Podcast Summary: UnJustified – "Criminally Contemptible"

Podcast Information
Title: UnJustified
Host/Authors: Allison Gill and Andy McCabe (MSW Media)
Episode: Criminally Contemptible
Release Date: April 20, 2025
Description: The creators of Mueller, She Wrote, Allison Gill, and former Deputy Director of the FBI, Andrew McCabe, delve into the erosion of civil liberties and the rule of law under Trump's Department of Justice (DoJ).

Introduction

The episode kicks off with Allison Gill extending Easter greetings to listeners and setting the stage for a week filled with significant legal developments. Hosts Allison Gill and Andy McCabe, co-creators of "UnJustified," discuss two major court decisions involving Judge Boasberg and the Abrego Garcia case, highlighting the Trump administration's defiance of court orders and the resulting legal battles.

Judge Boasberg’s Criminal Contempt Findings

Key Developments:

• Criminal Contempt Proceedings Initiated: Judge Boasberg concluded that there is probable cause to find the Trump administration in criminal contempt for violating court orders related to the Alien Enemies Act case.

• Legal Nuances: Despite the Supreme Court vacating Judge Boasberg's temporary restraining orders (TROs), Boasberg argues that the contempt proceedings remain valid because court orders must be obeyed until formally reversed.

Notable Quotes:

• Andy McCabe [00:07]: "Judge Boasberg issues a memorandum opinion that concludes that probable cause exists to find the government in criminal contempt for defying court orders..."

• Allison Gill [03:23]: "One might nonetheless ask how this inquiry into compliance is able to proceed at all, given that the Supreme Court vacated the TRO after the events in question."

Discussion Highlights:

• Supreme Court’s Role: The Supreme Court’s vacating of the TRO does not render the contempt findings moot. As Boasberg points out, "a court order must be obeyed, no matter how erroneous it may be, until a court reverses it."

• Steps for Contempt Proceedings: Before initiating criminal contempt, the court typically allows the offending party to purge contempt by complying with the order. If the government fails to do so, Judge Boasberg plans to identify responsible individuals and potentially refer the case to the Department of Justice (DoJ) for prosecution.

• Prosecutorial Discretion: There is skepticism about whether the DoJ will pursue criminal contempt cases against high-level officials, reflecting concerns about political interference within the justice system.

Notable Quotes:

• Allison Gill [06:10]: "If you accept a reality in which litigants can just ignore an order of the court because they disagree with it, then we have no rule of law."

• Andy McCabe [08:04]: "But there's really not much that the court or anyone else can do about that."

Implications:

• Erosion of Rule of Law: The administration’s resistance to comply with judicial orders signifies a troubling trend towards undermining the rule of law.

• Potential for Special Prosecutor: If the DoJ declines to prosecute, Judge Boasberg may appoint a special prosecutor, a rare and controversial measure that could face opposition from the Supreme Court.

Notable Quotes:

• Allison Gill [14:06]: "But the reason they denied cert in Donzinger, Andy, was for procedural. There were a lot of procedural issues with the case, not so much on the merits..."

• Andy McCabe [16:09]: "They have steel in his spine for sure. But it is hard for me to understand how that actually works in his favor."

Abrego Garcia Case

Overview:

• Background: Abrego Garcia, a Maryland father, was unlawfully removed to El Salvador due to an administrative error. The Supreme Court denied the Trump administration's bid to stay Judge Sinis’s order, mandating the government to facilitate his return.

Judge Sinis’s Order:

• Discovery Process: Judge Sinis initiated a two-week intensive discovery process to uncover why the government failed to comply with court orders. She ordered the government to answer three critical questions regarding Garcia’s whereabouts and steps taken to facilitate his return.

• Government’s Non-compliance: The Trump administration missed deadlines and failed to provide substantial information, leading to intensified legal scrutiny.

Notable Quotes:

• Andy McCabe [22:08]: "Every turn of the screw here, the government just ups the ante, doubles down, triples down. It's incredibly frightening."

• Allison Gill [32:18]: "Cruel and unusual punishments inflicted... yet they've not produced a single compelling piece of evidence to prove that."

Legal Maneuvers:

• Expedited Discovery: Judge Sinis granted expedited discovery to quickly obtain necessary information, allowing plaintiffs to file additional sanctions if the government continues non-compliance.

• Potential Contempt Proceedings: The court is prepared to move forward with contempt proceedings if the government fails to comply, echoing the earlier proceedings against the Trump administration’s broader actions.

Notable Quotes:

• Allison Gill [37:35]: "Trump administration... us here now. We're doing this thing."

• Andy McCabe [43:08]: "They should... put him back and put him on trial and convict him."

Implications:

• Constitutional Rights: The case underscores the fundamental right to due process, regardless of the individual’s background or alleged affiliations.

• Potential for Broader Legal Challenges: While the current focus is on criminal contempt, the case paves the way for future legal challenges regarding the constitutionality of the Alien Enemies Act and related deportation practices.

Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals Opinion

Overview:

• Government’s Appeal Denied: The Trump administration sought an emergency stay or a writ of mandamus to halt Judge Sinis’s orders. Judge J. Harvey Wilkinson III of the Fourth Circuit denied these motions, reinforcing the district court’s authority.

Notable Quotes:

• Judge Wilkinson [40:38]: "The government is asserting a right to stash away residents of this country in foreign prisons without the semblance of due process..."

• Allison Gill [46:00]: "This gives me chills."

Judge Wilkinson’s Analysis:

• Executive vs. Judiciary: He emphasizes the critical balance between respecting executive powers and upholding judicial authority, warning against the erosion of mutual respect between branches.

• Rule of Law: The opinion starkly criticizes the administration’s actions, stating, "The government asserts that Abrego Garcia is a terrorist and a member of MS.13. Perhaps, but perhaps not. Regardless, he's still entitled to due process."

Notable Quotes:

• Judge Wilkinson [47:02]: "If the government is confident of its position, it should be assured that position will prevail in proceedings to terminate the withholding of removal order."

Implications:

• Judicial Integrity: The ruling underscores the judiciary’s role in protecting individual rights against executive overreach.

• Historical Reflection: Judge Wilkinson’s opinion reflects a deep concern for the long-term impact on the judiciary and the rule of law if current trends continue.

DOJ News and Additional Updates

Key Stories:

• Firing of Peter Carr: Longtime DoJ spokesman Peter Carr was fired amid ongoing controversies and administrative turmoil within the department.

• CIA’s Handling of Signal Messages: A CIA chief data officer admitted that Director John Ratcliffe’s Signal messages were inadvertently deleted or altered, raising questions about data preservation and compliance with court orders.

Notable Quotes:

• Allison Gill [51:54]: "What's it, you know, what's a court order anyway, really?"

Implications:

• Transparency and Accountability: These developments highlight systemic issues within the DoJ and CIA concerning adherence to legal standards and transparency.

• Impact on Justice: The erosion of experienced and ethical figures within the DoJ could further complicate ongoing legal battles and undermine public trust.

Listener Questions and Analysis

Featured Question:

• Question from Tyler:
  "I know we're supposed to praise you guys to get our question picked, but it feels way too close to what is going on in the White House, which creeps me out. You know what, Tyler? Fair play, bro... [continues with humor and critique]."
  "My question, it seems to me that sending people to a prison in a foreign country known for horrific conditions where we are powerless to retrieve them is extremely cruel and unusual. Why don't we see anyone going at the Abrego Garcia case? From the 8th amendment angle, it seems to not only be straightforward enough to win, but simple enough for normies, not nerds like us, to understand."

Hosts' Response:

• Allison Gill [55:35]: Elaborates on the Eighth Amendment, explaining why it currently doesn't apply directly to the Abrego Garcia case. She clarifies that the Eighth Amendment addresses excessive bail, fines, and cruel and unusual punishments resulting from convictions, whereas Garcia's situation pertains to immigration law and due process before any conviction.

• Andy McCabe [55:35]: Supports Allison’s explanation, emphasizing that Garcia has not been convicted of any crime, thus making Eighth Amendment claims inapplicable at this stage.

Notable Quotes:

• Allison Gill [57:10]: "I know that doesn't sound very. That sounds a little nonsensical, but it does make sense in the context of the Constitution."

• Andy McCabe [59:41]: "If we get to the point where these people are finally afforded due process, and at the end of that process, the judgment is to send them to Seacote. Now you've really teed up an Eighth Amendment question."

Implications:

• Legal Strategy: While the Eighth Amendment is currently not applicable, future legal battles may explore its relevance should the government proceed to punitive actions without due process.

• Public Understanding: The hosts aim to educate listeners on the nuanced distinctions between constitutional amendments and their applications in ongoing legal scenarios.

Conclusion

Allison Gill and Andy McCabe conclude the episode by reiterating the critical nature of the ongoing legal battles against the Trump administration's DoJ practices. They emphasize the importance of adhering to the rule of law and the judiciary's role in safeguarding civil liberties. The hosts encourage listeners to subscribe and stay informed as they continue to monitor and analyze developments in the Abrego Garcia case and Judge Boasberg's contempt proceedings.

Notable Quotes:

• Andy McCabe [61:10]: "We're digging into the filings. Just this is our ground. This is why people come to this, thankfully come to and support this show."

• Allison Gill [61:35]: "We are in a constitutional crisis."

Final Thoughts: The "Criminally Contemptible" episode of UnJustified provides a comprehensive and engaging analysis of significant legal challenges facing civil liberties under the Trump administration. Through detailed discussions, expert insights, and critical evaluations of court decisions, hosts Allison Gill and Andy McCabe offer listeners a deep dive into the mechanisms of justice and the ongoing struggles to uphold constitutional protections.