Since we are all just throwing spitballs here (I’m neither an excellent lawyer nor one practicing in criminal law), here’s my take:
A petition for change of venue is possible under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) (for convenience) or 1406 (improper venue), but it’s made to the judge where the matter is currently pending and it’s discretionary. If the…
Since we are all just throwing spitballs here (I’m neither an excellent lawyer nor one practicing in criminal law), here’s my take:
A petition for change of venue is possible under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) (for convenience) or 1406 (improper venue), but it’s made to the judge where the matter is currently pending and it’s discretionary. If the judge won’t accept an amicus brief offered by eminent Republicans, she sure ain’t fixing’ to grant a change of venue.
Might the Archivist bring its own original case in the DC court? Probably has to have the DOJ represent it. Not sure of the basis. But what I don’t know is whether consolidation of the two cases is possible under Rule 42 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, that is, whether a DC judge can drag the Florida case up north.
I suppose the DOJ could file a criminal information against Trump in DC based on the records that were previously obtained and not covered by the injunction. Clearly Trump was in possession of presidential records contrary to law. A bit of a Hail Mary pass, but at least they would be in DC and the criminal case can’t be consolidated with a civil case. Whether they could resume the hunt for evidence clear of the injunction is not something I know.
Thanks Gary. I'm feeling pretty good about what I said last night about appealing the injunction, since no less than Professor Lawrence Tribe said the same thing on Lawrence O'Donnell's show tonight.
I’m sure DOJ will appeal although I suspect the principal effect, as you said yesterday, is to convict Trump in the court of public opinion, and convict the Trump judiciary of rank intellectual corruption while laying down a marker when common criminals try to pull the same stunt later. The 11th CA will find a way to uphold most of the injunction. Remember that GOP judges have experience in creating one off rules just for favored GOP politicians (see, Bush v. Gore).
Since we are all just throwing spitballs here (I’m neither an excellent lawyer nor one practicing in criminal law), here’s my take:
A petition for change of venue is possible under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) (for convenience) or 1406 (improper venue), but it’s made to the judge where the matter is currently pending and it’s discretionary. If the judge won’t accept an amicus brief offered by eminent Republicans, she sure ain’t fixing’ to grant a change of venue.
Might the Archivist bring its own original case in the DC court? Probably has to have the DOJ represent it. Not sure of the basis. But what I don’t know is whether consolidation of the two cases is possible under Rule 42 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, that is, whether a DC judge can drag the Florida case up north.
I suppose the DOJ could file a criminal information against Trump in DC based on the records that were previously obtained and not covered by the injunction. Clearly Trump was in possession of presidential records contrary to law. A bit of a Hail Mary pass, but at least they would be in DC and the criminal case can’t be consolidated with a civil case. Whether they could resume the hunt for evidence clear of the injunction is not something I know.
Thanks Gary. I'm feeling pretty good about what I said last night about appealing the injunction, since no less than Professor Lawrence Tribe said the same thing on Lawrence O'Donnell's show tonight.
I’m sure DOJ will appeal although I suspect the principal effect, as you said yesterday, is to convict Trump in the court of public opinion, and convict the Trump judiciary of rank intellectual corruption while laying down a marker when common criminals try to pull the same stunt later. The 11th CA will find a way to uphold most of the injunction. Remember that GOP judges have experience in creating one off rules just for favored GOP politicians (see, Bush v. Gore).
I just read a news blip where the DoJ has filed for an appeal already.