Legal AF Full Episode 4/19/2025

Summary

Legal AF by MeidasTouch – Episode Summary: Legal AF Full Episode 4/19/2025

Release Date: April 20, 2025

Hosts:

• Ben Meiselas: Founder of MeidasTouch Network and civil rights lawyer.
• Michael Popok: National trial lawyer strategist.
• Karen Friedman Agnifilo: Former Chief Assistant District Attorney of the Manhattan District Attorney's Office.

---

1. Introduction: Supreme Court's Emergency Stay on Migrant Flights

The episode opens with a significant development in U.S. immigration law. At 1:00 AM, the United States Supreme Court issued an emergency stay, effectively blocking the Trump administration from dispatching another group of Venezuelan migrants to concentration camps in El Salvador. The ruling was decisive, with a 7-2 vote, marking a rare and bold intervention by the Court.

Ben Meiselas (A):
"The Supreme Court's 7 to 2 ruling sent a clear message to the Trump regime: We don't trust you, Donald. We're ensuring our position is unmistakably clear by halting these flights." [00:22]

2. Federal Court Proceedings and Key Judicial Figures

The discussion delves into the intricate web of federal court proceedings surrounding this issue. Key figures include:

• Judge Paula Zinnis: A respected federal judge in Maryland who initially ordered the return of Abrego Garcia, a Venezuelan detainee.
• Judge Boasberg: A D.C. federal judge who found the Trump administration in contempt for violating his order regarding migrant flights.
• Judge Harvey Wilkinson: A Reagan-appointed judge in the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, known for his conservative judicial philosophy.

Michael Popok (B):
"Harvey Wilkinson is an icon, a rock-ribbed Reagan Republican. His recent ruling against the Trump administration underscores the judiciary's commitment to upholding the rule of law." [04:27]

3. ACLU's Strategic Litigation and Due Process Concerns

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has been at the forefront of challenging the Trump administration's immigration policies. Their strategy focuses on ensuring due process for migrants, emphasizing that deportations must follow habeas corpus petitions filed in individual states rather than class-wide injunctions.

Ben Meiselas (A):
"The ACLU's masterful litigation strategy addresses the fundamental issue: lack of due process. They're ensuring that each migrant has the opportunity for individual legal representation and hearings." [18:50]

4. Political Pressure and Propaganda Tactics

The Trump administration has employed various tactics to undermine legal proceedings, including manipulating public perception through propaganda. Notably, Senator Van Hollen's trip to El Salvador to meet Abrego Garcia faced public mockery, with the administration releasing doctored images to portray the senator negatively.

Ben Meiselas (A):
"The administration's attempt to deepfake Senator Van Hollen as an MS-13 gang member was a blatant effort to discredit genuine efforts to uphold the rule of law." [32:15]

5. Judicial Integrity and the Rule of Law

A critical theme is the judiciary's resilience against executive overreach. Judges like Zinnis and Boasberg exemplify judicial independence, standing firm against attempts to circumvent legal protocols. The Supreme Court's emergency stay reflects a broader commitment to maintaining constitutional integrity.

Michael Popok (B):
"Judges like Zinnis and Boasberg are upholding the rule of law, ensuring that the executive branch cannot bypass due process without accountability." [59:13]

6. Upcoming Supreme Court Oral Arguments

Looking ahead, the Supreme Court has scheduled oral arguments for May 15th on two pivotal cases:

• Birthright Citizenship: Challenging the constitutional guarantee that anyone born on U.S. soil is automatically a citizen.
• Nationwide Injunctions: Evaluating the validity and scope of nationwide injunctions in federal law.

Michael Popok (B):
"May 15th will be a landmark moment as the Supreme Court addresses birthright citizenship and nationwide injunctions, shaping the future of constitutional interpretation." [64:04]

7. The Shadow Docket and Its Implications

The episode highlights concerns regarding the Supreme Court's use of the "shadow docket" — expedited decisions without full briefing or oral arguments. This process, often bypassing thorough deliberation, raises questions about transparency and the potential for ideological bias in critical rulings.

Ben Meiselas (A):
"The shadow docket undermines the Court's deliberative process, leading to precipitous decisions that lack the robust analysis characteristic of landmark cases." [30:36]

8. Reflections on Judicial Appointments and Future Implications

The conversation touches on the long-term impact of judicial appointments, emphasizing the importance of selecting judges committed to impartiality and the rule of law. Concerns are raised about potential shifts in judicial philosophy that could influence future rulings on constitutional matters.

Ben Meiselas (A):
"Judges like Wilkinson demonstrate the vital role of judicial humility and restraint. Their commitment to constitutional principles is essential for safeguarding our democracy." [73:01]

9. Conclusion: Upholding Democracy and the Rule of Law

The hosts conclude with a reaffirmation of their dedication to legal integrity and democratic principles. They emphasize the importance of vigilant legal advocacy and the role of independent journalism in holding power accountable.

Michael Popok (B):
"In these challenging times, our commitment to upholding the rule of law and democratic values has never been more crucial. Together, we can ensure justice prevails." [85:16]

---

Notable Quotes

• Ben Meiselas (A):
  "We have the rule of law outnumbered four to three with the justices aligned in a way that threatens our constitutional democracy." [27:53]

• Michael Popok (B):
  "The Supreme Court is sending a message that administrative overreach without due process will not be tolerated." [25:48]

• Ben Meiselas (A):
  "Due process without notice is no due process at all. The ACLU is ensuring that every migrant has the opportunity for fair legal proceedings." [18:50]

Key Insights and Conclusions

• Judicial Oversight: The judiciary, particularly the Supreme Court, plays a pivotal role in checking executive power, especially in immigration matters.

• Due Process Advocacy: Legal organizations like the ACLU are crucial in safeguarding migrants' rights, emphasizing individualized legal processes over broad, class-action policies.

• Political Manipulation: The Trump administration's use of propaganda tactics to discredit legal challenges underscores the intersection of law and politics, highlighting the need for independent scrutiny.

• Shadow Docket Concerns: The expedited decision-making process of the Supreme Court's shadow docket raises significant concerns about transparency and thoroughness in critical legal rulings.

• Future Legal Landscapes: Upcoming Supreme Court cases on birthright citizenship and nationwide injunctions will have profound implications for U.S. constitutional law and immigration policy.

---

Conclusion:
This episode of Legal AF by MeidasTouch provides a comprehensive analysis of the ongoing legal battles between the Trump administration and the U.S. judiciary over immigration policies. Through detailed discussions on court proceedings, judicial integrity, and the strategic actions of advocacy groups, the hosts underscore the importance of maintaining the rule of law and democratic principles in the face of executive overreach. Upcoming Supreme Court decisions are poised to further shape the legal landscape, making this episode a critical listen for those interested in the intersection of law and politics.

Transcript

[A]

This episode is brought to you by Shopify. Upgrade your business with Shopify, home of the number one checkout on the planet. Shop pay boosts conversions up to 50%, meaning fewer carts going abandoned and more sales going cha ching. So if you're into growing your business, get a commerce platform that's ready to sell wherever your customers are. Visit shopify.com to upgrade your selling today.

[B]

Great days start with great underwear and Tommy John makes the greatest. With Tommy John you make each day better than the last. And with over 20 million pair sold and thousands of five star reviews, guys everywhere love their Tommy John. Plus you're fully covered with Tommy John's best pair you'll ever wear or it's free guaranteed. Grab 25% off your first order now at tommyjohn.com Spotify Save [e-mail] Spotify See site for details. At 1am The United States Supreme Court issued an emergency stay blocking the Trump regime from sending another group of Venezuelan migrants to concentration camps in El Salvador. It was a 7 to 2 ruling, very rare for the Supreme Court to jump in at 1am and they sent a clear message to the Trump regime. We don't trust you Donald. So we are making sure we make our position clear by blocking the flights. We should also talk about what's been going down with Abrego Garcia. One of the reasons also the Supreme Court doesn't trust the Trump regime anymore. I could give you a million other reasons, but this is just one of them. We should talk about Senator Van Holland's trip to El Salvador meeting with Abrego Garcia, how the authoritarian leader of El Salvador, naive Bukele, tried to set this up with like Margaritas to act like Abrego Garcia was treating well. I want to talk about everything that's going on there. Everything that's going on in the Federal Court proceedings before Judge Zinnis in Maryland. What the fourth Circuit Court of Appeal ruled, what a powerful ruling by a Reagan appointed judge, Judge Wilkinson. Let's talk about the Washington D.C. proceedings before federal Judge Boasberg where he found the Trump regime in contempt regarding that original flight of the first group of Venezuelan migrants who were sent to the concentration camps in El Salvador. That contempt order was temporarily stayed by the D.C. circuit Court of Appeals. A bad panel, a bad ruling. But it's only an administrator administrative state. But we will bring that down. We will break that down. Also, the Supreme Court has set oral arguments on two major cases, one involving birthright citizenship, the other on national nationwide injunctions. In May Both on, I think May 15th, we'll break this down and more on legal AF. But Popac, I want to start off by reading from the opinion of Judge Wilkinson. I think we start off reading this. He's a Reagan appointed judge, one of the leaders in the kind of conservative judicial movement and one of the big feeders to Supreme Court justices. The clerks work for this guy Wilkinson first before working for the Supreme Court justice. Let me just read this one paragraph where he denied the Trump regime's attempt to appeal the order by Judge Zinnis. When Judge Zena set out a process by which the Trump administration should show that it was trying to facilitate the return of Abrego Garcia, Judge Wilkinson, again Reagan appointed conservative Republican writing in a unanimous opinion for the 4th Circuit says it is difficult in some cases to get to the very heart of the matter, but in this case it is not hard at all. The government is asserting a right to to stash away residents of this country in foreign prisons without the semblance of due process. That is the foundation of our constitutional order. Further, it claims in essence that because it has rid itself of custody that there is nothing that can be done. This should be shocking not only to judges, but to the intuitive sense of liberty that Americans far removed from courthouses still hold dear. We'll get to that ruling. More on Legal af, but I wanted to mention that at the outset, Michael Popak, a busy, busy week in the courts. And then that 1am order earlier today.

[A]

Which woke us both up and we both hit respectively hot takes on Legal AF and here on Midas Touch Network. Look, we got a lawless executive branch led by Donald Trump and we're watching courts at every level, Circuit court, trial court, Supreme Court struggle with the tools in their toolbox on how to restrain them. You and I are going to talk about three different this is going to be like a breakout tutorial law school meets Ted talk about administrative stays. We've got three in the last 48 hours that were considered by three different courts about Donald Trump's out of control, reckless lawless immigration policy. We've got the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals written by Harvey Wilkinson. And I don't want to undersell Wilkinson for a minute. He is a icon, a rock ribbed Reagan Republican. He is a if they were chiseling a new Mount Rushmore, especially for the Federalist Society, he would be on it. Judge Ludig, formerly of the Fourth Circuit, would be on it. I mean, this is about as far away, Ben, from a radical leftist Marxist activist judge which Donald Trump always uses those words to talk about something like Judge Zinnis at the Fourth. Not only that, Harvey Wilkinson not only wrote a book when he was like 26 years old coming out of a Supreme Court clerkship, but he wrote a book about 10 years ago about cosmic interpretation of the Constitution, in particular, arguing that judges should never be activists, judges should never be ideologues. Judges should be humble and have humility. That's the guy that just wrote the passage. And there's some others in there that we'll touch on when we get to that segment. So that was the fourth saying, we respect what Judge Zinnis is doing. She's doing everything right off the Supreme Court decision in her favor about Armando Abrego Garcia. You go, Judge. You do you. But while we're here, let's use soaring rhetoric to completely tear down Donald Trump and appeal to his, his, his inner angels, his higher angels. He has no higher angels. He has, it's all devils replacing other devils. That's the fourth. Then the D.C. court of Appeals a day later in a three judge panel that you and I worried about because we saw two Trumpers in Rao and Katzis. They came out and said, well, we hear you, Judge Boasberg, about your probable cause on criminal contempt against the Trump administration and possible referral for prosecution, but why don't we put a pin in that for a day or two while we get our arms around the process. So forget your next Wednesday deadline stay. And then we have a dissent from, from Pollard, the Obama appointee. You said, why are we saying anything? This isn't even right for, for an appeal. And then right. And then 1am or 10pm Whatever it was Eastern time, Pacific time, bing, bing, bing. You're my phone, everybody's phone starts blowing up. I'm walking a dog. My dog didn't feel well late last night. And I get holy cow, look what just got issued. And we had been following and tracking this case, cases what the ACLU had been doing off of three weeks ago's ruling by the Supreme Court, which, which told Judge Boasberg, you're right and you're wrong. You're right on the Alien Enemies act about there needs to be due process and notice. But you're wrong about the procedure. It needs to be habeas corpus petitions in individual places where these people are being processed before they leave. The United States will just completely ignore the 250 that already went and we'll never get that due process that's now the law of the land. So Go do it by individual petitions.

[B]

All right.

[A]

ACLU said, we'll, we'll see you. We'll see you judges, and we'll match you. They filed individual petitions and class action petitions on habeas corpus in various jurisdictions and started getting rulings in their favor. The one in Texas, Northern District, that one in particular, they couldn't get anybody to give them the stay. And they had. They had noticed from a number of immigration lawyers that their clients were given imminent. Their removal was imminent, off on a plane under the Alien Enemies act over to El Salvador, like any moment. So they ran to the judge. The judge says, no. They ran to the fifth Circuit. The fifth Circuit, of course, said, well, we don't see what the harm is going to be putting them on a plane without due process. And so they had to file this fast application last night to the Supreme Court. And in a 72 decision, we have an administrative stay. You and I are going to talk more about what administrative stays where they were very pointed and said, nobody in the Northern District of Texas, including Blue Bonnet, wherever that is, in that, that is a part of this putative class, is going anywhere until we figure out with briefing what's going on here. So everybody sit out. Now, let's see what the Trump administration does next. They're very good at taunting and they're very good at funny memes and getting Bukele, who's their puppet, to do funny things to their MAGA base. But this is the United States Supreme Court and their commands. And we've got two judges, the Supreme Court and Judge Zinnis in the Fourth Circuit, Maryland Trial Court, who are making or who are maneuvering this administration into possible second level contempt.

[B]

All right, there's a lot of moving parts here, and a lot of people are saying, okay, Abrego, Supreme Court, Texas, Blue Bonnet detention, Boasberg, Judge Zenis, you guys are saying a lot of things. Can you break it down for me? What's happening? So let's just talk about states, districts, right? There's DC Proceedings, District of Columbia, Federal Court there. That's Judge Boasberg. Judge Boasberg was the judge who ordered that whatever Trump was doing with the first group of Venezuelans who were sent to the El Salvador concentration camps be returned. The Trump regime violated that order, sent that first group that's currently right now in Seacot, the El Salvador concentration camp. And so Bozberg, D.C. federal judge, he was the one who found probable cause for the Trump regime in contempt, criminal contempt, for violating his order. Separately, the Supreme Court reversed Judge Boasberg's order essentially ordering the return of those prisoners and ordering or being involved and enjoining what the Trump regime did. Because the Supreme Court ruled, as Popak said, that because he's a D.C. judge, he doesn't have jurisdiction, say, for people who live in Maryland or people who are being held in Texas, that he could only deal with the things before him in Washington, D.C. so therefore, there has to be cases filed in different districts. Okay, so Boasburg, federal judge, D.C. the D.C. circuit Court of Appeals is like the boss of Boseberg. They're the appeals court that sits above the trial court. Above it all is the United States Supreme Court. So we understand that part separately. Abrego Garcia. Abrego Garcia, he's referred to as a Maryland man. Right. So why is the case filed in Maryland? He's from Maryland. That's where he lives. He's married to an American woman. His kids are citizens, his wife's a citizen. An immigration judge in 2019 issued a, when Trump was in office, issued a withholding order saying, you can deport Abrego to other countries, just not to El Salvador. Also, they gave him a work permit. In 2019, he has to check in with ICE, but he was able to work in Maryland. He had no criminal history. Never criminal history. That's on the paperwork itself. But because there was a double hearsay accusation by a crooked cop who then pled guilty to other misconduct involving prostitutes and paying prostitutes and all this weird stuff and criminal stuff, the immigration judge in 2019 did say, you can deport if you want to at your election, just not to El Salvador, but he can work in the United States. We don't think that he's that big of a danger. So we're going to give him a work permit, which requires background checks in Maryland. There's a federal court there. Judge Boasberg's a D.C. judge. So he's not going to be the Maryland judge. Maryland's going to be a Maryland judge. So a district judge in Maryland, federal court judge. The way Boseberg is a federal judge, there are federal judges in Maryland. The federal judge in Maryland is Federal Judge Zinnis. That's how. That's her name. It's Judge Zinnis. And so Judge Zinnis is the one who has been following The Supreme Court's 9 to 0 ruling, which is return Abrego. Facilitate the return. Zenis was the first to say return Abrego Garcia, then the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals is the boss. They sit above. They're the Appeals court for the Maryland District court. Remember, in D.C. i said the D.C. circuit Court of Appeals sits above the D.C. district Court. In Maryland, it is the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. In New York, it would be the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. In Florida or Georgia, it would be the 10th Circuit Court Appeals. There's different circuit courts.

[A]

11Th.

[B]

Sorry, 11th Circuit Court of Appeals. Colorado would be the 10th. Sorry, 11th Circuit court of Appeals.

[A]

I just want to show you I was listening.

[B]

That's good. Thank you. In different districts, they have different circuit courts that sit above the circuit courts of appeals. So Maryland, it's 4th Circuit. So when we're talking about the 4th Circuit, they are hearing Trump's appeal over federal Judge Zinnis, requiring that there be a process for facilitating the return of Abrego Garcia. Now, separately, there's Texas, Texas federal court. Why is Texas involved? Because the second batch of Venezuelan migrants, remember the first batch? And it's horrific that I'm referring to them as batches, groups of people, but that's how the Trump regime is treating them, as the first groups. Already in Secot, the concentration camp in El Salvador, a second group was moved to a detention center in Texas in the Northern District called the Blue Bonnet Detention Center. That's its name, Blue Bonnet Detention Center. It's an ICE facility where they are being held. So the jurisdiction there, and the Trump regime wants the jurisdiction to be in Texas. More Republican judges, right wing judges. Trump appointed judges in Texas. So the Northern District of Texas has jurisdiction there. And there the judge is a judge named Wes Hendricks, who Trump appointed. So we all have the story straight. D.C. boasburg, M.D. zinnis, 4th Circuit, M.D. d.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, D.C. in Texas, it's the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals that oversees Texas. The federal judge who has this case is named Judge. Judge. What did I say? Judge Hendrick. Judge Wes Hendricks. So those are all the judges who are. Who are involved, and the Supreme Court is above it all. So I just want everybody to have their story straight now with this second batch of migrants, the Trump regime. This guy Ensign, who's the Trump DOJ lawyer, made the representation both in D.C. and in Texas, where the ACLU brought two separate cases because of these lawsuits. Ensign said, we are not going to. We promise you we won't send this second group of migrants to the concentration camp in. In El Salvador without a court order. Just trust us. Trust me, bro. Why was it in the two different cases? Why was it in D.C. and why was it in Texas? Because the ACLU who represented these migrants didn't really know. They wanted Judge Boasberg to issue a class wide injunction. Boberg says, I don't have the power to do that because the Supreme Court said they have to be filed in individual states. So the ACLU went to Texas before Judge Hendricks and the Trump regime said, we're not going to do anything. Don't worry, Hendricks, we're not going to send him. So Hendricks Popac was basically like, it's a moot issue. The government's representing. They're not going to send it, so what can I do? So then it was appealed to the fifth Circuit Court of Appeals and the fifth Circuit Court of Appeals basically sat on it. Then there was new evidence that the Trump regime, even though they made the representation, said they were going to send these people to El Salvador. To which the ACLU went back in front of the Texas District court, Judge Hendricks, and then Hendricks, because he's a Trumpy guy who tried to be like, oh, I don't know what to do, said, sorry, I don't have jurisdiction. The fifth Circuit now has jurisdiction because you've already appealed my other order. Nothing I can do. The 5th Circuit didn't do anything. So the ACLU with the second group had to go to the United States Supreme Court and say, supreme Court, we need you to do something. To which the Trump regime said to the Supreme Court, hey, Supreme Court, don't worry. We've told the District Court in D.C. we've told the district court in Texas, we're not going to send these migrants to the concentration camps until they get a habeas proceeding. So that's the framework. And then when the Supreme Court still said, popak, we don't trust you, that's a big deal. I'm sorry, Popak, I described that so long, but there's so much moving parts with this district, that district. I want you to talk about the specific cases, but I wanted to do a little professor lesson of where these districts are. That's all.

[A]

Yeah. And look what I. Let me take it from another angle. A masterful, and this should give our audience a lot of confidence, a masterful display of litigation skill and strategy and tactics by the American Civil Liberties Union in this everything that you just described, most of what you just described as it relates to those that haven't yet been removed, that are being threatened with imminent removal. The lack of due process is the problem here. And the Trump administration's refusal to recognize the fundamental precept of due process and notice, because due process without notice is no due process at All. And you can also compromise due process if you don't give the party enough time with a proper notice, like in Spanish, not in English, which is what happened here. Give them time to retain notice counsel. Since the Supreme Court has said they have to file individual or maybe class, class action versions of petitions for writ of habeas corpus, they got to get together in a class or they've got to retain a lawyer. The lawyer has to have time to prepare and file the petition. The court has to have time to make a ruling as the jets are fueling and the wheels are about to roll up. And that means that the Trump administration is, as we know from the social media postings where they just flouted, you know, their answer to Judge Wilkinson, like, can't you use your higher angels to, in this moment in time to support the rule of law? And they were like, look at this. Senator Van Holland, we have a response to you. We're going to, we're going to draw penises and mustaches on the New York Times headline. You're never getting a BR Go Garcia back. They're like, what? And if anybody doesn't think that went into the, when we get to it, the United states Supreme Court's 7 to 2 decision to at least do an administrative stay to stop those flights, I assure you they saw that. Everybody saw it. Whether you follow the Midas Touch network or legal AF or not. So masterful job of the ACLU on this due process notice issue. They run first to Boasberg, who you've identified the judge in D.C. and Boasberg, who trust me, is chomping at the bit to do something in this case besides the criminal contempt finding. He says, guys, I'd like to, however, however, the court has already, Supreme Court has said, my bosses have said I don't have jurisdiction. This has to be in Texas or New York or Colorado, all these other places before these people are deported. So I can't do a class action notice requirement. But, but they're fueling the planes. I know. I hear you. So aclu, boom, runs back to the judge and they get, they get the judge that you identified. Interesting about thing about him. We'll talk about him a little bit later. He was an Obama appointee that never got out of committee. Then Trump picked him up and put him there. But he certainly, he gave more credence to the Department of Justice and their credibility. Why would they lie to me? I don't know. They lie every court they're in or the lawyers are purposefully not given information by their client, the administration, or their bosses at the Department of Justice in order to make them have implausible deniability. And that's just as bad the fact that they participate in that as lawyers. So ACLU loses at, at, at the judge in, in the, in Texas, in the Northern District of Texas, where this Blue Bonnet is. They have been winning all around. They won in the Southern District of Texas because each state is divided into federal districts. So the Southern. This is why, when you and I.

[B]

They lose because of the, the only reason why they lost is because the Trump regime, the executive branch says, we, we agree with what you're saying. We'll give them habeas. That's the only reason why they lost.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

And they said, we don't trust you.

[A]

Right. So Southern District of Texas, this is why when you and I get to nationwide injunctions, why they're so important. Judge there says, well, it's rid of habeas corpus, but in the entire Southern District of Texas, nobody's going anywhere. Colorado, same thing. Part of Colorado, part of New York, same thing. Northern District of Texas, Blue Bonnet. No, this judge not doing it. So they run off to the fifth Circuit, which is so far right leaning, you know, it barely can stand up. So they go there and the fifth Circuit says, well, we don't see a problem. Even though there's three affidavits from immigration lawyers that say our guys are being told, and it's now been translated for them that they are imminently going to be boarded on planes. Forget that guy named Drew Ensley. He doesn't know what he's talking about. And they filed the affidavits. Well, no, we're not going to do that. Especially given that the Supreme Court has basically acknowledged that the people already sent to El Salvador are never coming back and they don't have due process rights because they got off on the planes outside of jurisdiction before anything could happen. So ACLU goes crap, fire up. I'm sure they're all working simultaneously. All these teams are working simultaneously. Fire up the Supreme Court emergency application brief. It was yesterday. File it, let's go. But this was last gasp if they didn't get that stay at 1:00 in the morning or 10, whatever it was, these guys were gone, never to be seen from again. Not sipping margaritas, you know, in, in sen. In sea cot. Done. And the Supreme Court, as I said on one of my hot takes, maybe this is what the Supreme Court says does matter. Maybe they care about what their orders are. So it's an administrative stay for now, meaning it's a temporary hold the ring or put a pit in it as they get briefing in from the other side, which would be the Solicitor General's office for Trump. And then they'll make their decision without the same problem. Shadow docket came up through Alito referred to the full court. Two in dissent, Alito and Thomas. We're still waiting for Alito's statement, whatever that means, about why he, he wouldn't have sided with the 7 to 2. But, but they are like, let's get the briefing in. Nobody go anywhere, nobody leave, nobody gets deported and removed until we've had time to do it. Doesn't mean once they got the full briefing without oral argument on a very limited, scant, skeletal record. It doesn't mean managing expectations here for the audience that they couldn't redo the voting, so to speak. And it comes out against these guys. Oh, no, that seems to be like enough due process. I just don't see it. What is the due process? What is the, what is the Solicitor General going to say? The only thing I think he can say, Ben, which is Donald Trump's former appellate criminal lawyer John Sauer, is, oh, you're getting into foreign affairs again. This is the power. A war has been declared. He does, you know, very limited rights under habeas corpus. I just don't see it based on the record. I think the, even the Supreme Court, five votes of it at least, are going to say this is not notice and due process through habeas that we demanded and you're effing with us. They're not going to say that last part. But I think. What do you think the Supreme Court does even on full briefing by John Sauer?

[B]

I think they're going to clarify now what the habeas process looks like in detail, in depth, what the time constraints are that need to be provided and really set forth the process by which the habeas takes place. Because now that the Supreme Court really prevented the kind of class action style that the ACLU wanted, let's go to one judge in D.C. to address all this whole group together. Now we have to go deal with the Maryland case in Maryland, the Texas case in Texas. And the problem is when you divide and conquer, migrants who often don't have almost all don't have the resources to have a lawyer lined up and to within 24 hours file habeas corpus petitions and have hearings and line up the lawyers, you create this resource disparity which then allows the government to take people and very quickly move them to El Salvador.

[A]

Before you move on, you finish your thought. But before you move on, I have one last thought before we take our break.

[B]

You know what I was going to say. I think Judge Wilkinson's ruling that we're going to talk about after the break played a major part in this. I think the fact that the Supreme Court gave Donald Trump a face saving way out of Abrego Garcia in the 9 to 0 ruling about facilitate and Trump gave them the middle finger. When we get, when we come back, I want to read the Supreme Court ruling. It's short but what it says to me not in the words but in its substance is we don't trust your representations Trump regime that you're not going to send these people to El Salvador. If this was any other executive branch, any other one, yeah, Biden, Bush, Reagan, Clinton, Obama, you name it. And the executive branch told a court and this is what the, this is why the fifth Circuit and, and the, the federal judge in Texas ruled the way they, they did because they're like now we still trust Trump. So there's what, what do you want us to do here? The Supreme Court's like we don't so we're putting it in an order that's extraordinary.

[A]

Let me just, I agree with you one last one minute point. Then we'll, then we'll take the break that I know we're, we're gearing up for what we're also watching and I want to put this on our audience's radar is the unseemly side of the shadow docket. In the emergency docket, Donald Trump has obviously made a decision that he's going to slam the Supreme Court with as many emergency applications. This one came from the ACLU and, but it's the same problem on the other flip side of the coin. When the emergency docket is, is activated, okay, it means scant record development of facts below by the trial judge. It means limited briefing on those scant facts that were developed. It means no oral argument. And more importantly, because you and I are students of the Supreme Court, I've been, I mean I got my first copy of the Brethren about, you know, back when I was in high school, about what goes on in the inner workings of the Supreme Court and how they make their opinions. But that was nothing about the shadow docket. That was about what Trump figured out is if you don't give the Supreme Court individual justices time to lobby each other and time to circulate competing drafts and use their clerks to run around the hallway to try to gather votes and do a caucus. If you don't do that, then they have to go into their ideological corners. And he knows he's got four votes just on reflexive ideology in Kavanaugh, Gorsuch, Alito and Thomas. He knows that we're out. The rule of law is outnumbered four to three right there, with the three being, of course, Ketanji, Brown, Jackson, Kagan, and Sotomayor. So then it's just all he has to do is fight for one, because he only has to get one of Roberts and or Amy Coney Barrett. But what we're watching is, and this is why you'll see dissents and statements and other things coming out of the Supreme Court because they're not allowed to do their normal deliberative process over a series, series of months and circulate because Trump's not allowing them or Trump's actions are causing the emergency docket to be used, which is, which is ending up in the exact same place. Usually when you and I studied the law and, and did an entire course for a year or two on con law, constitutional law, the cases that we studied came out of that deliberative process that I just identified. Brown versus the Board of Education, Griswold v. Connecticut, you know, Marbury versus Madison, you know, all of it. It all came out of this deliberative process and vote trading and getting. That's gone. Everything you and I have been talking about over the last 80, 90 days is all coming off of the emergency shadow docket. And it's. And it's a shabby way to run a democracy.

[B]

Agree with you, Popak. I want to remind everybody to go to Michael Popak's YouTube channel. It's on its way to 1 million subscribers. The legal AF YouTube channel. Make sure you check it out. Hit subscribe and turn your notifications on. In addition, would love for everybody to also subscribe here. Of course, we're on our way to 5 million subscribers. Michael Popo started his own law firm. It's. Where do people reach out to you, Popak, for they have catastrophic injury. They know someone who's been in a catastrophic injury if they themselves have been injured. The consultations are free. We had a lot of demand of people wanting, you know, to. They had cases and, you know, and really kind of, you know, you handle wrongful death cases, real serious injury cases, sexual harassment and abuse cases. So if anyone has a case like that, reach out to Popox law firm now, Popak, where can they reach out to you?

[A]

1-877- POPAK-AF. We've got lawyers and people standing by to talk about your case for a free case consultation and you can also go to the website popoc firm.com and there's a reason I'm focusing on those kind of catastrophic, horrible cases, life altering cases. It's because, you know, this is what I can in addition to the commitment I've made to the Midas Touch Network and to help grow Legal AF as a community. This is where my limited legal time can best be spent and that's why we focused on it there. Thanks for talking about it Ben everybody.

[B]

We'll be right back after a quick break. We've got a lot more to discuss and we'll see you right after the short break.

[A]

Did you know Fast Growing Trees is the biggest online nursery in the US with thousands of different plants and over 2 million happy customers. They have all the plants your yard needs like fruit trees, privacy trees, flowering trees, shrubs, and so much more. Fast Growing Trees makes it easy to get your dream yard order online and get your plants delivered directly to your door in just a few days without ever leaving home. Their alive and thrive guarantee ensures your plants arrive happy and healthy. Plus get support from trained plant experts on call to help you plan your landscape, choose the right plants and learn how to care for them. We recently moved into a new house and it came with two big bald spots where grass used to be but the prior owner's dog wore out. So we turned to Fast Growing Trees and their plant experts advice turned an eyesore into one of our favorite features of the yard with a few key lime trees suited for our climate and location saved us all the aggravation of dealing with unknown landscapers and nurseries too. Big yard, small yard, no yard. Fast Growing trees has over 6,000 plants to fit any space from indoor plants to fruit trees to full size privacy trees and more. And their 14 point quality checklist ensures you're getting the best quality plant possible. Each plant is cared for individually based on their needs, from watering routines to the amount of sunlight, giving your plants the care they deserve from the time they start growing to when they ship to your home. Whether you're looking to add privacy, shade or natural beauty to your yard, Fast Growing Trees has in house experts ready to help you make the right selection. With plant experts on call to offer growing and care advice, you can talk to a plant expert about your soil type, landscape design, how to take care of your plants and everything else you need. No green thumb required. Every plant comes with instructions and tips to take care of your new plants so they can grow to their fullest potential this spring. They have the best deals for your yard, up to half off on select plants and other deals. And listeners to our show get 15% off their first purchase when using the code legal AF at checkout. That's an additional 15% off at fast growingtrees.com using the code legal A F at checkout fast growing trees.com code legal AF now is the perfect time to plant. Use legal AF to save today. Offer is valid for a limited time. Terms and conditions may apply. 4:20 is around the corner and there's no better time to elevate your wellness routine. Whether you want to relax, recharge or refocus, Via has the perfect lineup for you. If you haven't tried them yet, you're seriously missing out. Whether you need to unwind, refocus or boost your mood, Via is here to enhance your every day and night. Trusted by over half a million happy customers, Via is changing the game and natural wellness blending powerful, high quality hemp derived ingredients to deliver real effect driven benefits. Whether you're looking to sleep better, have better libido, improve focus, recover or simply relax, Via has a tailored solution just for you. With products ranging from zero to high cannabinoid levels, Via lets you fully customize your experience to fit your needs. Whether you're looking to support your daily wellness routine, enhance focus and clarity or unwind with deep relaxation, Via has you covered. From their award winning effect Forward gummies to calming drops, every Via product is thoughtfully crafted, made with organic lab tested hemp sourced from trusted independent American owned farms. And the best part, VIA legally ships across the usa, discreet direct to your door, no medical card request required and backed by a worry free guarantee. Not sure where to start? Take Via's Product Finder quiz to get personalized recommendations tailored to your needs. It can take you less than 60 seconds to complete, so if you're 21 years or older, treat yourself to Via's annual Spring 420 sale Black Friday level savings up to 35% site wide right now up to 50% off packs and bundles and get a free free gift plus more savings with your first order using our exclusive code LEGAL AF at the link in our description. Plus enjoy free shipping on orders over $100. Unlock the power of nature with Via's organic and vegan hemp extracts perfect for relaxation and rejuvenation. Via is the only lifestyle hemp brand they use compounds found in hemp along with active plant extracts to create products each with a specific effect in mind. Whether you want to get better sleep, ease anxiety, enhance your mood or just get high, they have something for you. Their products range from 0 milligrams to 100 milligrams of THC. So these guys have you covered whether you're looking to microdose or enjoy more potent effects. Via's products are sourced from the finest hemp for your peace of mind. Plus they're lab tested and certified and feature premium products that fit your budget. If you're 21 years or older, check out the link to Via in our description and treat yourself to Via's annual Spring 420 sale Black Friday level savings up to 35% sitewide right now up to 50% off packs and bundles and get a free gift plus more savings with your first order using our exclusive code legal AF. Plus free shipping on orders over a hundred dollars. That's code legal af@ the link in our description after you purchase they ask you where you heard about them. Please support our show and tell them we sent you Enhance your everyday with Via.

[B]

Welcome back to Legal af. Thank you to our Pro Democracy sponsors. The discount codes for those sponsors are in the description below. Jordy spends a long time negotiating those discount deals, so check it out and they help keep shows like this going on the Midas Dutch Network now that you all are experts in jurisdiction and the way the Court of Appeals oversee the district courts and the Supreme Court oversees it all, let me just read for you the Supreme Court Court Order so you all can I'm sure you now will understand it much better after the description that Michael Popach and I gave in the first segment. There is before the Court an application on behalf of a putative class of detainees seeking an injunction against their removal under the Alien Enemies Act. The matter is currently pending before the Fifth Circuit. Upon action by the Fifth Circuit, the Solicitor General is invited to file a response to the application before this Court as soon as possible. The Government is directed not to remove any member of the putative class of detainees from the United States until further order of this Court. Justice Thomas and Justice Alito Dissent from the Court's Order. Statement from Justice Alito to follow so a 7 to 2 panel on this issue or 7 to 2 ruling on this issue. And that's the order. That's the current status. We'll keep you posted as we learn more. So Michael Popak throughout the week and the various you know Thursday Friday when Senator Van Hollen of Maryland, Maryland Senator went to see Abrego Garcia, at first he was denied access. Then he also invoked international law, which I think was a major factor in applying pressure. You know, the official Trump accounts were posting photos, AI manipulated photos of Senator Van Hollen to look like an MS.13 gang member with like MS.13 tattoos on his forehead and just kind of mocking him. And then Senator Van Hollen was able to secure a meeting with the Brago Garcia. Look, folks, El Salvador is a poor Latin American country. It relies on tourism. And the idea of Americans boycotting El Salvador tourism, the idea of international communities applying pressure on El Salvador, whose entire GDP is $34 billion a year, like that. That pressure works. Their authoritarian leader, naive Bukele tried to act like this was like checkmate and he was playing like three dimensional chess against Senator Van Holland. He tried to set up a photo op with like margaritas and poolside to make it seem like Abrego Garcia was just having the time of his life out there. Later, Senator Van Hollen talked about all of the North Korea, or should it say El Salvador style or now Trumpian style manipulation and propaganda that was taking place. But we did get signs of life of Abrego Garcia. We also learned that he was moved from Seekat the concentration camp to another prison facility as well in El Salvador. One of the reasons I think that's the case is that Seekat is Bukele's baby. Like it's like his main thing, it's his main international kind of propaganda. And he sees the pressure as we're all focusing on what's going on in Sicot as his concentration camp. And so whether Abrego is going to be able to come back to the United States or not. The Trump administration or regime is saying no. Bukele saying never. But if he does, I think that Bukele is nervous. I mean, that's why he's moving him out of Seekot so that he's not able to tell additional stories about what's going on in Seekot. That's why I think he's being moved. But Popak, why don't you walk us through though? Because now that we've also I think appropriately framed jurisdiction, Judge Zinnis ruling 4th Circuit, which oversees the Maryland Court of Appeals, that's the three judge panel with Judge Wilkinson, those rulings and then this meeting between Senator Van Hollen and Abrega. Let's take that piece, right?

[A]

Yeah, yeah. The just to touch on El Salvador for just a moment. It's an island of 6 million people whose GDP is what you outlined. He has it, this is what Bukele wanted. He has a, he had an empty sea cot with 40,000 beds in it that he wanted filled. And so that dangle of $6 million, which has to be pursuant to some sort of contractor agreement that we're trying to get our hands on. I don't. Unless the Trump administration is just completely flagrant in how they mismanage our taxpayer dollars and just sent $6 million and not on some sort of agreement. We'll get to the bottom of that. Judge Zinnis will get to the bottom of it. One out of every 68 people in El Salvador is in jail. If you do the math, when Donald Trump said when Bukele visited, remember that guy with the black T shirt and the suit jacket, they had no problem when he didn't wear a shirt and tie. It's only when Zelinsky was at war, they had a problem when he, he didn't wear a shirt and tie. But if it's Musk or it's this guy, the petty dictator of El Salvador, no, everything's fine. And there when they were doing this, scripted as you and I envisioned and anticipated, pitch and catch they could later use in court between Bukele and Trump and all the other clowns. This is like a clown car shoved together with lots of different clowns. In the Trump administration, all these cabinet members. The Oval Office has become the new Broadway stage for Donald Trump. He's always got to do something there. Everybody's got to be there with him, take turns. Stephen Miller, you, I'm sure is behind the White House posting about Van Hollen and about, you're never going to get him back. Pam Bondi and then Bukele, what do you, here's your part of the script that was written for you. And there Trump said, oh, you need more. 40,000. We need, we need five times that. We need bigger. We need more. Do the math. Six million people at the 250 that went already, that's 24,000 a prisoner. If you fill the jails with American sent prisoners, use it as a storage unit for human beings, you're talking about $200 billion going to El Salvador. Now you see why he's doing the dance of Donald Trump. Although it does send a chill down my spine. They were letting the El Salvadorian leader tell us how to run our rule of law and our constitution and our, in our constitutional republic. So Van Holland from Maryland, because we know Abrego Garcia lived with his family in Maryland. You know, he was picked up and arrested in front of his five year old. Just to put a point on this, Van Holland goes down. And he's not the only one. Cory Booker, fresh off his 35 hour, longest Senate speech in history. He's going down there. I'm sure AOC will go down. There's a lot of people that are going down to see cot. And so the best they could do was to give him a shirt and a cap and let him meet with Van Holland. Trump saying, oh, you're a fool and it's a fool's errand. And he's a fool and he's not a Maryland man. Let me, let me correct you. So that's going on with the political pressure because we sit at that intersection of law and politics. You've got the outside, real world political pressure. And the optics were so bad for the Trump administration that they tried to deep fake the optics by having Bukele post the margarita glasses and then the picture of the guy, Van Hollen as a member of Ms. 13 and all the rest of it. Okay, so that's going on in real world, real time. And we know that Donald Trump can be pressured into folding. Folded on Harvard. We'll talk about it later. Folded on tariffs because he's watching cable news. We know how to get him to fold. And it's this world, including the world that Midas Touch contributes to in the ecosystem of independent journalism that matters. And so that's going on. In the meantime, Zinnis, Judge Zinnis, Paula Zinnis and Obama appointee, fine jurist, could be Supreme Court judge one day if a justice, one day if the Democrats win the White House again, which they should. She makes her initial ruling about Abrego. Garcia orders that the Trump administration facilitate his release from El Salvador. They take it up to the Supreme Court. Supreme Court sides with Judge Zinnis. Two weeks ago, they just said there's one word in there, we want you to clarify. Effectuate. What you mean fix it. We're fine with everything else. Your whole way, you're administrating justice, administering justice. Your whole due process angle, your whole fifth Amendment thing, you're doing it right. That's the right order. We got you nine zero. She takes it back like that evening and says, all right, well, I'll take a blue pencil. I got a blue pencil here. I'll take out the word effectuate. I'll take out the deadline for the return of Abrego Garcia. You take all appropriate steps to facilitate his release from jail. And now we start the Orwellian tortured stretching of Words beyond all recognition. Words don't mean anything. They're like in a spelling bee. What does facilitate mean? Can you use it in a sentence? Yes, the sentence is get him out of jail. That's the sentence. Oh, it's foreign affairs. Oh, it's, it's, it's a, it's a, it's an activist Marxist judge telling a president how to conduct foreign affairs who was duly elected. Can't. But, no, that's not what it is. Oh, we'll facilitate on the domestic side. If he shows up randomly, if they're. I'm not making this up. If he, if there's like a prison break and he gets out on his own and he shows up at a port or an airport, we'll let him in. We'll deport him and remove him to another country immediately, but we'll let him in. And that's not what the, that's not what the court said. So Zinnis holds a hearing about their failure to comply and determines at that hearing, as she throws the book at Drew Ensign, who is the resident punching bag. He is, he is the pinata for the Trump administration. And willingly. It's not a. He could quit any time. You know, they fired a couple of days ago and I did a hot take on it. Mr. Rouveni, who told the truth about the failure of the Trump administration to abide by another federal court's order, judge's order, immigration order, and sent him knowing that he had an order against removal to El Salvador. And that fact, that stubborn little fact, has driven the Supreme Court to rule against the Trump administration. Nine, zero, and every other judge there's. Now, when you add them all up, it's 21 judges who have looked at it, have ruled against the Trump administration. So she holds a hearing. She says, you haven't done anything. You've done absolutely nothing to facilitate. And she tells him every day at 5 o'clock, file a piece of paper that tells me what you've done and what you're going to do. And they tell her to go F herself every, every day at 5:00. They say, we're not doing. He's alive. He's. I think he's alive. He's alive. There was a press conference. Buelli was here, but he doesn't want to release him, and we can't release him, and that guy doesn't want to release him. And what are we going to do? She says, you've done absolutely nothing. In fact, there's a motion for contempt on the board let's get some discovery. Because I'm a trial judge. Let me develop a record. Why don't we have some discovery? Let's have some depositions. You know, all those people that filed those affidavits, let's have them in deposition, sworn question and answers under oath with a court reporter. Let's do that and start noticing those. And let's do some interrogatories, written questions and answers under oath. And let's have some documents. Let's, you know what, judges like documents. I don't want to see unofficial transcripts of press conferences. I want to see evidence under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. So let's do that. How about we do that? And they didn't like that, and they didn't like her ordering the start of this process towards contempt, much like Boasberg. And they ran to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals again. And the Fourth Circuit, we knew it. You. And I wrote back and forth. I said, this is Wilkinson. This is Wilkinson. Even though it's like the clerk issued it, it's Wilkinson. You can tell by his writing the guy's a prolific writer. And he in. So, I mean, that should be. When you're, when you're doing your law school class, if you do a legal writing or written argument, you should take that seven pages. Because he accomplished Wilkinson in seven pages, what most lawyers, which would struggle and not do one third as well in 50. It was poignant, it was soaring. It was stinging rebuke of the Trump administration. But at the end saying, and I'll boil it down without reading from it, and you and I have all done hot takes on it. Wilkinson said to the Trump administration, you talk a lot about your Second Amendment, sorry, your, your Article two powers. And, and I, I will agree that you have Article 2 powers, especially around foreign affairs, but we have Article 3 powers. And you are creating a grinding relationship between Article 3 and Article 2 that lessens all of us. It undermines the legitimacy of the judiciary, but it also undermines the legitimacy of your presidency. And history will write your epitaph. That's directly. That's a paraphrase, but almost word for word from Wilkinson. And he said, I am hoping in this moment, this critical, incipient moment, that you use this opportunity to reaffirm your commitment as a presidency to the rule of law. I implore you to do that. And what was their response to Wilkinson? And so they denied the stay to stop. What they said is a fine judge in Zenith doing a fine job with administering her process. They were not going to interfere with it but then took six pages to fire back at Donald Trump. Now at the time I said in my hot take, what are they going to do with Wilkinson? He's not activist, he's the opposite. He's not a Marxist, he's not a leftist and he's not corrupt. How are they going to go after Harvey Wilkinson? And what they did was they posted we'll put it up on the screen. They posted the white, the white from the White House official account. Not even using like some plant of theirs, some social, you know, some social media influencer plant. They did it from the official WhiteHouse.gov with a red line of the White House sorry of the New York Times headline. There it is, Senator meets with Crossout wrongly deported MS.13 gang member in El Salvador. And by the way, he's never coming back. Okay, that was an F you to Harvey Wilkinson to the rule of law to the United States of Supreme Court. And it certainly entered their ken, their consciousness of the nine members of the Supreme Court, at least seven of them in ruling against the Trump administration. So will the 4th Circuit over Maryland under over Zenis says you got this judge. Keep going. They're going to have to now at the Trump side try to get back to the United States Supreme Court fresh on one administrative state already going against them about Zenis and I don't and, and you're right about a lot of things Ben. But you're right about what I think they're going to do about fleshing out habeas corpus. Do process steps again, not great on emergency applications with one page decisions. Usually you want that in 30, 40 pages that we, you and I can ruminate over and figure out what they mean. It's hard in two paragraphs but that's what they're going to do. And here the question is, and this is back to you Ben. The question is are they going to clarify their one paragraph ruling giving Judge Zinnis direction saying you got this, you're right on due process, you're right on facilitate about how she's moving towards contempt in the Trump administration. What do you think the Supremes do about Zinnis? Either they do nothing, we don't have jurisdiction, it's too early. Sorry, nothing needs clarification. We were clear in our order or they do something. What do you think?

[B]

I think at this stage they do nothing. I think that her order of what she's requiring them to do to comply with facilitate she ordered expedited aggressive discovery over a two week period to let US know, the steps you're taking to facilitate. I think that there will then be another order right late April, that will be the one that will probably find the Trump regime in contempt. There. There will be a further order, and then that will end up going to the Supreme Court once it's clear that no steps have been taken for facilitation. When we come back, we're going to talk about Judge Boasberg finding the Trump regime in criminal contempt and saying, give us the list of the lawyers, the administration officials who were okay with violating my court order, because I'm going to hold them in criminal contempt. And if the DOJ doesn't prosecute, I'm going to have a special counsel prosecuted. And Popak, as you know, sure, the Trump do, the Trump could eventually pardon these people, but they're going to lose their law. This is exactly what you and I said would happen. If you are convicted of a crime, you lose your legal license, too. So even if the Trump regime were to pardon some of these people who a special counsel criminally prosecutes, these people are going to be these lawyers and these, you know, State Department officials and ICE officials who are aiding and abetting Trump. They don't have absolute immunity, and they are going to be criminally prosecuted. They're going to be viewed as criminals on their record. And that's going to go beyond what Trump says. I mean, beyond Trump being in office. I did a whole hot take on Trump throwing DOJ lawyers under the bus, right? Trump was asked about, well, what's going to happen with the lawyers and contempt. And Trump was like, that's not me. Ask the lawyers. And I think that's part of the reason why, as we talked about earlier, someone even like an ensign who works at the Trump DOJ said, look, we're going to do the habeas corpus proceedings. Whether he was being lying or whether he was being authentic about it, I think it actually is. It at least will make some of these lawyers think, am I going to be, you know, is Trump going to take care of me if I get criminally prosecuted for aiding and abetting his crimes? Where he's got immunity and I don't have immunity. So I want to talk about that. I want to read from this fact sheet, though, Popak, that I wrote, and this is what I just said. Here are the undisputed facts about Abrego Garcia. I just think it's important just to list these in this order. Undisputed. Supreme Court ruled 9 to 0 he was improperly sent to El Salvador and to facilitate his return. The Trump DOJ admits Abrego was sent in error to El Salvador. Abrego was given a work permit in 2019 during the first Trump administration. He checked in annually with ICE for the 2019 immigration ruling, says he can't be deported to El Salvador. 5. His paperwork says he had no criminal history. 6. There was a double hearsay accusation by a disgraced cop back in 2019 that Abrego has an MS.13 affiliation. And on that basis, the immigration judge said Abrego can be deported, just not to El Salvador. Still, he was viewed as being not a criminal. So he was given a work permit where you need extensive background checks to get one. Whether Abrego is good or bad, he is entitled to due process in the United States. El Salvador has facilitated the return of other people back to the United States before. The United States frequently extradites non citizens. It alleges to be the worst drug dealers and gang members in the world, to have trials in the US and to serve sentences, including life sentences in US prisons. And 10 if there is evidence of Abrego committing crimes, he should be held accountable once that evidence is presented and the findings of criminal conduct takes place. I don't know how you argue outside of that as as Judge Wilkinson said, it's actually relatively simple. Let's talk about that and more. Popak. We got to take our last quick break. Let's talk about Judge Boasberg's contempt and then let's talk about the Supreme Court setting those two oral arguments in May. May is going to shape up, I think, to be the Supreme Court either saying dictator or not dictator. And they've scheduled May 15th to hear these two big cases, birthright citizenship, nationwide injunctions. And then also the cases that we're talking about now are going to be in May. And I think the Supreme Court gave Trump a face saving way out in the 90 and now I think they're going to start getting a little more excoriating in the weeks and months to come. Let's take our last quick break of the show. A reminder, subscribe to Michael Popox YouTube channel, the Legal AF YouTube channel. It is soaring right now. It's on its way to 1 million subscribers. Subscribe to Legal AF on YouTube and turn your notifications on there just as you subscribe to our YouTube channel here, the Midas Touch Network. And also if you or someone you know is in a catastrophic injury, whether it's a car crash, a trucking accident, whether it is a wrongful death case, sexual assault case, big catastrophic type injuries, negligence cases, medical malpractice employment cases. Popak where can they reach out to you?

[A]

And just to put the meat on the bone there, or just to explain it better, we're representing a family of a flight attendant on the American Airlines flight that was hit by the Blackhawk helicopter over the Potomac. The American Airlines flight. We're representing a family who was somebody was father was run over by a supermarket tractor trailer. So those are the kind of cases that were focused on 1877 Popak AF and the website thepopocfirm.com we'll put the links up there for a moment.

[B]

Take our last quick break of the show.

[A]

When it comes to spending, sometimes it's out of sight, out of mind. That daily coffee habit, those streaming subscriptions, they add up fast without you even noticing. Rocket Money helps you spot those patterns so you can do something about them and keep more money in your pocket. Rocket Money is a personal finance app that helps find and cancel your unwanted subscriptions, monitors your spending, and helps lower your bills so you can grow your savings. See all of your subscriptions in one place and know exactly where your money's going. For ones you don't want anymore, Rocket Money can help you cancel them easily. Create a personalized budget with custom categories to help keep your spending on track. See your monthly spending trends in each category to know exactly where your money is going. Their new goals feature automatically saves money for you so you don't have to think about it. Help pay off bills, help put away money for a house, or just build your savings. Rocket Money makes it easy. Rocket Money will even try to negotiate lower bills for you. They automatically scan your bills to find opportunities to save. Then you can ask them to negotiate for you. They'll deal with customer service so you don't have to. Rocket Money has over 5 million users and has saved a total of $500 million in canceled subscriptions, saving members up to $740 a year when they use all of the app's premium features. Canceled your unwanted subscriptions and reach your financial goals faster with Rocket Money. Go to RocketMoney.com LegalAF today. That's RocketMoney.com LegalAF RocketMoney.com/legal AF in this crazy upside down world that we're working to make sense of, I have no better judge of character than my lab border collie Lily. And having given her her forever home, we take pride in making sure that we feed her healthy, fresh dog food while making sure we don't break our back or the bank doing so. And my family is thrilled to have found sundaes for Lily, having tried other freezer box brands and we noticed the improved health of our dog almost right away. First, she loves the flavor and we love what it's done to her coat, eyes and breath. And with her weight management, so much easier to manage her weight with a scoop of sundaes than any other product we tried. And this product is super easy for us to store and serve. It doesn't require refrigeration or the delivery of dozens of pounds of ice packs. Sundaes is fresh dog food made from a short list of human grade Ingredients. Sundaes contains 100% all natural meat and superfoods and 0% synthetic nutrients or artificial ingredients. Dog parents report noticeable health improvements in their pups including softer fur, fresher breath, better poops and more energy after switching to sundaes. Unlike other fresh dog foods, Sundays does not require refrigeration or preparation because of their air drying process. Just pour and serve. Cancel or pause your subscription anytime. With their 14 day money back guarantee, every order ships right to your door so you'll never worry about running out of dog food again. Did I mention how easy and convenient it is to store the bags? Insert big wife smile here. Get 40% off your first order of Sundays. Go to sundaysfordogs.com legal AF or use code legal AF at checkout.

[B]

Welcome back to Legal AF. Thank you to those pro democracy sponsors right there. They keep this shows running. Jordy gets some great discount deals for all the legal A effers and Midas Mighty. The discount codes for those sponsors are in the description below. Finally, Michael Popak, let's talk about what Judge Boasberg did in finding the Trump regime in criminal contempt. What that could actually mean in terms of its important implications. The D.C. circuits issued an administrative stay, temporarily pausing those contempt proceedings and the and what Judge Boasberg basically ordered, which is there's a way to purge the contempt. Let's talk about that and then let's get into those. You know what the Supreme Court did and that it has those two big oral arguments not on the shadow docket, on its real, on its actual docket.

[A]

And on that note, as a programming note, we are, we are now committed on Legal AF to put up all the oral arguments that matter at the courts of appeal. That's all the ones we talked about today, the 4th, the 11th, the 2nd, the DC wherever it may lie, the Court of International Trade. We'll talk about that another day. And the United States Supreme Court, fortunately, federal on the federal side, most of these courts are allowing audio of the oral arguments. We just put up the one for the Gulf of America fight at the D.C. court of Appeals for Associated Press, and we got it with a very little notice because we decided to do it a little bit last minute. We had a great turnout of our community, our fellowship here on Midas Touch and on Legal AF for that. So I, so we're going to be the home on Legal AF of the live feeds of those oral arguments with a pregame and post game as well. I'll do it sometimes with Tina Doll and sometimes with other people. I just want to do that as a little bit of a programming self promotion there for Legal af. Okay. So we, you know, so many earth shattering things, you know, we're running out of adjectives to describe events concerning Donald Trump. That's what happens when you send a twice impeached, multiply indicted, once convicted guy to be the president of the United States. You're going to set history and not in a good way. And so now, now I thought, you know, we could have just done a whole show about, you know, the late night emergency administrative stay by the United States Supreme Court. We just do one whole show on these things. And when we heard three days ago that Boasberg, the judge in the, in D.C. not just a judge, the chief judge, former roommate in law school for Justice Kavanaugh, good friend of Justice Roberts, middle of the road, respected by both sides of the aisle, that Chief Judge Boasberg, that he had started the criminal contempt process by a finding, a probable cause, that the Trump administration and its Department of Justice and others were in criminal contempt for violating his order a month ago that would, that it's hard to believe, was four Saturdays ago to ground and, and return any planes on the way to El Salvador because he had ruled that they had violated the Administrative Procedures act, they'd violated the Alien Enemies act, they violated the due process and Fifth Amendment, whatever it was, they needed to be grounded. Now, subsequently, because some people that follow Legal AF very, very closely, we have a great student body that's been in class for five years. They might be thinking, well, wasn't the order that he was enforcing ultimately vacated or changed in a way by the Supreme Court? And you'd be right. Three weeks after that, two weeks after that, United States Supreme Court said, you're right on the substance, you're wrong on the procedure. It's not for you in D.C. it's really the habeas corpus procedure that Needs to be used wherever these people are before they are deported and removed. Sorry. 250, that's already in CE COT in El Salvador. But the ones that haven't left yet, you get due process and habeas corpus. But not in D.C. why are we in D.C. so that was, right, that at the time we were considering that divestment of jurisdiction over the case. No, because the judge has inherent authority. Before that order was vacated or changed, it was a, it was an enforceable on the books order of a federal judge. And you can't violate that order because you think, well, I'm going to appeal it. Well, I might win. Well, maybe I'll get a stay until you do. You don't. Until you do, you comply. And that is like there's case law on that. No man can be his own judge. You, you know, and so when, when the Trump administration had an order, ground wheels down, don't fly those two planes. The judge determined after a series of evidentiary hearings and getting the facts provided to him by the lawyers on the other side that the there were at least two planes that went to El Salvador in violation of his order. Now they keep arguing, well, it was 6:37 versus 7:00pm and your order was oral. But then it was written and we were confused like that's not going to work, that none of that's going to work. And so the judge held a, entertained a motion for contempt. Now, he had two choices there. I want to hear from you later why you think he went the criminal route. He could have done civil contempt, which he doesn't even need a prosecutor for, and it could end in jail just like criminal contempt. And it's all within his own, his own wheelhouse. The advantage of civil contempt, which he's not currently contemplating, is that it's not the result on the civil contempt finding is not necessarily pardonable, even though it ends up in jail. Very interesting. But he went criminal contempt because he thinks the facts were just so egregious. So in that role, the federal judge, he has a role and then prosecutors have a role. The judge has a role to determine whether probable cause, it's sort of like he's the indicting prosecutor to start. Sort of like the information or indictment process is really under the judge and he found it. He says, you willfully violate it. I don't know exactly who. I'm going to get to the bottom of that. You're going to tell me. I love that you're going to tell me who the contemporary are, the people that violated next week. In the meantime, you have a choice. You can purge the contempt that I have found by turning. By getting those two planeloads back. Good luck. We know what the Trump administration's view is of one guy, Abrego Garcia. You think they're bringing home another hundred from, you know, from the same jail? They're not. So he gave them a choice. That or you tell me who violated my order, and then I'll move to the next phase and I'll refer for prosecution. Trump didn't like all of that, obviously, including the potential that a private lawyer. And I volunteer you, Ben, and I know you'll volunteer me to be that private lawyer, to be a prosecutor. And if we're not available, Jack Smith's not doing anything right now to prosecute the case because we know the Champam Bondi ain't prosecuting her boss or herself. So that ain't happening. So he was about to do that. We were moving inexorably towards that dark place. And so they ran to the D.C. court of Appeals, the Court of Appeals that sits over D.C. and when I saw the panel poll, the random three, you know, I like, I wasn't happy with it. So you've got this three judge panel, Katzis, who almost invariably sides with Donald Trump. Raya, who I describe and. And then Pollard, and I like her. She's Obama and she's really smart. She's the smartest of the three. And I thought it's going to have to be for the substance merits of the appeal. It's going to have to be Pollard trying to pull Rao over with her. Because I think Katis is a foregone conclusion, but I think she is, too. And then, lo and behold, nobody asked for a stay. Nobody asked for the stay of next Wednesday's deadline. And they, they came out yesterday or they. Yeah, day before yesterday with a order 2 to 1 to issue a stay. Making. Making a point of saying it's just a stay. It's just so we get briefing. It doesn't mean we prejudge the case. It doesn't go to the merits. Yeah, sure it doesn't. And Pollard dropped a footnote and said, yeah, I'm not in favor of this. This is. I was. I did not vote for this. We don't even have jurisdiction. We haven't even seen the appellate briefs yet. This is just a judge moving towards a potential referral on contempt to enforce their own orders. What are we appealing and why are we intervening with our jurisdiction in issuing a stay? We should not but they have and now from there they're asking for a brief at some point. They've set a briefing schedule, the same Wednesday deadline, which now the ACLU and all have to file their brief and they're going to make a decision. But I'm just managing expectations. I don't like the lineup. I've been surprised occasionally and you and I, I don't know, one out of ten on a hand have, have, have reported and commentated over the last four years about shocking news. A Trump appointed judge ruled against Donald Trump. Could it happen? It could do. I think it's going to happen here. I don't. What do you think is going to happen with, with, with the, with the D.C. court of Appeals?

[B]

You know, I think that they'll go more along the lines of what Judge Wilkinson did. I think that they'll hear from Trump, I mean, Trump's side of the argument. I think they'll say it's probably premature for them to make a ruling at this point. And so I think that they'll end up punting it back. And then once a full record on the contempt is actually made, I think then you'll see the ruling, you know, and, and I guess the, you know, one of the issue is, is that if the Supreme Court said you don't have jurisdiction to begin with, how is your underlying order? Right, right.

[A]

That's what I thought. I was like pro Tunk, not effective.

[B]

How is your underlying order? But at the end of the day, the order was, the order, the order was violated. You had jurisdiction to make that initial order. And it was not for the Trump regime to say we're not following that order, you know, at this stage. So that's the, that becomes the issue. That'll be decided and we'll go from there. Now criminal contempt will rear its head again in Maryland for sure. I mean, I think with Judge Zinnis. And even if Judge Boasberg gets overruled and now everybody gets it now. Ah, Judge Boasberg, he's the D.C. federal judge. Judge Zinnis, she's the Maryland federal judge. Texas has their own federal courts. Each state has their own federal courts. They all have their court of appeals that sit above them. Ultimate multiple states have a circuit court of appeals that sits above them. The Supreme Court sits above them all. Judge Boasberg, though, gave, I think the outline to Judge Zenis, not that she needed it, about what the remedy can look like. And I think that's what Judge Zinnis is setting up for a criminal contempt against the lawyers involved there. Let's talk briefly, Michael Popak, very briefly, about just the Supreme Court setting these oral arguments and when they're taking place, the two biggies. On May 15th, we'll have them both live on the legal AF channel on the Midas Touch Channel. Maybe we'll arm wrestle over whether it goes both or whether we give Legal AF Channel the exclusive. You know, we could have that conversation. You know, maybe we'll just give it to Legal af. It's all good.

[A]

Come on Legal AF and do it with me there.

[B]

So I see where Popak's view is. We'll talk about whether it goes on both. You know, who knows? Supreme Court moves so the birthright citizenship case. Donald Trump wants to overturn birthright citizenship. Multiple cases where the district courts have stayed or stopped Donald Trump from unilaterally declaring birthright citizenship as being unconstitutional, even though it's written into the Constitution. That goes to the United States Supreme Court. I mean, my view is the Supreme Court will hear our oral argument on May 15. It should be pretty clear that birthright citizenship is in the Constitution. I think the Supreme Court is bringing that case up to smack Trump down. I could be naive. The Supreme Court tends to always let us down. But it seems like at least an issue where, where Justice Roberts gave the warning in December in his annual report about compliance with court orders and things like this. I view this as, and again, maybe very naively. And so I'll admit it could be naive, it could be naivety. But given all of these events in the Supreme Court's ruling that we just saw at 1am I think on these easier questions like birthright citizenship, the Supreme Court's going to use it to, you know, assert a little bit more authority on, on an easy, on an easy one. And then on the nationwide injunctions, I don't know how they're going to rule, but they set a hearing on whether nationwide injunctions are valid or not. It should be noted that the Trump regime relied on nationwide injunctions to derail the Biden administration's efforts to do things like restore people's rights, protect women's reproductive rights, cancel student debt. The Trump regime would run to a Northern District of Texas judge, he'd issue a nationwide injunction. Now that the levers, now that the power has shifted. Now the Republicans are against the very tool that they use throughout the Biden regime. But that's just who the Republicans are. I mean, for them, it's all, it's all games. But Bopak, it often backfires for them. Assume they win this, you know, and Trump's uses this to inflict More Project 2025 stuff. The Democrats win in the midterms, the Democrats win in 2028. People look back at the disaster that Trump's caused on the economy and musk and we go, we're never going back. At the end of the day, if you can't have crazy Trump judges issue nationwide injunctions in a future administration of Democrats or pro democracy people, if you have a long term perspective of it, you could see a world where this could ultimately backfire for them, even if they get what they want. And the aclu, all of these legal groups, other than the firms that have like tapped out and bent the knee and now they're all internally fighting because they're like, but Trump's now telling us to do things that we didn't, we didn't say in the deal. Yeah, when you give in to an extortionist, they go and take more from you. Big firms that kiss the ring. But anyway, the broader point I'm making is a lot of great legal talent on the pro democracy side that upholds the law. A lot of bad legal talent on the Trump regime side, like idiot lawyers. Bad lawyers. Alina habit type people. So ultimately, if you don't have nationwide injunctions, but you have the ability to file in the different districts very quickly and then go right to the Supreme Court as we saw the ACLU do here, it's an important one, Popak, but to me it's not, I don't rank it with birthright citizenship.

[A]

Yeah, I agree with you. Yeah, I agree with you. I think on the, on the nationwide injunction. You know, you hear Donald Trump against it, but then I heard him complaining about, well, we're going to have to have 500,000 habeas corpuses petitions all around because of Sleepy. We're back to Sleepy Joe again. Sleepy Joe Biden. We have to have 500,000. I was like, I don't know, you could have one class action in D.C. wouldn't that be a lot easier for everybody? And then you're going to get to the Supreme Court one way or the other. Whether it's a conflict between various jurisdictions or districts or it's a class action. You're going to get there one way or the other. I don't understand the. And I think you're the all. What the all the rigmarole is about in the on the other than It's a Project 2025 thing because they used it very successfully, as you pointed out to to tie up the Biden administration in knots and some key issues. And they had no problem doing the Texas Two step, doing, you know, Northern District of Texas. Let's get Kazmark. He's the only judge there, you know, and we'll form an organization on, on, you know, Doctors for Hippocratic Oath that's never existed before. And we'll incorporate them in Abilene, Texas, and then Amarillo, Texas, and then we'll file it with Cast America, and then we'll go to the 5th Circuit, and then we'll go to the Supreme Circuit. Well, I mean, what was wrong with that? And then, then when we do it, it's like, oh, hold it. Nationwide injunctions, you say, we don't allow that anymore. The Supreme Court level, Gorsuch doesn't like nationwide injunctions, and he's got at least two votes for that. But look at when you don't have them. I don't even understand birthright citizenship and the nationwide injunction problem when you put the two things together, because what are you trying to tell me that the judge in California who issued a nationwide injunction, he had a limit to the state of California. So if you're lucky enough to be born there, you're a US Citizen, but if you're not in one of these other states, you're not. You have to have nationwide injunctions on key constitutional precepts. I don't understand how you wouldn't have that. And we're watching the problem with no nationwide injunctions play out in our first segment today about the removal of these Venezuelans to El Salvador. Southern district is they're grounded. But Northern District, yeah, they had to run to the Supreme Court. Colorado, it's like, seriously, let's get the issues teed up. Let's get it up to a court of appeals. Let's get it over to a Supreme Court. And if you think you can win, the better person's argument is going to win, depending upon how you're counting the votes on the United States Supreme Court. So this gamesmanship, you know, of venue, forum shopping, which the Republicans have been masterful at, although we're doing it, too. The Democrats, the moderates are doing it, too. Of course, we're following all our cases in California and the New England, the original 13 colonies, and D.C. and we're staying away from Florida and Texas and Louisiana and all those places. So, you know, we what? As I was just in court the other day in a hearing, and the judge used a phrase I hadn't heard, but I understood immediately he Said it's, it's the goose gander problem. You got a goose gander problem? Yeah, it's what's good for the goose is good for the gander. And, and why they don't want to. We're going to have, at the rate we're going, the lamest of lame duck presidents and Donald Trump at the midterm. I seriously believe that. I think these things that are happening now, these, these cosmic f ups in the first 80 days, which you, you and I haven't even cataloged yet. But, but we have in separate places that will is searing and the economy being trashed is seared into the brain of voters at the midterm, which will just be a referendum about Trump. Forget there's no Kamala, there's no Sleepy Joe. It's Trump up or down, R or D, that's it. And he's going to lose badly at the rate he's going. And we're going to make sure that happens here with the community and fellowship that we've created. At the same time, the presidency, I mean, I mean, listen, Democrats have done a lot of stupid things in their life, but if they lose this presidency off of this administration. Wow. So if they get the presidency back, you tell me the Republicans don't want nationwide injunctions to drive president. Fill in the blank. Crazy. They do. That's that. Birthright, citizenship. I don't know. Call me cockeyed, optimist, opium, whatever people accuse me of peddling, I just don't see the Supreme Court getting five votes to change the US Constitution from an interpretive standpoint about subject to the jurisdiction thereof. I'm using Ben's voice, I don't know why. And twist that out of contortion to shape and recognition and make that mean, well, you know, you're here, you know, your mother or your father, and even though you're born in a, in a, in a birthing center in America, you're not an American, Even though the 14th amendment says you are. I just don't see this Supreme Court writing that as their obituary.

[B]

Well, I think that was a great impression of me. I would, I would encourage you to keep on doing that impression. I think it's, I think it's a. They go, I was wondering. I was like, is that me over there speaking? Okay, we, we cover, we covered a lot. It was very heavy on immigration, but I thought we also covered jurisdiction, which is an important role for all of these cases, so that you understand. Oh, got it. I understand. District court judge, court of appeals Supreme Court, how this all fits together. And of course we'll be covering all of this, all of the developments on the Legal AF YouTube channel. Also, we do legal takes on the Midas Touch channel, but we want to make sure that we hit every legal issue from every angle. And Michael Popak has put together an all star team of not just Popak, but the top lawyers in the country. Some of the people who are behind a lot of these big cases, they're all on the Legal AF YouTube channel every single day cranking out hot takes. And I got some big interviews coming up this next week with some of the key strategists behind all of this litigation. So excited to share that with you. Also, if you've been injured or you know someone who's been injured in a catastrophic type of situation, truck accidents, car accidents, medical malpractice, negligence, sexual assault abuse. Michael Popo's new law firm handling catastrophic injury cases. So if you were looking for a lawyer, consultation is free. Lots of people were asking Popak to do this. Popak left his other like he started his own new firm to do specifically this. And it's off to a great start. Popak, tell us where we can find you.

[A]

Sure. Easy. I made it easy on everybody, including me. 1-877-POPAK AF is the phone number and the website is www. The POPOC firm and POPAK is P O P O K. Thank you everybody.

[B]

So much for watching this episode of Legal af. We'll see you next time. Hit subscribe subscribe to the Legal AF audio podcast as well. Leave a five star review there so all those Rogan people don't vomit with negative reviews. If you like the show, give it this five star review there. Thank you all so much for watching. Have a great rest of the weekend. Stay in the fight because when we fight, we win. Hit subscribe right now. Shout out Legal A effer Shout out Midas Biting.

[A]

Shopify helps you sell at every stage of your business. Like that. Let's put it online and see what happens. Stage and the site is live that we opened a store and need a fast checkout. Stage thanks. You're all set that count it up and ship it around the globe Stage.

[B]

This one's going to Thailand and that.

[A]

Wait, did we just hit a million orders? Stage Whatever your stage Businesses that grow grow with Shopify. Sign up for your $1 a month [e-mail] listen.