Dem
47
GOP
53
Boy howdy, does this administration keep the courts busy. A rundown of the "highlights" from the last week:
Good Times: Donald Trump and Todd Blanche broke federal law and Department of Justice regulations in ordering the FBI to serve subpoenas on New York Times reporters. They misled the court that approved the subpoenas by failing to disclose that reporters were the target. They also didn't give the required notice to the reporters and they served family members, including one reporter's mother. The subpoenas were withdrawn after Judge Arun Subramanian indicated he would quash them. When the prosecutor couldn't answer the Judge's questions beyond claiming the violations were "mistakes," Subramanian ordered the DOJ to produce all communications with the White House regarding the subpoenas. He granted an extension until August 6 to produce the documents.
Our Take: It should be interesting to see if the DOJ complies with the judge's order, especially if Blanche's nomination for AG is still pending (see above). Lawyers for the Times produced evidence that Trump was asking for regular updates on the status of the investigation. No doubt Blanche will argue any emails with the White House are privileged, but it's doubtful the attorney-client privilege would apply because Blanche is not acting as the president's lawyer here (at least, he's not supposed to be).
Jim Don't Know Jack: Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) referred former special counsel Jack Smith to the DOJ for criminal prosecution for allegedly committing perjury. Jordan claims that in his deposition last December, Smith should have volunteered more information than Jordan's questions asked for. Smith was asked if the toll records he subpoenaed revealed any content. He correctly and truthfully testified that they did not. He did see some text messages that the National Archives turned over in response to a separate request from Smith's team. But Smith wasn't asked about that. He was only asked about the toll records, which only include the numbers that were called and not any content.
Our Take: Any first-year lawyer learns the importance of follow-up questions in a deposition in order to later claim the deponent committed perjury. Here, the obvious follow-up question was: "Did you ever see the content of any text messages of members of Congress?" No doubt, Smith would have then mentioned the records from the National Archives. But he wasn't asked about it, and he has no obligation to do the Republicans' work for them. Even this DOJ does not seem particularly interested in pursuing this bogus claim.
So Much Losing: In the quest to obtain unredacted voter rolls, Trump's losses continue to pile up. He's now 0-17 after a federal judge in Kentucky dismissed Trump's claim for voter rolls. Kentucky officials refused to turn over sensitive voter data, including driver's license and Social Security numbers. Kentucky's Republican Secretary of State, Michael Adams, said he would not "voluntarily commit a data breach" without a court order. He had given over redacted voter registration records but refused to provide unredacted information.
Our Take: Secretaries of State of both parties are standing up to Trump's efforts to compromise election security. Kentucky is part of the Sixth Circuit, which just upheld a Michigan federal court's dismissal of Trump's suit for voter data there. This should embolden more state officials to fight back against these illegal demands, especially given the inconsistent way the DOJ is treating some states who only provided publicly available voter data, like Montana and Kansas. It's almost like Todd Blanche & Co. only really want data from blue states, for some reason.
Beware the Stiff Upper Lip: In 2025, Trump sued the BBC for defamation, claiming that a 2024 Panorama documentary used a clip from his January 6 speech that was improperly edited. The BBC issued a correction and an apology. Trump's suit claims $10 billion in damages to his businesses. The case is proceeding, and on Monday, a U.S. magistrate judge ordered Trump to turn over financial documents related to his businesses, including the Trump Revocable Trust, which owns most of his properties and businesses. She ordered the production to take place within 10 days.
Our Take: Oops. Did Trump's lawyers really not see this coming? He claims that his brand's value and all his businesses have suffered $10 billion in economic damages. Prove it! Maybe he thought the BBC would just roll over like so many other companies. But to paraphrase Bugs Bunny: He don't know them vewwy well. We expect a quiet dismissal of this lawsuit in about 9 days.
Seattle U.S. Attorney Sues Trump: Roger Rogoff served as U.S. Attorney for Seattle for 54 minutes before being summarily terminated in an e-mail. Now he is suing the Trump administration and claiming that his removal from office violates the Constitution and disregards the Court's role in selecting a U.S. Attorney when the president fails to get a candidate confirmed by the Senate. Trump and Blanche have fired several other court-appointed prosecutors after the acting U.S. Attorneys were found to be serving unlawfully.
Our Take: Someone had to do it. This lawsuit is an important test of the notion that the president can do an end-run around the Vacancies Act, and its requirement to have a Senate-confirmed appointee serving as U.S. Attorney, by simply firing whomever the Courts appoint.
More Grand Jury Shenanigans: David Hearn, a former Olympic canoeist, was indicted in D.C. Superior Court on a felony charge of destruction of property and causing more than $1,000 in damages to the liner of the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool, which the administration "renovated" earlier this year. But the defense learned that the only witness to the grand jury testified that the liner was already damaged and repairs were required regardless of Hearn's actions. This led the defense team to question whether the grand jury was properly instructed and ask the judge to release all the grand jury material.
Following that request... the entire case against Hearn fell apart. Late yesterday, prosecutors filed a motion to dismiss the indictment. They now admit that the problems with the reflecting pool were not due to vandalism, but "flawed installation" by the contractor. Prosecutors claim the motion is based on "newly discovered information" and blame the Department of Interior for failing to provide "fulsome information" about the cause of the damage. And if you believe that, we have some land in Florida to sell you. No doubt they wanted to avoid responding to Hearn's motion to unseal the grand jury transcripts. Hearn's lawyer correctly excoriated the government for abuse of power in charging an innocent man with a felony and threatening years of prison time. Interestingly, the government is asking to dismiss the indictment without prejudice despite admitting they have no case. Hearn's lawyers will fight that and probably seek sanctions for bringing a frivolous case.
Meanwhile, attorneys for former FBI Director—and seashell enthusiast—James Comey are watching this closely. They are also seeking grand jury materials as well as dismissal of the charges against him on the grounds of vindictive and selective prosecution. Comey's team cited "irregularities" in how prosecutors presented the case. Comey has also learned that Trump demanded the Secret Service surveil him and his wife after he posted the "86 47" seashell photo.
Our Take: Whether it's due to incompetence, deliberate misrepresentations, or both, judges can't ignore the pattern here of grand jury misconduct to secure indictments. This DOJ has lost all benefit of the doubt and, as the evidence piles up, these cases are going to continue to fall apart. Oh, and the DOJ sent a clear signal of how flimsy they know their case against Hearn was by filing it in D.C. Superior court instead of a federal court.
Somewhere, Wong Kim Ark Is Smiling: After the Supreme Court struck down Trump's executive order purporting to alter the Fourteenth Amendment's guarantee of citizenship for everyone born in the U.S., he vowed to seek a rehearing. The deadline to do so was July 27, and nothing was filed. So the case, Trump v. Barbara, is officially over.
Our Take: Trump's crusade against non-white non-citizens continues apace and he will continue to make life difficult for all immigrants, legal or not. But it appears that his campaign to expand his targets to U.S.-born children of immigrants has been quashed for the foreseeable future.
Court is adjourned. (L)