As I said in the immediate aftermath of the FBI’s Mar-a-Lago raid, this outrage raises all sorts of legal and constitutional issues. Sooner rather than later, real experts would weigh in. That process has begun, and today the redoubtable Philip Hamburger—expert in Administrative Law and the regime that sponsors its abuses—has weighed in on the constitutionally dubious phenomenon of non-judges in our federal system—”magistrates”, or “commissioners” as they were formerly known—issuing warrants.
I’m sure that I’m not the only one who sometimes just sits down and puts their head in their hands and quietly wonders how much longer can this blatant, pernicious and pervasive contempt for the law of the land by agencies and individuals who have sworn to uphold those laws continue before the entire system simply collapses beneath the accumulated enormity of the abuses?
Information is slowly trickling out on the issue from both expected and unexpected sources. While there is still plenty that remains unknown about the facts, as well as the intentions of the government and its agents there is a question I have regarding President Trump.
It is said he is playing 4d chess while Biden et al are playing checkers. The President’s safe was reportedly empty when the hired safe cracker opened it on site. That begs the question, was he informed this was going to happen? If so, we’re the documents found (possibly in an underwear drawer) made to look good but not really helpful to the thieves? One doesn’t have to be a chess master to know that 1. The seized documents are probably now out of play permanently 2. Maybe were placed to be found to lead the thieves off target, 3. Know that all of them will be copied and studied for any argument that could possibly be made that threatened the perpetrators, even if they are eventually returned.
So if the raid was to remove incriminating evidence, were the confiscated papers what was really important for a future case against the conspiracy or were those important documents held elsewhere? Considering the depth and breadth of those wanting to keep him out of play, I don’t believe this was just to emphasize how illegally they would act to keep the power.
I came to the same conclusion on this signing off of the warrant ? and so now I guess I would ask is Who in the Doj got this to get signed off , Second; is what district court judge does he ( rienhart) work for and in what district?? I was taught in some law classes , that a Magistrate judge was a hepler to the upper judges in their district and could only sit on Civil actions ??? and not Federal Felony cases at all !!! If you could help straighten me up on this I'd appreciate the help !!
Maybe having the case thrown on because the Magistrate could not Constitutionally issue the searcjh warrant is exactly what the Biden DOJ wants since they could then claim that Trump was let off on a technicality. They could then say the only reason he was not charge was a technicality and thus make him look guilty.
Your note looks at the Article I issue about the appointment and authority of inferior judicial officers and administrative judges. But there is a separate Article II problem, one resting in the lawyer’s Code of Professional Conduct. (I know this is honored in the breach than in the observance, but still . . . and it forms a serious issue that Trump could raise).
A search warrant issued on an ex parte basis. Lawyers generally have no obligation to disclose adverse facts or law; the DoJ’s duty to “seek justice” is less than a fig leaf over a venereal disease outbreak. But when application is made without opposition, the ethical rules read that unfavorable material and adverse law must be submitted to the tribunal. Remember for instance the hullabaloo over whether Carter Page’s background was sufficiently disclosed in a footnote to a FISA application — that was part of the deal.
A case can be made for disqualifying all counsel who dealt with the SW for professional disciplinary violations. No sane person expects any such results, but the shadow of SCOTUS in the background will concentrate the minds of lawyers as well as the judges. And an order to unseal all material showing how the DoJ informed the magistrate about adverse legal authority would bring attention to the cancer at the heart of the system.
Pace Andy McCarthy, perhaps we should Defind the DoJ.
For the record, I have 25 years in State Police from road doggie through detectives. If I had ever tried to have a search warrant signed by anyone save a judge I would have been rebuked, sternly if not worse. In my state a Justice of the Peace is qualified to determine PC but would laugh at you if you offered a SW for review and signature. DC is a cancer on this country. The corruption is open and brazen. Marie Antoinette is tame compared to these people.
I’m sure that I’m not the only one who sometimes just sits down and puts their head in their hands and quietly wonders how much longer can this blatant, pernicious and pervasive contempt for the law of the land by agencies and individuals who have sworn to uphold those laws continue before the entire system simply collapses beneath the accumulated enormity of the abuses?
Information is slowly trickling out on the issue from both expected and unexpected sources. While there is still plenty that remains unknown about the facts, as well as the intentions of the government and its agents there is a question I have regarding President Trump.
It is said he is playing 4d chess while Biden et al are playing checkers. The President’s safe was reportedly empty when the hired safe cracker opened it on site. That begs the question, was he informed this was going to happen? If so, we’re the documents found (possibly in an underwear drawer) made to look good but not really helpful to the thieves? One doesn’t have to be a chess master to know that 1. The seized documents are probably now out of play permanently 2. Maybe were placed to be found to lead the thieves off target, 3. Know that all of them will be copied and studied for any argument that could possibly be made that threatened the perpetrators, even if they are eventually returned.
So if the raid was to remove incriminating evidence, were the confiscated papers what was really important for a future case against the conspiracy or were those important documents held elsewhere? Considering the depth and breadth of those wanting to keep him out of play, I don’t believe this was just to emphasize how illegally they would act to keep the power.
I came to the same conclusion on this signing off of the warrant ? and so now I guess I would ask is Who in the Doj got this to get signed off , Second; is what district court judge does he ( rienhart) work for and in what district?? I was taught in some law classes , that a Magistrate judge was a hepler to the upper judges in their district and could only sit on Civil actions ??? and not Federal Felony cases at all !!! If you could help straighten me up on this I'd appreciate the help !!
Maybe having the case thrown on because the Magistrate could not Constitutionally issue the searcjh warrant is exactly what the Biden DOJ wants since they could then claim that Trump was let off on a technicality. They could then say the only reason he was not charge was a technicality and thus make him look guilty.
Your note looks at the Article I issue about the appointment and authority of inferior judicial officers and administrative judges. But there is a separate Article II problem, one resting in the lawyer’s Code of Professional Conduct. (I know this is honored in the breach than in the observance, but still . . . and it forms a serious issue that Trump could raise).
A search warrant issued on an ex parte basis. Lawyers generally have no obligation to disclose adverse facts or law; the DoJ’s duty to “seek justice” is less than a fig leaf over a venereal disease outbreak. But when application is made without opposition, the ethical rules read that unfavorable material and adverse law must be submitted to the tribunal. Remember for instance the hullabaloo over whether Carter Page’s background was sufficiently disclosed in a footnote to a FISA application — that was part of the deal.
A case can be made for disqualifying all counsel who dealt with the SW for professional disciplinary violations. No sane person expects any such results, but the shadow of SCOTUS in the background will concentrate the minds of lawyers as well as the judges. And an order to unseal all material showing how the DoJ informed the magistrate about adverse legal authority would bring attention to the cancer at the heart of the system.
Pace Andy McCarthy, perhaps we should Defind the DoJ.
For the record, I have 25 years in State Police from road doggie through detectives. If I had ever tried to have a search warrant signed by anyone save a judge I would have been rebuked, sternly if not worse. In my state a Justice of the Peace is qualified to determine PC but would laugh at you if you offered a SW for review and signature. DC is a cancer on this country. The corruption is open and brazen. Marie Antoinette is tame compared to these people.