Jeff Sessions Accuses Federal Judge in NY Census Suit of Judicial Overreach
"The words on the page don't have a motive; they are either permitted or they are not. But the judge has decided to hold a trial over the inner workings of a Cabinet secretary's mind," Sessions said.
October 15, 2018 at 08:19 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on National Law Journal
As the U.S. Supreme Court considered whether to block a court-ordered deposition of Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross in a suit over the 2020 census, Attorney General Jeff Sessions on Monday night inveighed against federal judges who have allowed what he called “invasive discovery” into executive branch operations.
Accusing an “increasing number of judges” of being akin to “roving inspectors general for the entire executive branch,” Sessions, speaking at a Heritage Foundation event in Washington, pointed to the Ross deposition dispute to argue that judges are going beyond their powers to resolve purely legal disputes.
U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman of the Southern District of New York, upheld on appeal, ordered Ross to sit for a deposition in litigation over the inclusion of a citizenship question on the coming census. The Justice Department has appealed the order to the Supreme Court, where the dispute is pending and could be acted on soon.
“The court believes this is proper because it wants to probe the secretary's motives. But the census question—which has appeared in one form or another on the Census for over a hundred years—is either legal or illegal,” Sessions said in his remarks. “The words on the page don't have a motive; they are either permitted or they are not. But the judge has decided to hold a trial over the inner workings of a Cabinet secretary's mind.”
Depositions of Cabinet officials must meet a high bar, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit said that threshold had been met in the case involving discovery of Ross.
“The district court, which is intimately familiar with the voluminous record, applied controlling case law and made detailed factual findings supporting its conclusion that Secretary Ross likely possesses unique firsthand knowledge central to the plaintiffs' claims,” the court said on Oct. 9. “As the district court noted, deposition testimony by three of Secretary Ross's aides indicated that only the Secretary himself would be able to answer the plaintiffs' questions.”
Sessions on Monday called the deposition of a Cabinet official a “monumental disruption” that “should not be done lightly.” He vowed the Justice Department would prevail, drawing applause from the audience.
Sessions' remarks at Heritage, a conservative group sympathetic to the Trump administration's policies, were an extended rebuke of the federal judiciary and highlighted other gripes he has previously expressed.
He repeated his oft-spoken criticism of nationwide injunctions as an example of what he described as “judicial encroachment.” Since President Donald Trump was elected, Sessions said, 27 district courts have issued these injunctions. The Supreme Court declined the Justice Department's invitation, last term in the travel ban litigation, to curtail the power of federal trial judges to issue nationwide injunctions.
“Courts ignore these constitutional limits at their peril,” warned Sessions. He said any judges overstepping boundaries makes him or her open to criticism as any other political leader “and the same calls for their replacement.”
Sessions also applauded the Trump administration's appointment of 84 federal judges, including Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh. “These judicial appointees are the culmination of decades of the work done by those in this room, and Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh are the heirs to this legacy,” he said.
Sessions made no mention of the sexual assault allegations that roiled Kavanaugh's confirmation proceedings. Kavanaugh was confirmed this month 50-48, the narrowest margin of any modern Supreme Court nominee. He denied the sexual misconduct claims from his high school and college years, blaming Democrats for an “orchestrated” political hit.
Read more:
Meet the Ex-Kirkland Partner Up for White House Counsel
6th Circuit Pick Chad Readler Grilled Over DOJ's Defense of Trump Policies
Trump Names 13 More Nominees for the Federal Bench
Sessions, Nodding to Justice Thomas, Takes New Swing at National Injunctions
DOJ Policy Head Scolds 'Dogged Determination' to Enjoin Trump
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
© 2025 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 AllProsecutors Ask Judge to Question Charlie Javice Lawyer Over Alleged Conflict
Trending Stories
- 1Judge Denies Retrial Bid by Ex-U.S. Sen. Menendez Over Evidentiary Error
- 2Lawyers: Meet Your New Partner
- 3What Will It Mean in California if New Federal Anti-SLAPP Legislation Passes?
- 4Longtime AOC Director Glenn Grant to Step Down, Assignment Judge to Take Over
- 5Elon Musk’s Tesla Pay Case Stokes Chatter Between Lawyers and Clients
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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