[U] The Able USDC Judge White Has… Pointed Questions, In Oakland, For Team Trump, On Asylum Fee Price Gouging: September 25, 2020 Hearing Date.

It goes without saying that — if, in advance of one’s hearing date, a federal district court judge takes the time to sua sponte issue a list of questions to the government, primarily — and specifically forbids the parties from simply arguing matters already addressed in their briefs. . . as well as insists that any other “authorities” the parties expect to rely on. . . be pre-filed (without additional argument), with his docket clerk. . . (in Condor’s opinion) well, that judge is very-likely poised to rule AGAINST the government (here, Trump), and grant a nationwide injunction.

The Trump rule/order would go into effect on October 2 — but Condor confidently predicts. . . we will never get to that point. See this, as just one example from dozens Judge White has set before the parties (that’s his full PDF order), on the record this afternoon:

. . . .DHS asserts it “does not know the price elasticity of demand for immigration benefits, nor does [it] know the level at which the fee increases become too high for applicants/petitioners to apply.” 85 Fed. Reg. at 46,797. DHS then asserts it believes immigration to the United States remains attractive and that the benefits of immigration “continue to outweigh the costs noted by commenters.” Id.

From there, DHS concludes it “believes the price elasticity for immigration services is inelastic and increases in price will have no impact on the demand. . . for all immigration services impacted by this rule.” Id. On what facts did DHS rely to form these beliefs and where in the record before the Court on this motion can the Court find those facts?

Updated 09.19.2020 @ 9 AM EDT: Mr. Wolf intends to rely on this case (which is all about the creation of a NEW federal agency, and its director — not about never being confirmed to a long-standing agency!) — which is rather. . . precious, thus — via his lawyers’ overnight filing:

“. . .On September 17, 2020, Acting Secretary of Homeland Security Chad Wolf ratified “each of [his] delegable prior actions as Acting Secretary,” including the “Final Rule [he] approved and issued in the Federal Register at 85 Fed. Reg. 46,788 (Aug. 3, 2020).” See Decl. of Bradley Craigmyle ¶ 2, Ex. 1, Ratification of Actions Taken by the Acting Secretary of Homeland Security (Ratification) at 1, 2 (Sept. 17, 2020). Acting Secretary Wolf also ratified the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking “for that Final Rule at 84 Fed. Reg. 62,280 (Nov. 14, 2019),” which “[f]ormer Acting Secretary McAleenan issued.” Ratification at 2. Based on Acting Secretary Wolf’s ratification, Defendants intend to rely on CFPB v. Gordon, 819 F.3d 1179, 1190-92 (9th Cir. 2016) (attached as Exhibit 2), which is not cited in their briefs. . . .”

Well — good luck with that. End, updated portion.

Trump will lose. And American liberty, the wisdom of continued American pluralism, and the values reflected in the immortal Lazarus poem, inscribed on the base of the Statue of Liberty will. . . live on. Vote with us — vote this corrupt wanna-be dictator. . . out.

नमस्ते

There are no comments on this post.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: