers have heard about this, this administration is not exactly known for doing the smart thing. (Z)