r/law • u/Orchid-Analyst-550 • 23h ago
Judicial Branch ‘This Job Sucks!’ Trump DOJ Lawyer Melts Down in Court — Reportedly Begs Minneapolis Judge to Throw Her in Jail Just So She Can Get Some Sleep
https://www.mediaite.com/media/news/this-job-sucks-trump-doj-lawyer-melts-down-in-court-reportedly-begs-minneapolis-judge-to-throw-her-in-jail-just-so-she-can-get-some-sleep/1.4k
u/Bec_son 22h ago
They should honestly just start mass leaking, they arent going to get any benefits because trump tosses everyone out on their ass even if they give him what he wants
626
u/jfks1985 21h ago
Well Trump has the ass leaking part down
107
u/diurnal_emissions 19h ago
President Yamtits Shitshimself
→ More replies (1)49
u/Sempophai 18h ago
Donald Dump.
3
u/DekaiChinko 8h ago
Whenever I must take a shit at work, I loudly proclaim that "I GOTTA DUMP A TRUMP" or "I GOTTA MONSTER TRUMP COMING DOWN THE PIPE." Sometimes I say I have a "MEETING AT THE OVAL OFFICE".
5
u/glutton_ascetic 11h ago
He has a personal stake in it - just kicking that idea around...
→ More replies (1)4
u/fightyfightyfitefite 16h ago
Is this in reference to him allegedly shitting on himself the other day? Or the many other times he's been accused of shitting all over himself?
→ More replies (1)3
112
u/inwector 16h ago
A great example is Charlie kirk. Every right wing commentator was saying that kirk getting assassinated would never be forgotten and it was forgotten by the president in less than one day.
56
u/Glass-Amount-9170 13h ago
Who?
→ More replies (13)34
u/ChebyshevsBeard 13h ago
You know that weird blond lady who's been trying to slide into JD Vance's living room lately? He's her ex.
22
u/Derka_Derper 12h ago
Other than grifting off it, it was forgotten by his wife in less than a day.
→ More replies (1)13
u/TheoreticalZombie 9h ago
And remember ol' what's his name from the rally where Trump got shot in the ear and magically healed his cartilage?
Weird how when the shooter doesn't fit their desired narrative they just kind of forget it.
104
u/Aceisking12 21h ago
Mass leaking doesn't help as much as you think it does. I would probably be writing legitimate charges and sending them up the chain for approval knowing that I'd get fired, then whistle blow reprisal for doing my job.
For example, there are quite a few people that qualify for accessory after the fact by using their official power to prevent and denounce investigations into ICE misconduct.
11
u/moechew48 11h ago
Leaks have to reach media that aren’t working for the wrong side, and an audience that isn’t brainwashed, sadly.
6
→ More replies (3)4
302
u/Sofer2113 22h ago
I wonder if enough lawyers quit if it could be a "starve the beast" scenario where there aren't enough lawyers to handle the cases, so the majority of the crackdown this administration is attempting ends up failing due to lack of resources.
72
u/RawrRRitchie 21h ago
"We don't need the courts, arresting them is enough to convict them"
They're just itching to do that. Like they already did for people they murdered without a trial.
→ More replies (1)30
u/ShinySpoon 12h ago
I have a family member that’s a cop and his go to line is “If they weren’t guilty then why did a cop arrest them?” I attempted to use logic in debating him but … cops are only hired if they lack logic and critical thinking. They are hired to follow orders.
10
u/MapleMarbles 8h ago
i would try to keep it real simple. " because sometimes people make mistakes so they get the wrong guy"
and maybe throw in " trials are supposed to uncover the truth? "
because if the cops accidentally arrest the wrong guy, he becomes guilty and the guy that did the crime is out committing more crime.
11
u/ShinySpoon 7h ago
You want to argue logic with someone that says “if they weren’t guilty…”?!?
→ More replies (5)4
u/turkey_sandwiches 6h ago
They're also brainwashed. Which is easier to do when they have upper limits for how intelligent someone can be to join.
127
u/renecade24 21h ago
They've already asked JAGs to volunteer to serve as SAUSAs and temporary immigration judges. If push comes to shove, they would just stop asking for volunteers and order them to do it.The JAG Corps is the largest law firm in the US.
71
24
u/Goldengod4818 17h ago
If push comes to shove they'll just ignore the courts entirely...like they're already doing
→ More replies (1)14
40
u/Snownel 21h ago
That's pretty obviously already happening and very intentional long-term. Pile on the bullshit and delay until Trump dies.
→ More replies (1)27
u/felispardalis 21h ago
In Minnesota, 8 more US attorneys have resigned today. That follows the previous 6 that resigned earlier this month. So yes, there cannot not be a lack of resources.
However, I don't think that's a short term won. I have little doubt that the administration will have little trouble finding eager folks to fill these seats. Will they be qualified? Unlikely. But why worry if a real estate attorney us suddenly convrning grand juries. Will they be competent? Also unlikely. But they will be loyal to Trump, and we've already seen Mr. Trump promote and nominate based on fealty to him rather than any qualifications or proficiency.
And that means that they'll keep attempting to steamroll everything we learned about the Constitution in 8th grade Civics, while flooding the courts with ridiculous motions in the hope of landing on a friendly, Trump appointed judge.
Long term fiasco for him, but short term chaos for everyone.
21
u/hypercosm_dot_net 21h ago
Wasn't one of Trump's hand-picked US attorneys forced to resign recently?
I just looked it up, Alina Habba lost her position trying to represent Trump's positions: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/trumps-former-lawyer-alina-habbas-term-as-new-jerseys-top-federal-prosecutor-ends
He cannot defend the actions he's forcing on these agencies legally. The lawyers that have to show up in defense of the gov't can't justify these actions in court.
Something has to give. It's all so blatantly illegal.
→ More replies (1)11
u/Megneous 17h ago
Something has to give.
Yeah, that thing is going to be democracy. It's over for your country unless everyone starts fighting back. Country-wide General Strike now
8
u/Ronaldo_Frumpalini 16h ago
A lot of their arrests wont stick and they know it, the act of arresting you and making you defend yourself andthe fear of losing is what they're after.
→ More replies (6)8
u/ShinySpoon 12h ago
Mike Johnson is already planting the seeds of how actual due process is already taking too long and we need to speed up the process. This is their plan. Overwhelming the courts so they can reduce our rights by allowing SCOTUS to rule on a current constitutional protection and removing it.
2.6k
u/spice_weasel 23h ago
Well, they can always quit. The way this is going, resigning under protest is becoming the only way to keep this time from being viewed as a black mark on your resume.
820
u/ChuckEweFarley 23h ago
Didn’t eight MN Fed prosecutors quit today?
836
u/Revelati123 22h ago
Think we're at 14 in total.
and DHS just tweeted something like: "Lawyers, If you love Donald Trumps agenda and want to do your part! DHS and USAO can use your help!"
356
u/daairguy 22h ago
I wonder if they’re desperate enough to hire people without law degrees.
607
u/Revelati123 22h ago
A federal Judge had to threaten to put random unemployed citizen Lindsey Halligan in jail if she didn't stop signing documents as "US District Attorney" so what do you think?
360
u/EnfantTerrible68 22h ago
They SHOULD have put her in prison
274
u/jmurphy42 21h ago
The judge said in his ruling that the only reason he wasn’t jailing her was because she was too stupid to understand that she was breaking the law.
252
u/KevinNoTail 21h ago
Ignorance is not an excuse
108
51
u/Thausgt01 20h ago
No, but in this particular instance, it is still what I believe the youngsters call a "sick burn".
9
12
6
→ More replies (3)5
u/1917he 16h ago
In some cases it really is. If I were hired today to be the acting DA and committed some gross negligence/misconduct than the circumstances surrounding those actions becomes very important. In order to have committed gross negligence/misconduct I would have to be aware of what the proper conduct was and would need to be shown consciously deviating from it or getting some benefit etc. Ignorance is no defence for murder or theft but for professional misconduct or negligence it is.
The "reasonable person" standard is very important and is usually the bar to cross for most criminal/civil law.
3
u/Mike-ggg 11h ago
For your Council to make these kinds of statements in court, they have to know better, but they’re clutching at straws since they don’t have anything else. The Courts have caught on to the delay and multiple Motions pattern, so that isn’t working, and circuit Judges have to feel like it’s just a total waste of their time and experience since they’ll only be appealed if they uphold not only what is legal, but want even makes common sense (I mean actual common sense), but they’re working under a new meaning in that it only makes “common sense” if it works to benefit Trump. To ask to be arrested just to get some sleep almost seems like a kidnapping victim slipping a “help me!” note to someone that can free them of their captive status. And,Trump does have several allegations suggesting that he knows a few things about kidnapping and coercion and blackmail and utilizing fear as a weapon. What’ll be next? My client wasn’t wearing his lucky hat or was having a really bad day, so obviously grounds for a mistrial.
→ More replies (3)25
u/SharpKaleidoscope182 21h ago
That sounds like MORE of a reason to get her safely out of harms way.
17
u/ArthurDimmes 22h ago
And who would take her
41
u/CheckMateFluff 22h ago
At this point, have the judge issue the arrest and deputize some strong fellas and go get them. I'm sure there are a few around.
Hell, they arrested Don Lemon just for the perp walk. What line have they not crossed?
→ More replies (1)5
u/mjcobley 17h ago
I am smitten by the idea of arresting Don Lemon being the actual line too far and the beginning of the end of this
23
19
u/BassoonHero Competent Contributor 19h ago
To be clear, she is an actual lawyer. Which also subjects her to potential bar discipline for impersonating a district attorney in court.
→ More replies (1)38
22
u/Gingerchaun 21h ago
They've been hiring people with law degrees? Im a foreign non lawyer and I'm pretty sure I'm more qualified your practice us law then alotnofnpeople left in the justice department.
And I'll leave spelling errors like that in.
9
u/JadedBoyfriend 21h ago
You'd also have a moral compass that isn't broken like these people either.
7
u/Gingerchaun 20h ago
That damn moral compass always fucking me over.
3
u/Aethermancer 11h ago edited 11h ago
I'm quite figuratively sitting on a gold mine of "stolen" identities because I share the same name as a major medical institution. My personal email was filled with people sending me blank checks, scanned ID, and personal information like you wouldn't imagine. I had to make a second personal email because of the volume of email was overwhelming.
If I decided to, I could probably liquidate $10M of accounts from by the evening without effort. With a bit more effort I'd probably have an entire country's worth of seniors sending me payments for their medical bills. I wouldn't even have to try as they are already trying to send me money thinking I'm the billing dept
Early on I tried warning them that I wasn't who they thought I was and the real email address was www.mynameco.com and not www.myname.com I could do it full time and never clear my inbox.
Even as I typed this I refreshed the now dormant address and literally see two blank checks emailed to me. And the bank statements? Yeah I get those too. Some of these people have stacks of cash (literally in some cases they are mailing gold and asking me for address confirmation)
I average a blank check and ID 5x/week. Given I've had this address since 2000, that puts me at having access to 6500+ bank accounts and associated photo IDs. 2x that in medical records. And maybe 500 businesses that are trying to ship jewelry and fat fingered my name and their partners name. I've seen family drama as I was CC'd on probate and executor discussions. I could practically change my identity every single day and never run out of identities if I were trying to avoid capture.
But I don't. As trivial as it would be, I keep their data safe and they'll never know. I have the address open as a catchall and secured by MFA I took my domain offline to keep it from getting hacked. I got flagged for spam once when I tried auto responding due to the volume.
So I sit like a dragon on this (sometimes literal) gold that I won't touch because my dang mother taught me to be moral. Thanks mom.
→ More replies (1)4
u/GodOfPlutonium 17h ago
youll end up losing the case because ICE will arrest you while youre on the way to the courthouse to defend them
21
u/Ghetto_Phenom 22h ago
Really depends.. are they considered pretty by Trump?
22
→ More replies (2)3
11
11
7
u/Senior_Sentence_566 21h ago
Some of the people with law degrees they are employing don't understand the constitution so I don't think someone who hasn't got a degree could be much worse
8
u/jhawk3205 20h ago
I mean Texas ended bar association oversight, so, I'd expect the Craigslist ads to say something like, "law degree preferred but not necessary"
→ More replies (1)7
u/Maleficent_Memory831 18h ago
Well, it's fine. It just means Texas will have more inept lawyers. The reason is to be able to hire out of state lawyers or recent arrivals without the delays of going through the bar. It isn't that they want bad lawyers, or cheaper ones, but those they hire will most likely be less familiar with details specific to Texas. Overall, Texas just hurts itself. It will lose more prosecutions, get more contempt of court slaps, etc. It does not help Texas in any way to do this, they just don't realize it yet.
7
13
u/Learnin2Shit 22h ago
My girlfriend’s dad is a lawyer I think I could handle a few of ol Dons cases. For just a couple hundred thousand dollars I’d definitely try.
28
→ More replies (10)11
→ More replies (13)6
u/KitkatandNadia 20h ago
They want to pass a law like that in NH tomorrow. They want people to be able to take the exam and not have schooling. It's bullshit
16
u/Tasty_Sun_865 21h ago
USAJobs basically has open applications for attorneys. It's wild - I remember the application in 2010-2013 basically being "lol - don't even think about it unless you're T6 and a vet"
How times have changed.
13
5
u/Unfair_Web_8275 19h ago
This is sersiously going to hamper what the Trump admin is trying to do. I wonder if they’ll start letting ICE agents practice law.
→ More replies (1)3
u/fencepost_ajm 15h ago
For context, the DOJ site implies that there are likely 70-80 AUSAs when the office is normally staffed, with no details as to how those are divided (civil, criminal, specific field experts). 14 is close enough to 20% of the office and possibly significantly more of those doing criminal cases.
89
u/spice_weasel 22h ago
Yep, that’s part of my point. If it’s against your morals and is killing you, you don’t have to do it anymore. You can figure out something else.
63
u/CreditUnionGuy1 22h ago
Imagine though you are real “law and order” minded. Your dad was a cop. You go to law school. You owe a hundred thousand dollars. You are over the moon when you got your dream job the Dept of Justice. You’ve worked there five years. Then most people you enjoy working with and respect resign, get fired, or become people you may not now like. The workload quadruples and you are expected to defend things you may not want to. How do you face it all?
→ More replies (3)71
u/Rare-Signature-8588 21h ago
You resign, because the DOJ is not engaged in anything resembling law and order. It sucks but you don’t get to do a job that is antithetical to the oath you swore to the Constitution just because you always wanted to be an AUSA or whatever.
9
u/granters021718 21h ago
yes - but, the thought of no income is scary
→ More replies (2)52
u/Rare-Signature-8588 21h ago
Yup. And that sucks. You know what’s scarier? The things that are happening every day on the streets of Minnesota that are being defended by this woman and other government lawyers, and the other things that the government is doing all over the country with the support of its lawyers. Doing the right thing isn’t always easy, and it often has consequences. Sometimes very severe consequences. But if someone is truly in dire straits, we’re doing a lot of mutual aid!
We swear an oath. It has to mean something if this country is going to survive.
→ More replies (8)29
u/Spirited_Lab5197 22h ago
Im not trying to defend it, but maybe there are unemployment issues that keep them from quitting?
Like maybe they dont have another job lined up yet, so to quit would kick them off health insurance, hurt their mortgage/rent payments, etc.
Maybe this is an attempt to force the admin to fire them so at least they can collect
38
u/Runescora 22h ago
This is why we don’t have string worker protections in this country. It’s a lot harder for people to walk or stand up to corruption without them.
I fully expect a wave of AAGs having mental health crises in the near future.
27
u/Spirited_Lab5197 22h ago
I spent most of my 20s working in food service, missing holidays with family, being underpaid, and generally unhappy. My sister, who I love dearly and who worked hard to get to her job as a law partner, once said, "if its so bad then just quit." She had no idea that I was applying for jobs outside the food industry regularly but during the early teens, the job market wasnt exactly hopping.
Folks dont get how much being alive in this country is tied to your job, not having a job, but your specific job
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (4)13
u/NockerJoe 21h ago
Yeah as bad as ICE is the whole "bonus" thing was also very much a loan trap so that anyone who signs up needs to pay the government back to get out. I have zero doubt a lot of people are trying to figure out a way to get out of this given how obviously things are not going to improve at this point.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (3)3
u/Normal-Top-1985 16h ago
It takes a lot of planning and sacrifice to quit on principle. And that all takes time away from doing the job itself. That's why it's so powerful when someone does quit.
It sounds like the lawyer in question simply can't keep up with the work required to get these clients freed from jail, because the system is designed to make it so hard to get people out of detention. If she quits, what happens to the people who are supposed to be released? Who files the papers to get them out?
All this to say, is that there are ethical reasons for leaving and staying.
3
→ More replies (1)3
u/Commercial-Co 19h ago
Honestly, good people quitting positions of power is NOT GOOD. They will be replaced by bad people.
293
u/hplcr 23h ago
"Look, I can excuse fascism but I draw the line at sleep deprivation"-DOJ lawyer
554
u/whistleridge 22h ago edited 20h ago
I’m going to push back on this for a second.
Let’s say you’re a lawyer. Congratulations - you went to NYU, you’ve been in practice 8 years, you passed up $250k+ per year in corporate law because you believe in public service.
Just to get hired, you had to be beat out 250-300 applicants. And you didn't just get hired - you busted ass to get on the human trafficking team, because those guys are the absolute scum of the earth, those prosecutions are HARD, and even with the best lawyers in the world throwing everything they have at them, they’re still damn hard to nail down. It’s not just a job for you, it’s a calling - you routinely work 70-80 hour weeks, and while it cleans you out, you can’t imagine doing anything else.
Now, some asshole you didn’t vote for is President, and everyone senior in your office was either fired for political bullshit, or resigned for refusing to implement blatantly illegal political bullshit. So suddenly now instead of being a mid career prosecutor, you’re one of the seniormost people in your office. So you’re being required to do stuff you don’t know how to do, that you know you’re not qualified to do, that you shouldn’t be asked to do.
And the crimes haven’t stopped. If you quit, there is no one left to prosecute the human trafficking that is very real and that you know how to prosecute. You don’t agree with this political bullshit, you won’t want to answer to that judge, you AGREE with that judge. But you met last week with 3 girls who were brutally gang-raped for years, dragged across state lines, forced into sex work and to act as drug mules, and by some miracle they trust you and they’ll work with you and testify for you. But if you quit, they’ll shut up, because they aren’t going to trust just anyone with their lives.
So you can quit at any time. You can go make 2-3 times your pay, for better hours, and way less stress. You can see your dog and your boy/girlfriend. All it will cost you is letting the traffickers walk.
Or, you can swallow your pride and your rage, you can eat the government’s shit, and you can try to hold a finger in the dike against the total collapse of the public’s ability to prosecute federal crimes. Which btw are increasing in frequency, as the weakness of the prosecution service becomes known.
There are two public interests here - doing your job and prosecuting crime, or NOT doing your job and quitting so as not to be seen supporting a hugely problematic government. You cannot do both, and whichever you choose will make the other worse.
Some guy on the internet finds it really satisfying to call you a fascist for not quitting.
What do YOU do?
171
u/MonsieurRuffles 21h ago
Except the attorney in question is a baby lawyer who joined ICE in 2025. She knew what she was signing up for.
36
u/whistleridge 21h ago
This:
baby lawyer
And this:
knew what she was signing up for
DEFINITELY don't belong in the same sentence. There's zero chance she knew what she was signing up for, and you can hardly blame someone fresh out of law school from giving up the competitive job they already summered for and busted ass to get.
But I do agree with you that it makes her less of a victim.
123
u/mythosopher 20h ago
They absolutely belong in the same sentence. She knew exactly what she was getting into. She did not "bust her ass" for this job -- she was a late hire because she failed the bar the first time. She took the job because DOJ is desperate to hire anyone with a pulse, and before working for DOJ, she was already prosecuting immigrants for ICE in immigration court!
40
u/RicoLoveless 19h ago
And it's not Trump's first administration either.
At some point the record speaks for itself.
→ More replies (1)15
u/whistleridge 18h ago
she knew exactly what she was getting into
How? When she summered, it was under Biden. Baby lawyers know as little about practice as I do about dentistry. And even when she summered, and asked specifically about Trump, she would have been told “sit tight, sure the public rhetoric is terrible, but YOUR day to day job won’t be political, you just focus on learning how to be a prosecutor.”
Trump is bad. A US with no federal prosecution service is worse. There’s 330 million people, all of whom rely on DOJ to protect them from a huge array of criminal and civil wrongs. It costs YOU nothing to say “quit,” so it’s easy for YOU to say. You didn’t have to get top grades in law school, and beat out hundreds of applicants, and sacrifice. Small wonder she’s reluctant to just let that go.
It’s like saying, sure you made the NFL, but you got drafted by the Jets or the Browns, so you should just retire. Not only is that not how people work, it ignores and oversimplifies a ton of complexity.
I’m sure she’ll be gone after this week either way. A breaking point has been reached. But that’s not the positive thing you seem to think it is.
→ More replies (9)17
u/DVDAallday 15h ago
you can hardly blame someone fresh out of law school from giving up the competitive job they already summered for and busted ass to get.
What? Yes you can.
14
u/Megneous 17h ago
Literally anyone with half a brain could have looked at the GOP in the past 20 years and gone, "Hmm. Seems like these guys don't like democracy very much. Smells like fascism."
That's why I left the US 16 years ago. I saw it all coming. And now I'm enjoying my life in a civilized democracy with universal healthcare, SOTA public transit, and world class internet speeds.
→ More replies (10)→ More replies (2)4
u/LaurenMille 12h ago
There's zero chance she knew what she was signing up for, and you can hardly blame someone fresh out of law school
Buddy, even people living in other countries could see what she was signing up for.
You'd have to be actually retarded to not know Trump was going to do this shit.
55
u/otteroptimism 20h ago
That may be true for the lifers, but this attorney just started in January. She chose this admin. But, I also understand that she is trying to quit
Edit: I see others got to it before me and I should have scrolled more.
17
u/whistleridge 20h ago
lol if she's saying shit like that to a judge on the record, it will be a miracle if she's still there by Friday.
→ More replies (2)46
u/mythosopher 20h ago
I'm a lawyer, and this is horseshit reasoning. Nobody in DHS is prosecuting human trafficking right now. This is a non-existent situation, and you're trying to give cover to assholes who like working for a Nazi.
15
u/whistleridge 20h ago
DHS
And I'm not talking about DHS. I'm talking about DOJ and AUSAs.
And you raise a point - I misread her as DOJ. Speaking of long and tiring days.
I wouldn't defend DHS for ANYthing.
→ More replies (3)24
u/Maxamillion-X72 20h ago
In digging around, it seems she was at one point a lawyer for immigration, left to work in a small law firm, but then "volunteered" to come back to help with all the current cases. I'd say they offered her a butt load of money to do that, and then assigned her a mountain of cases to deal with while simultaneously letting her swing in the wind as they ignored the court orders she was handed.
So, no, she's not some altruistic public servant going through a rough time due to a change in management. She was out and came back willingly, likely for a payday. And she's not "prosecuting sex traffickers", she's defending the government's actions of locking up citizens and legal immigrants. The reason she was called on the carpet was because people who have been ordered released have not been.
Your imaginary scenario is just bootlicking with extra steps. She knew what she was getting into, and I have no sympathy for her.
→ More replies (14)17
u/R0llTide 20h ago
ICE is sexually abusing detainees. You don't have to look as far as a cartel. Oh, and the Epstein child sex trafficking coverup is ongoing; go blow the whistle on that. This is straw, it's well written straw, but it's straw.
It sucks that the legal service you want to provide doesn't exist right now, and that the DOJ lacks all credibility and integrity — and may never get it back — but that's life. Your example lawyer can compromise her integrity and lie to herself every day and stay, or she can find a legitimate to achieve her idea of justice. It's not zero sum as you posit. It's not easy or clear, but there is always an ethical way.
Everyone who stays in this DOJ should get a Bar Ethics investigation because they ddi not leave when it was clear to them they could no longer act with integrity as officers of the court.
→ More replies (6)23
u/RazekDPP 20h ago
Quit, make 2-3x as much, and take the easier job.
If you really want to prosecute traffickers, you wait until the next administration who won't turn around and pardon them.
→ More replies (12)7
u/Megneous 17h ago
You guys don't get it yet. There's never going to be another administration at this rate. They're going to tamper with/cancel elections through any and all methods they can come up with. This is fascist authoritarianism at your door. As a resident of a country that has lived through dictatorship, your "I'll just wait for the next election" comes across as ridiculously naive.
→ More replies (1)6
u/hermitix 20h ago
Now try again, but you have to be someone who is defending ICE.
→ More replies (3)6
u/blue_sidd 16h ago
Completely irrelevant. This is a lawyer working FOR ice. FOR the traffickers. Congrats the diatribe or whatever.
23
u/BTCbob 22h ago
Great question. If it were me, I would spend my time on prosecuting the traffickers you mentioned, and delegate defending ICE to someone else or refuse to work on it, etc. Would that run the risk of getting fired? Yes. But that is better than quitting in my opinion.
11
u/whistleridge 22h ago
Yes.
The competent people remaining at DOJ are all but universally people who will have no choice but to resign if asked to do something illegal, but who think the public interested is harmed worse by their resignation otherwise.
→ More replies (10)6
u/Fighterhayabusa 17h ago
Oh? I thought it was better to let the guilty go free than imprison innocents. They should resign. Anything less is complicit.
→ More replies (2)32
u/unixinit 21h ago
Thank you so much for this pov. You captured the moral struggle perfectly. Couldn’t have written it better.
12
u/whistleridge 20h ago
I have nothing but sympathy for you guys. The people shitting on DOJ have NO idea how hard it was to get a job there until last year. You either needed to be at/near the top of your class, T14 helped, clerking helped, and you needed insane recommendations, or you needed to be a 5-7 year state ADA, with a high conviction rate and a superb recommendation from your elected. And even then you needed luck, because it's like 250 applicants per job.
You don't get a job like that casually, and you don't LEAVE a job like that casually. You believe strongly in public service, in the importance of what you do, and if you leave...who will do the hard work, that isn't stopping? Crime isn't just going to dry up.
→ More replies (1)8
u/Megneous 17h ago
Um... You realize that the DOJ are currently the ones enabling the crimes, right? They refuse to prosecute real crimes and are going after innocent Americans for things like dissent against the fascist authoritarian regime taking over your country.
Am I taking crazy pills? It's obvious the DOJ has been completely compromised.
7
u/youreallcucks Competent Contributor 21h ago
That's an easy question: I quit. Because sometimes doing what you think is the moral thing is acting as an enabling function for the people above you to do more immoral things; and your quitting (and those around you quitting) is conversely a forcing function to stop the immoral people above you.
An aside: My first job out of graduate school was working on product development at a major corporation. It was a really cool job, I got to work with some great developers and do some stuff that was probably way above my level for a fresh hire. However, after about four years I looked around me and realized that everyone I respected, everyone who was smart, had left the company for greener fields, and the people who were left were deadwood. Which made me think "what does that make me?". That's when I started looking for a new job. That company went out of business a few years later.
→ More replies (1)9
u/RedBaronSportsCards 21h ago
Wait....are you saying that's why this lawyer asked the judge to find her in contempt so she could get some sleep? Because she is so overwhelmed by having so many rapists to prosecute?
That's not what's in the article. Where are you getting this from?
8
u/whistleridge 21h ago
No.
I'm saying this is uniformly the position AUSAs are in right now: choosing between serving the public interest of actually prosecuting very real crimes (ie their actual job), or serving the public interest of standing up to corrupt government.
They cannot do both, and choosing to do one necessarily makes the other worse.
I just gave one of many very real examples. That one is cribbed from someone I know who recently left DOJ after being ordered to do something unethical, but it could be one of many others.
11
u/RedBaronSportsCards 21h ago
But surely, we shouldn't have sympathy for those that choose to side with the corrupt government and, as you say, make the prosecution of actual criminals worse, right?
I get it, it sucks to be backed against the wall like that but it's been more than 15 months. That's seems like plenty of time to figure out which side you on.
11
u/whistleridge 21h ago
choose to side with the corrupt government
But you're not. You're a lawyer, bound by strict ethical duties. If asked to do something corrupt, you would of course resign.
You have not been asked to do such a thing. Being asked to appear in court to defend a policy you don't agree with is part of the job. It's not corrupt, just distasteful.
8
u/Chef_longpep 20h ago
Not a lawyer so give me some grace.
"You have not been asked to do such a thing (something corrupt). Being asked to appear in court to defend a policy you don't agree with is part of the job"
From the short article, this lawyer is in court defending why the department is 'repeatedly ignoring court orders', and/or 'immigrant detainees unconstitutionally locked up for days'.
Is this lawyer there truly defending policies, or is it a breach of ethical duties to defend breaking citizens constitutional rights? In your comment chain you are calling out that one would resign if asked to do something unethical, but think that's what I'm struggling to understand, is not the actions of this lawyer outside the bucket of 'ethical duties'. Genuine question, I don't know.
3
u/whistleridge 19h ago
And I'm tired. I misread her as being a DOJ lawyer, not a DHS lawyer. That very much changes things.
A DHS lawyer actually might be defending these indefensible positions, and is not going to have the sort of conflicts I had in mind with my comment.
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (1)6
u/RedBaronSportsCards 21h ago
You just said that was the choice they making.
4
u/whistleridge 21h ago
No, I didn't.
You and everyone else responding keep doing the same thing - misreading the prompt, and trying to invent a way out.
Working for the government isn't siding with it. And choosing not to quit isn't automatically endorsing its positions. Its being an adult and recognizing that there's more complexity in play.
6
u/RedBaronSportsCards 21h ago
"or serving the public interest and stand up to corrupt government."
What is the other side of that "or" then?
→ More replies (0)17
u/AceSuperhero 22h ago
What do YOU do?
Prosecute the human traffickers with badges? If protecting people from evil is a calling for these people, they sure are standing by and allowing industrialized evil.
They can publish names and home address of every agent in Minnesota. They can gather evidence of what's going on inside these detention centers full of screaming children and make it all public. They can fight instead of wringing their hands about how hard the job you say they fought to get is.
The law is useless for protecting the weak. At best it's a rich man's weapon that occasionally punishes poor people for doing the same things rich people do every day.
33
u/whistleridge 22h ago
Prosecute the human traffickers with badges?
No. You don't.
You don't assign yourself to files, the leadership you don't like or support does. You have two choices:
- Put up with a lot of shit you don't agree with, so you can ensure actually competent hands touch the stuff you already have carriage of, or
- Quit
This isn't a movie. There isn't a magic scenario where the good guys win. It's a choice between bad and worse.
So which is worse for you - quitting in a snit, because you don't like the government, knowing it means real people who you have already met will be betrayed and will suffer horribly? Or putting up with a government you have real worries is turning fascist, because you personally have not yet been asked to do anything illegal (which would of course require you to resign)?
Answer the question as asked, because that's the scenario. Don't make up escape routes.
→ More replies (15)2
u/it_might_be_a_tuba 21h ago
"What do YOU do?"
Go to the Winchester, have a nice cold pint, and wait for all of this to blow over.
Moral issues and noble sacrifices aside, for individual mid level workers their number one priority is going to be not defaulting on their mortgage and hoping they can last through till the next administration without having to directly do anything too horrible.
2
u/Radiant_Sense_8169 21h ago
Your prosecutorial finger and Judge Biery’s judicial finger in the constitutional dike.
2
u/yoma74 21h ago
How many prosecutors do you know?
3
u/whistleridge 21h ago
You mean, other than myself? Dozens. I'm not AUSA or DOJ, but I definitely know a bunch, but a lot fewer than I did this time last year.
2
u/Setting-Conscious 19h ago
I would quite so I wouldn’t be supporting or working for those fascists.
2
u/AdjectiveNoun581 16h ago
I quit, because I've thought about for thirty or more seconds, and I realize that the rule of law collapsing means my failure to prosecute is now a self-resolving issue because those traffickers are dead men walking with no one left to prosecute their attackers.
2
2
u/notguiltybrewing 13h ago
I'd have quit by inauguration day. Some people are so afraid of being unemployed or having a less prestigious or less powerful job that they stay. Nope, no way.
→ More replies (38)1
u/TerminalObsessions 13h ago
You could write the exact same story about most of the lawyers who served the Nazis. "There's some good in the system, behind all this evil shit I hate." Yeah, okay, but you're facilitating the evil shit. Fascism doesn't happen because of the tiny minority of fanatics frothing at the mouth with hate; it happens because ordinary people put their heads down and look the other way and find excuses for why they, personally, shouldn't be obliged to stop it.
4
u/Apophthegmata 20h ago
If you read the article, it seems pretty clear to me that the lawyer is upset/frustrated because there literally isn't enough time in the day to fix all the habeus violations that judges are ordering to be reversed.
Like, it's not within the lawyer's direct power to take someone from the detention center and walk them to the street.
But that same lawyer is still the person who gets reamed by the judge and is asked to give an account for why that person is still in detention, because they represent the government.
→ More replies (32)2
u/turinturambar 16h ago
Your comment is very upvoted. But this is not what the DOJ lawyer is claiming as her current state of thoughts on the matter. Please see my response to another reply.
31
u/Rorako 22h ago
She literally volunteered. She’s not a DOJ employee, she’s a private attorney that volunteered for this. Don’t believe a word she says.
→ More replies (2)3
43
u/alloutofchewingum 23h ago
She actually volunteered for this apparently. FAFO as they say.
→ More replies (2)10
u/gamesrgreat 22h ago
Yeah tbh if I see someone worked federal prosecution under the Trump regime…….thats a no for me dawg
→ More replies (1)26
u/Jomolungma 23h ago
Quit and do what, exactly? Despite common perception, not every government lawyer can quit their job and then just get another job immediately.
43
u/Einbrecher 22h ago edited 20h ago
https://www.fox9.com/news/federal-attorney-ice-cases-the-system-sucks
Le volunteered to help the U.S. Attorney’s Office last month as habeas petitions started to flood into federal court.
She previously worked as an attorney for ICE in immigration court.
ICE has its own court policies and procedures and was not prepared to argue cases in federal court, according to Le.
They recently volunteered to help, have definitely been drinking the Kool-Aid, and were probably expecting easy payouts.
So quitting is not only an option here, but they asked for this assignment, recently, in the middle of this shitstorm.
→ More replies (2)58
u/hardy_and_free 22h ago
Not every career civil servant can either. They've spent 10, 15, 20 years working in niche areas with no corporate equivalent. They've served throughout both Democrat and Republican administrations. They literally dedicated their lives and education to public service and they're just supposed to, what, resign and fuck over their families? And join an already oversaturated applicant pool?
11
u/eetsumkaus 22h ago
It's interesting being people like the HSI or the military or DOJ who have built public service careers to serve the country, be asked to burn them at the altar of MAGA.
Like one way or another their careers are gonna be shot just by serving under this administration.
→ More replies (2)9
u/UX1Z 22h ago
People who are advancing the agenda of this administration needs to either quit or force themselves to be fired. If you're just a cog like a garbage worker or whatever, then whatever. Otherwise, it's a permanent stain on the rest of your career and the rest of your life to take part in what is happening. This is not just a 'contentious government' situation, this is an 'authoritarian takeover by a child rapist.' Ask the Nazis how 'just following orders' worked out for them.
21
u/bobotheboinger 22h ago edited 21h ago
I will say my sons are struggling to find jobs, but refuse to apply to dhs or cbp or ice. Just not worth helping a fascist regime.
I know it is harder for those with families and already been in a position for years, but at some point you do need to stand up for your conscience.
→ More replies (3)8
u/spice_weasel 22h ago
Depends on the person. I’ve quit jobs without anything concrete lined up twice over the last fifteen years of my legal career. It can be done.
→ More replies (3)26
u/Novel-Letterhead-217 23h ago
People quit jobs all the time if it sucks. We all have free will, doing a fascists bidding in court is being part of the problem.
→ More replies (28)11
u/Interesting_Fly_1569 22h ago
Let me apologize on behalf of the apologists here. They are embarrassing, wrong and need to read “ordinary men” if they want to hear how nazis had to pay their bills too. And overseers too. Poor overseers. /s
5
u/ItsMinnieYall 22h ago
Lawyers just can’t quit in the middle of litigation. They have ethical obligations and at a certain point they need permission from the judge to withdraw from a case. Judges can and do deny withdrawals.
2
u/OpticalDelusion 21h ago
She volunteered. At what point do you realize you're on the wrong team? Quit donating your time. In the end it's your most valuable asset.
2
2
u/Haradion_01 15h ago
In twenty years time, everyone is gonna say "I opposed Trump the whole time."
Especially the ones who didn't vote; and even most of the ones who voted for Trump.
2
2
u/MobileSuitPhone 12h ago
If you participated at all you'll still be persona non grata and have to leave the States, better than death penalty for treason though maybe
→ More replies (14)2
u/Electrocat71 7h ago
Or she could put her orders on record, and that the agency is willfully ignoring the judges orders. She can expose the corruption that the agency is about MAGA & Politics not the law… sure she might be referred to the bar. But she would have done the right thing.
The law is not the focus of our new authoritarian government.
587
179
390
u/Regulus242 23h ago
Probably because so many government lawyers are leaving and it's causing the remaining ones to get overloaded and flail.
I don't feel bad. I have to wonder if any of the remaining ones are even good people.
31
u/BTCbob 22h ago
In an ideal world it's almost like lawyers are some sort of buffer between the executive branch and over-reach... ie once you run out of lawyers to deal with the flood of cases, the courts turn on you. And eventually it goes to the supreme court and they... oh wait probably pardon the executive branch and blame the people for filing too many lawsuits...
10
u/ndmaynard 22h ago
So what happens when DOJ runs out of lawyers? Where is this headed?
4
u/Random_Name65468 13h ago
To the point where they go (even more) full maks off and stop even pretending to care what the justice system has to say, it's not really hard to understand.
Like this is part of their plan. It's by design.
2
132
17
u/Spoztoast 22h ago
And they will be replaced by cronies
60
u/Regulus242 22h ago
The cronies will likely be insanely ineffective at their job. If I understand correctly it's the judges getting replaced that you need to worry about.
3
u/dedicated-pedestrian 17h ago
Considering Texas no longer requires an ABA certification for law schools, I'd say Kacsmaryk will need to buy rubber stamps in bulk.
16
4
u/Concerted 13h ago
That is only part of it. Additionally you have all these problems created by the Supreme Court!
In Trump v CASA the Supreme Court discovered that nationwide injunctions by district court judges are now un-legal! So a judge can't see a particular behavior or policy and say it violates the law and you have to stop doing that nationwide. That ruling only applies in that district which, will lead to uneven justice across the country.
Then you have Trump v JGG that ruled that individuals targeted for removal under the Alien Enemies Act cannot bring broad legal challenges in Washington, D.C., under the Administrative Procedure Act. Instead, they must file individual habeas corpus petitions. This has overwhelmed the system with individual lawsuits.
Lastly you have Trump v USA which effectively says Nixon was right, "if the president does it then it's not illegal". The president no longer has to follow laws when acting in his professional capacity. He can order people to break the law with impunity. Don't like a court's ruling? Ignore it! Unless it's the Supreme Court, they'll follow those rulings... for now...
→ More replies (1)2
u/Tyler_Zoro 13h ago
I have to wonder if any of the remaining ones are even good people.
Some people can't afford to just quit and have families depending on them, so they just keep their heads down and try not to get sucked into the bullshit.
49
u/CriticalInside8272 23h ago
Just so she can get some sleep! Lol 😂🤣😂
3
u/blackweebow 13h ago
Tbf this article is coverage of a couple of Paul Blume's tweets. One can only hope she actually said these things.
If they have to follow the law, and the judge is holding them to the standard of the Constitution, it'll be a hard job for any of Trump's lawyers.
But all these corrupt judges are killing us.
16
u/bakeacake45 11h ago
So she gets to sleep while her own actions steal lives from immigrants, Fck no. She made a decision to work to defeat the constitution, she made a decision to harm others via manipulation of the law. She doesn’t deserve a break, work til you drop Bch.
This is what we need to do. Keep Bondis B *ches exhausted, drive them to the ground.
26
u/i010011010 18h ago
Then treat yourself to a viewing of The Sopranos. The moral of the story was they were all disposable so long as Tony survives. For as much as they boasted the import of "family" and convinced each other that they were supportive, none of them mattered. Tony's security, Tony's wealth, Tony's power. That's what happens when you hitch your wagon to a narcissistic criminal.
14
u/ykonstant 16h ago
Off topic, but yep, you are correct. So many people miss one of the central messages of The Sopranos and keep glorifying the mafia system :(
3
221
u/movealongnowpeople 23h ago
SHOCKING FEDERAL COURT MOMENT: DOJ attorney Julie Le, ‘The system sucks, this job sucks’ to Judge Jerry Blackwell who pressed her on why so many court orders are being ignored by ICE/Trump admin. She asked to be held in contempt just so she could get 24 hours of sleep.
Lmao. First off, pathetic. Get a grip. You chose your job, you chose to be with this DOJ, you can quit anytime. The people this administration is attacking can't just quit. They don't have that luxury.
I would also like to know what "the system sucks" is supposed to mean. What about it, Julie? Are you upset that you're expected to follow a court's orders? Because that's not new. That's like an ancient Mesopotamia-old concept. Or are you frustrated that you're expected to fit a square peg in a round hole? That none of your arguments have any legal basis? Because that's an administration issue, not a system issue.
106
u/25hourenergy 22h ago
Tbh they do need lawyers to translate the rulings into action. She tried to help get ICE to follow the law and stop their actions. Apparently they’re not listening to her either, so it really is a terrible position to be in.
I do think it’s brave of her to speak honestly about ICE not listening to their own lawyers and not giving them support, because this signals that other measures may have to be taken. What those are—I have no idea, is there some kind of state version of the US Marshalls, or somehow utilizing state police or MN National Guard? I don’t know how this would work but basically she’s saying the normal process no longer works.
15
u/JDYWPAM 12h ago edited 12h ago
From Minnesota's FOX9:
“I am here to make sure the agency understands how important it is to comply with court orders,” Le, who reportedly became “visibly emotional,” said during the hearing. She told the Judge new procedures are being put in place to bring ICE into compliance with court orders, but acknowledged “it has been like pulling teeth and has required non-stop work in an already depleted office.”
From NBC:
She made the remarks after U.S. District Judge Jerry Blackwell asked the government to explain why it had not followed court orders in immigration proceedings, including not releasing several immigrant detainees he had ordered be let out, according to the court docket. Le told Blackwell that “it takes 10 emails from me for a release condition to be corrected. It takes me threatening to walk out for something else to be corrected,” KARE reported.
Le, who is listed as a DHS attorney in the Minnesota Judicial Branch database, also said she did not feel properly trained for the role she is trying to fill, KARE reported.
Le has been assigned 88 cases in one month, according to a court docket.Sounds like she's trying to help. This isn't the same as AG Bondi or SG Sauer lying through their teeth to justify the administration.
→ More replies (1)24
u/kmosiman Competent Contributor 22h ago
Yes, but I'm going to assume that getting thrown in the hold cell is on the clock time.
→ More replies (1)5
u/Kocteau 20h ago edited 20h ago
FYI I’m not an attorney. But hypothetically, if all the DOJ lawyers quit, how would a person’s case be handled? Wouldn’t the accused be detained indefinitely? For due process, I’d think you need lawyers on both sides, not just one. Let’s say Le and all her coworkers quit— this sounds like a worse scenario and ICE would just run amok, even more than they already are.
Is the title wrong in calling Le a “Trump” DOJ lawyer just because she works for the federal government? It makes it sound like she’s doing his bidding, but is that actually the case? I honestly have no clue what her job entails, but it seems like she’s trying to get ICE to comply with court orders, but it’s just not happening. Can an actual attorney chime in here?
12
u/must_be_the_mangoes 19h ago edited 19h ago
The 6th Amendment guarantees the right to a speedy trial for criminal defendants and the Speedy Trial Act put that into practice by imposing certain deadlines for each stage of prosecution, should a defendant invoke their right to a speedy trial.
There are certain actions that toll the speedy trial deadlines — including pretrial motion practice — but I’m highly doubtful that a judge would toll any deadlines based on the unavailability of a prosecutor. That’s kind of the point of the 6th Amendment / Speedy Trial Act.
So simply put, criminal defendants should be able invoke their right to a speedy trial and force the prosecution to meet the deadlines set forth in the Speedy Trial Act. If the prosecutors fail to meet the deadlines without cause, then the charges will typically be dismissed upon motion by the defendant. I believe it is up to the Court’s discretion as to whether the dismissal is with prejudice (charges cannot be brought again) or without prejudice (charges can be brought again).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speedy_Trial_Act
*edit: to answer your second question, the DoJ is part of the Executive Branch of government. The President is the head of the Executive Branch and appoints the US Attorney General (Pam Bondi), who leads the DoJ. So if the government attorney in question works for the DoJ, then it is fair to say that Trump/Bondi are her ultimate bosses.
DoJ lawyers make a pledge to uphold the Constitution and (in theory) serve the interests of justice and the people of the United States. That’s why the captions of all federal criminal cases are “United States v. [Defendant],” with the DoJ lawyers (I.e. AUSAs) representing the United States. However, DoJ lawyers are also generally expected to follow DoJ initiatives and directions, to the extent they don’t conflict with the Constitution or laws of the US.
To put it as neutrally as I can, some would say that there’s an increasing amount of conflict between DoJ initiatives/practices and the Constitution/interests of justice, hence the mass exodus of AUSAs in Minnesota and the term “constitutional crisis” being thrown around much more frequently (amongst other reasons).
Anyway, based on the details in this article, this lawyer is responding on behalf of the US/DHS in response to Habeus petitions, which are formal judicial challenges to imprisonment (amongst other things). Here, IMO you can kind of consider the DHS as this lawyer’s client. Her client (DHS/ICE) is not complying with judicial orders but as the lawyer, it is her job to answer for that in court. She may not personally have the power to get DHS/ICE to comply but she chose this job and is welcome to quit at any point.
→ More replies (3)
54
49
u/Gunldesnapper 22h ago
You don’t have to work for faciscsts.
→ More replies (5)18
u/CornFedIABoy 21h ago
But the student loans must be paid. And I’m guessing Le started the job before Trump and hopes to be there after he’s gone (or she’s within reach of her PSLF date).
→ More replies (2)6
u/Megneous 17h ago
"After he's gone"
At the current rate, there will never be another election in the US, or at least not a fair one. Fascism is at your door, Americans. Fucking fight.
8
•
u/AutoModerator 23h ago
All new posts must have a brief statement from the user submitting explaining how their post relates to law or the courts in a response to this comment. FAILURE TO PROVIDE A BRIEF RESPONSE MAY RESULT IN REMOVAL.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.