Trump's Newest Tweet Target: Solicitor General Noel Francisco
The president's early-morning tweet, seemingly prompted by a Fox News segment, didn't name Francisco but took aim at the SG's position in an Arizona case involving DACA recipients.
March 21, 2018 at 01:51 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on National Law Journal
Noel Francisco. Photo: Diego M. Radzinschi / ALM
The latest of President Donald Trump's Twitter salvos criticizing the Department of Justice was aimed today at a new, though unnamed target: Solicitor General Noel Francisco.
In an early-morning tweet, Trump took the Justice Department to task for failing to urge the U.S. Supreme Court to take up a case brought by Arizona defending its ban on the issuance of drivers' licenses to immigrants in the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals or DACA program.
A Justice Department spokeswoman said there would be no comment about the tweet.
In a 1998 essay on the role of the solicitor general that is posted on the Justice Department's website, former SG Seth Waxman wrote that “by long tradition the Solicitor General has been accorded a large degree of independence” in part because of his or her duty to the Supreme Court “to exercise restraint in invoking the Court's jurisdiction,” even though the SG is “of course an Executive Branch officer, reporting to the Attorney General, and ultimately to the President.”
The high court on Monday denied certiorari in Brewer v. Arizona Dream Act Coalition, in which a brief filed by Francisco on February 14 urged the court to hold or deny review of the case. The justices had asked the solicitor general to weigh in on the case last June.
The brief stated that the drivers' license case had been “overtaken by events” involving the controversial Obama administration DACA policy. “Arizona's opposition to DACA has largely been vindicated, and its concerns about the policy and its effects have been addressed,” the brief stated, referring to the Trump administration's decision to wind down DACA.
Francisco also pointed to another pending case testing the rescission of the policy, titled Department of Homeland Security, et al v. Regents of the University of California, et al, in which the government sought expedited review. On February 26, however, the Supreme Court denied the government's request without prejudice, stating that “It is assumed that the Court of Appeals will proceed expeditiously to decide this case.” The order tees up the prospect that the Supreme Court will decide on the fate of DACA next term.
Trump apparently was watching on Tuesday when Fox Business commentary Lou Dobbs railed against the government's brief, which he seemed to blame for the court's denial of review. “Are you kidding me?” Dobbs said. “What in the world is going on in our court system?”
Dobbs' guest for the segment was Harvard Law School professor Alan Dershowitz who told him, “stay tuned” for future action on the issue, suggesting that the SG and the court may have wanted to deal with the issue in other cases. Dershowitz also stated that “it is very, very hard to get review” from the court when the solicitor general urges against review.
Supreme Court scholar Josh Blackman mused on Twitter that “I never thought I would see a presidential tweet on a CVSG,” referring to the court's “Call for the Views of the Solicitor General” in the Arizona case. “What Trump does not realize, is that SG urged SCOTUS to deny review in AZ Dream Act case to leverage it to promptly review the DACA rescission case. This effort didn't pan out in hindsight, but it was a reasonable litigation strategy.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllAn ‘Indiana Jones Moment’: Mayer Brown’s John Nadolenco and Kelly Kramer on the 10-Year Legal Saga of the Bahia Emerald
Travis Lenkner Returns to Burford Capital With an Eye on Future Growth Opportunities
Legal Speak's 'Sidebar With Saul' Part V: Strange Days of Trump Trial Culminate in Historic Verdict
1 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250