Hi, and welcome back to Trump Watch! It's Valentine's Day, and my boyfriend and I are giving each other the gift of not celebrating it. Tell me what you're doing for the Hallmark-approved holiday at [email protected] and track the latest secular legal news on Twitter at @jacq_thomsen.

Discord at DOJ

President Trump is picking a fight with his administration's lawyers—again.

The spectacular meltdown over Roger Stone's sentence is just the latest incident of Trump being less-than-thrilled with the lawyers working at his Justice Department. He's long railed against the "13 Angry Democrats" that he thinks made up special counsel Robert Mueller's team (I wouldn't bet on them being Democrats….) and some of those prosecutors are facing his wrath yet again.

Two of the line prosecutors who quit the Stone case after their original sentence recommendation was just retracted by Main Justice were Mueller prosecutors. The two others were career prosecutors. One of them, Jonathan Kravis, left DOJ entirely over the debacle

Even Bill Barr isn't thrilled with Trump! He told ABC News on Thursday that Trump's tweets "make it impossible for me to do my job."

"And I'm happy to say that, in fact the president has never asked me to do anything in a criminal case," he added. Alex Jones, who Stone apparently wanted to pass along the request for a pardon, will be disappointed!

The Stone case is far from the first time there's been a clash between Trump and government lawyers. Let's look back at some of those fond memories:

Obamacare

The Trump Justice Department's decision to stop defending the Affordable Care Act was one of the first signs things were amiss at DOJ.

Three government attorneys withdrew from the case at the time, with one DOJ veteran, Joel McElvain, resigning entirely. He's since landed at King & Spalding.

The Trump administration's decision to ostensibly switch sides also reportedly contributed to low morale within the Justice Department.

Now Obamacare is awaiting a decision from the U.S. Supreme Court on whether it will take up the case, after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit remanded it to the district court judge who tried to strike the whole thing down.

Census citizenship question

The Supreme Court's 5-4 ruling blocking a question on citizenship from the 2020 census under the existing rationale was thought to be the final blow for the case. And then the president tweeted. (Sound familiar?)

During a call with U.S. District Judge George Hazel after Trump's tweet, one DOJ attorney sounded at a total loss at what was happening with the question, but promised he wasn't trying to mislead the court. And then another DOJ lawyer cut in and said, yes, the Trump administration would keep trying to push for the citizenship question.

That led to Main Justice's announcement that they'd be swapping out the entire team of lawyers who had initially fought for the question. Everyone agreed their credibility would be shot if they suddenly started making different arguments than the first ones they tried to make.

But not so fast, the judges said, and started demanding reasons for the attorney swap. And with his back to the courtroom wall, Trump turned to the next best thing: executive action, ordering agencies to hand over whatever citizenship data they've got.

Sure, there wasn't a public fight between the census litigation lawyers and Trump in that case. But don't tell me that those civil division attorneys weren't screaming into pillows about having to try and redefend a case they already lost.

Roger Stone

And that brings us up to current times, with our good friend and repeat Trump Watch subject: Roger Stone.

The handling of Stone's sentencing has reportedly caused other federal prosecutors in D.C. to start worrying about their cases being subject to political interference, and whether they should resign too.

Barr is now set to appear before the House Judiciary Committee on March 31, approximately a zillion news cycles from now. But House Democrats have already signalled they want to ask about Stone at that hearing. I guess we'll just have to wait six weeks and see what happens!

A Look Ahead

2/18: Remember the good old days, when the House was suing Trump for using military funds for his border wall? The case is finally getting its day at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. Tune in on the court's website at 9:30 to hear the arguments.

2/20: The day we've all been waiting for—Roger's Stone sentencing. The excitement starts at 10 a.m. Come for the political interference, stay for the mob lawyer Stone hired just this week.

What We're Reading

>> Chief DC Judge Defends Amy Berman Jackson Ahead of Stone Sentencing: Public Criticism 'Is Not A Factor': "U.S. Chief Judge Beryl Howell on Thursday released a public statement in defense of the federal trial judge overseeing Roger Stone's sentencing next week, a rare move after President Donald Trump criticized the judge. 'The Judges of this Court base their sentencing decisions on careful consideration of the actual record in the case before them; the applicable sentencing guidelines and statutory factors; the submissions of the parties, the Probation Office and victims; and their own judgment and experience,' Howell said. 'Public criticism or pressure is not a factor.' While the statement does not name her directly, it's a clear defense of U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson, who is presiding over Stone's case." [National Law Journal]

>> DOJ's Roger Stone Debacle Puts New Focus on Judge Amy Berman Jackson: "Some are calling for Jackson to call in top DOJ officials, including Attorney General William Barr, to answer questions about the different recommendations and whether political motivations are playing a role in DOJ's sentencing recommendation for President Donald Trump's longtime associate….Former federal judges said in interviews Wednesday that Jackson would be well within her rights to question DOJ about how to weigh the two sentencing recommendations from two different prosecutorial teams as she decides on Stone's sentence, set to be handed down next Thursday." [National Law Journal]

>> DOJ's Roger Stone Maneuvering Faces Calls for Internal Investigation: "The U.S. Justice Department faced mounting questions Wednesday over why senior leaders intervened to reduce the recommended sentence for President Donald Trump's longtime friend Roger Stone, a move that prompted four career prosecutors to abruptly withdraw from the case. Legal scholars and lawyers widely condemned the extraordinary decision undercutting career prosecutors, as some joined Democratic lawmakers in calling for an investigation by the Justice Department's internal watchdog. In a letter to the Justice Department's inspector general, Michael Horowitz, Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer of New York on Tuesday said the 'situation has all the indicia of improper interference in a criminal prosecution.'" [National Law Journal]

>> Amazon Wins Early Order Blocking $10B Cloud Contract Awarded to Microsoft: "Amazon.com Inc. won a preliminary order Thursday blocking the U.S. Department of Defense from moving forward with a $10 billion cloud-computing contract with rival Microsoft Corp., in a suit that confronts President Donald Trump's public animus toward Amazon and its chief executive Jeff Bezos….Amazon's lawyers, led by Morrison & Foerster's Kevin Mullen, co-chair of the firm's government contracts and public procurement practice, contend Trump improperly pressured the Pentagon to award the JEDI contract to Microsoft." [National Law Journal]

>> DC Circuit Again Rejects Attorney's Push to Get More Info on Trump's Financial Disclosure Form: "The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit has again rejected an attorney's effort to get President Donald Trump to provide more information on his financial disclosure form. Attorney Jeffrey Lovitky has spent several years in D.C. federal court challenging Trump's financial disclosure reports filed with the Office of Government Ethics. The D.C. Circuit initially ruled against him in 2019, finding it couldn't order the president to amend forms he filed as a candidate…In a unanimous opinion on Tuesday, Judge Judith Rogers repeatedly referred to the D.C. Circuit's prior ruling against Lovitky, writing: 'Just like in Lovitky's prior appeal, the court begins—and ends—its analysis with subject matter jurisdiction, holding that Lovitky 'lacks the clear right to relief based on a clear duty to act that is necessary to obtain mandamus relief.'" [National Law Journal]

>> Blue States Create Hurdle for Trump's 2020 Judicial Appointments: "President Donald Trump's push to reshape the federal judiciary with conservatives is likely to slow in 2020 as most of the remaining vacancies are in California and other blue states. Almost 84% of the nearly 80 current and expected district court vacancies are in states with at least one Democratic senator and fully 53 are in blue states, or states with two Democratic senators, according to Bloomberg Law analysis of Federal Judicial Center data. That means this year—an election year when there's already much less time to get things done in the bitterly divided chamber with a third of seats up for election in November—the White House will have to work with Democratic senators to get judges confirmed that they can agree on or possibly accept a lower yield on one of Trump's most successful priorities." [Bloomberg Law]

Thanks for reading. I will be back next week with more Trump Watch.