D.C. Circuit arguments in the Alien Enemies Act case, JGG v. Trump, are beginning now. You can listen here: www.youtube.com/watch?v=4DoT...
www.youtube.com
March 24, 2025 at 5:37 PM
D.C. Circuit arguments in the Alien Enemies Act case, JGG v. Trump, are beginning now. You can listen here: www.youtube.com/watch?v=4DoT...
Judge Boasberg in JGG case: probable cause to find the government in *criminal* contempt.
storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...
storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...
April 16, 2025 at 4:19 PM
Judge Boasberg in JGG case: probable cause to find the government in *criminal* contempt.
storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...
storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...
This is the same guy who is in hot water with Judge Boasberg in the JGG case!
April 12, 2025 at 12:13 PM
This is the same guy who is in hot water with Judge Boasberg in the JGG case!
Good morning all, at 9:30 ET I will be live-posting the DC Circuit oral arguments in JGG v. Trump. The question is whether Venezuelans sent to CECOT under the Alien Enemies Act are entitled to a hearing.
September 25, 2026 at 1:08 PM
Good morning all, at 9:30 ET I will be live-posting the DC Circuit oral arguments in JGG v. Trump. The question is whether Venezuelans sent to CECOT under the Alien Enemies Act are entitled to a hearing.
PSA: If you start listening at 930 AM, the case is not JGG v Trump. It is a separate unrelated case. I would wager the args for JGG begin closer to 1030.
You can also listen in if you want. A live stream if here:
www.youtube.com/live/vj5QbIv...
www.youtube.com/live/vj5QbIv...
The United States Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit
Friday, September 25, 2026 9:30 A.M.
Judges Rao, Edwards, Randolph
...
www.youtube.com
September 25, 2026 at 1:37 PM
PSA: If you start listening at 930 AM, the case is not JGG v Trump. It is a separate unrelated case. I would wager the args for JGG begin closer to 1030.
An important point: there is another case on the docket before JGG so I will probably have some comments on that too
JGG v. Trump will follow USA v. Venkata, so the lawyers from DOJ's Public Integrity section and the Federal Public Defender's Office will have an outsized audience.
September 25, 2026 at 1:28 PM
An important point: there is another case on the docket before JGG so I will probably have some comments on that too
Just reading transcript of 7/24 hearing before Judge Boasberg in JGG—AEA case where govt sent Venezuelans to CECOT despite his orders. Even if DC Cir blocks criminal contempt proceedings, Boasberg says he’ll refer DOJ attys to bar authorities & court’s own disciplinary committee ...
1/2
1/2
August 2, 2025 at 9:27 AM
Just reading transcript of 7/24 hearing before Judge Boasberg in JGG—AEA case where govt sent Venezuelans to CECOT despite his orders. Even if DC Cir blocks criminal contempt proceedings, Boasberg says he’ll refer DOJ attys to bar authorities & court’s own disciplinary committee ...
1/2
1/2
In response to documents suggesting that El Salvador has told the UN that the US has exclusive "jurisdiction & legal responsibility" over aliens removed there from the US, govt seems to be responding *under seal.* (In the JGG case before Judge Boasberg.)
July 12, 2025 at 11:29 AM
In response to documents suggesting that El Salvador has told the UN that the US has exclusive "jurisdiction & legal responsibility" over aliens removed there from the US, govt seems to be responding *under seal.* (In the JGG case before Judge Boasberg.)
The LGML case came very close to being JGG redux.
But just before the hearing began, the judge decided not to wait. She entered a TRO barring removal of all the children.
That made all the difference: DHS already had the kids loaded on planes. One plane even took off (then turned around).
But just before the hearing began, the judge decided not to wait. She entered a TRO barring removal of all the children.
That made all the difference: DHS already had the kids loaded on planes. One plane even took off (then turned around).
This whole scenario feels like it's straight outta the government's Alien Enemies Act/J.G.G. playbook.
In J.G.G., Boasberg entered TRO barring removal of named plaintiffs and set weekend emergency hearing on certification of class. But DHS started removing people just before/during hearing...
In J.G.G., Boasberg entered TRO barring removal of named plaintiffs and set weekend emergency hearing on certification of class. But DHS started removing people just before/during hearing...
August 31, 2025 at 7:50 PM
The LGML case came very close to being JGG redux.
But just before the hearing began, the judge decided not to wait. She entered a TRO barring removal of all the children.
That made all the difference: DHS already had the kids loaded on planes. One plane even took off (then turned around).
But just before the hearing began, the judge decided not to wait. She entered a TRO barring removal of all the children.
That made all the difference: DHS already had the kids loaded on planes. One plane even took off (then turned around).
Who would/could ask for an en banc rehearing? The JGG plaintiffs?
August 8, 2025 at 4:53 PM
Who would/could ask for an en banc rehearing? The JGG plaintiffs?
Attys for @aclu.org give the DC Circuit panel, which temporarily stayed Judge Boesberg's order to start contempt proceedings in the 1st Alien Enemies Act case (JGG) on 4/18, a copy of the whistleblower report that corroborates Judge Boesberg's findings in spades.
June 25, 2025 at 10:23 PM
Attys for @aclu.org give the DC Circuit panel, which temporarily stayed Judge Boesberg's order to start contempt proceedings in the 1st Alien Enemies Act case (JGG) on 4/18, a copy of the whistleblower report that corroborates Judge Boesberg's findings in spades.
Well, it now appears that the media room will be open, so I'll try to live blog the JGG (Alien Enemies Act) hearing before Judge Boasberg myself. (This is on behalf of @lawfaremedia.org.)
Here's the phone-in number for the hearing at 5pm before Judge Boasberg in JGG. I'm going to try to be in the courtroom, so won't be able to live-blog. But if my notes are good, I'll try to write them up later. Not sure if colleagues @annabower.bsky.social or @tylermcbrien.com will blog.
1/2
1/2
May 7, 2025 at 8:43 PM
Well, it now appears that the media room will be open, so I'll try to live blog the JGG (Alien Enemies Act) hearing before Judge Boasberg myself. (This is on behalf of @lawfaremedia.org.)
JGG hearing
Up next for the government: Abhishek Kambli
Judge Boasberg notes that the issue is "constructive custody," meaning custody of a person not under physical control.
DOJ denies the govt has it.
Judge Boasberg notes that the issue is "constructive custody," meaning custody of a person not under physical control.
DOJ denies the govt has it.
May 7, 2025 at 9:39 PM
JGG hearing
Statt JGG ab 12 lieber JGG bis 99. Man hätte bessere Instrumente und könnte spezial- und generalpräventiv oft sinnvoller reagieren.
February 7, 2025 at 6:40 AM
Statt JGG ab 12 lieber JGG bis 99. Man hätte bessere Instrumente und könnte spezial- und generalpräventiv oft sinnvoller reagieren.
A thread about DOJ’s astoundingly misleading responses to the 27-page Reuveni letter (since backed with 150pp of corroborating texts/emails), alleging contempt-like conduct in 3 cases: JGG, Abrego, DVD.
Let’s examine DAG Todd Blanche’s & AG PamBondi’s responses. ...
1/9
Let’s examine DAG Todd Blanche’s & AG PamBondi’s responses. ...
1/9
July 13, 2025 at 6:13 PM
A thread about DOJ’s astoundingly misleading responses to the 27-page Reuveni letter (since backed with 150pp of corroborating texts/emails), alleging contempt-like conduct in 3 cases: JGG, Abrego, DVD.
Let’s examine DAG Todd Blanche’s & AG PamBondi’s responses. ...
1/9
Let’s examine DAG Todd Blanche’s & AG PamBondi’s responses. ...
1/9
In JGG, Govt repeats previous positions in response to Boasberg's contempt inquiry. Says DAG Todd Blanche & PADAG Emil Bove gave legal advice, & Secy Noem made decision. storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...
November 26, 2025 at 1:24 AM
In JGG, Govt repeats previous positions in response to Boasberg's contempt inquiry. Says DAG Todd Blanche & PADAG Emil Bove gave legal advice, & Secy Noem made decision. storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...
J: isn't the problem that it doesn't even say they're entitled to challenge this.
DOJ: SCOTUS in JGG doesn't say you have to advise they have a right to challenge.
J: [now reading the SCOTUS language to DOJ]
govt's position is that this notice complies with SCOTUS ruling in JGG?
DOJ: correct
/16
DOJ: SCOTUS in JGG doesn't say you have to advise they have a right to challenge.
J: [now reading the SCOTUS language to DOJ]
govt's position is that this notice complies with SCOTUS ruling in JGG?
DOJ: correct
/16
April 18, 2025 at 10:33 PM
J: isn't the problem that it doesn't even say they're entitled to challenge this.
DOJ: SCOTUS in JGG doesn't say you have to advise they have a right to challenge.
J: [now reading the SCOTUS language to DOJ]
govt's position is that this notice complies with SCOTUS ruling in JGG?
DOJ: correct
/16
DOJ: SCOTUS in JGG doesn't say you have to advise they have a right to challenge.
J: [now reading the SCOTUS language to DOJ]
govt's position is that this notice complies with SCOTUS ruling in JGG?
DOJ: correct
/16
Drew Ensign, who has represented the gov in the JGG matter before Judge Boasberg, is here for DOJ.
Judge Xinis begins by explaining why we're here: SCOTUS ruled, and directed the court to clarify its order re: "effectuating" the return of Garcia
Judge Xinis begins by explaining why we're here: SCOTUS ruled, and directed the court to clarify its order re: "effectuating" the return of Garcia
April 11, 2025 at 5:01 PM
Drew Ensign, who has represented the gov in the JGG matter before Judge Boasberg, is here for DOJ.
Judge Xinis begins by explaining why we're here: SCOTUS ruled, and directed the court to clarify its order re: "effectuating" the return of Garcia
Judge Xinis begins by explaining why we're here: SCOTUS ruled, and directed the court to clarify its order re: "effectuating" the return of Garcia
One neat tidbit here for SCOTUS watchers: Xinis reads the unreasoned stay in the D.V.D. case as being about the composition of the class action, not about the underlying third-country removal merits. That means she thinks 3CR aliens get full due process under AARP & JGG. @stevevladeck.bsky.social
July 11, 2025 at 4:58 PM
One neat tidbit here for SCOTUS watchers: Xinis reads the unreasoned stay in the D.V.D. case as being about the composition of the class action, not about the underlying third-country removal merits. That means she thinks 3CR aliens get full due process under AARP & JGG. @stevevladeck.bsky.social
Judge Boasberg’s opinion in JGG v. Trump (4/16/25) is a masterpiece of judicial reasoning. He explains exactly why our legal system couldn’t survive tolerating willful defiance of clear judicial orders — even if those orders are ultimately overturned on appeal. The Supreme Court will have to agree.
April 16, 2025 at 7:06 PM
Judge Boasberg’s opinion in JGG v. Trump (4/16/25) is a masterpiece of judicial reasoning. He explains exactly why our legal system couldn’t survive tolerating willful defiance of clear judicial orders — even if those orders are ultimately overturned on appeal. The Supreme Court will have to agree.
JGG got hoes
March 22, 2026 at 2:15 PM
JGG got hoes
Rossman now addresses the Rubio declaration.
Simply saying national security is insufficient, he says.
And we're not aware of any cases in which something that isn't classified is a state secret. It would be strange, Boasberg recognized this in JGG case.
Simply saying national security is insufficient, he says.
And we're not aware of any cases in which something that isn't classified is a state secret. It would be strange, Boasberg recognized this in JGG case.
May 16, 2025 at 6:50 PM
Rossman now addresses the Rubio declaration.
Simply saying national security is insufficient, he says.
And we're not aware of any cases in which something that isn't classified is a state secret. It would be strange, Boasberg recognized this in JGG case.
Simply saying national security is insufficient, he says.
And we're not aware of any cases in which something that isn't classified is a state secret. It would be strange, Boasberg recognized this in JGG case.