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:
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 AllMore Big Law Firms Rush to Match Associate Bonuses, While Some Offer Potential for Even More
Lululemon Faces Legal Fire Over Its DEI Program After Bias Complaints Surface
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
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