Judge Orders Illegal RETURNED! Trump Strategy WINNING; Fired Gov't Workers Appeal

0:02 yes hello my beautiful friends what an amazing day it is we're waiting for these tubes to connect themselves all across the fruited plane on this lovely and amazing day of course we're excited to be here to celebrate the close of the week and the much awaited and very cherished Friday we made it through another very busy week and my goodness my friends what a Friday treat we have in store fresh out of the oven like minutes ago the Supreme Court dropped an opinion on a TTRO injunction type case and we're going to get into it now we've got just a very short opinion from the court and what's curious about

0:49 this one is John Roberts would have denied the application the full court granted the application which means John Roberts was still being ordinary so Amy Coney Barrett it sounds like joined in with the Republicans and we've got our very first stay granted from the Supreme Court going back down to a lower level court in Massachusetts so very good news coming out of the Supreme Court today now what is this going to mean and how will this trickle out to all of the other cases time will tell but we got some Supreme Court business to attend to it's so fresh I couldn't even put it in the thumbnail or in the title but we'll

1:34 get to it so we'll start there then we got some other business to attend to talking about this dude who has been told uh he's coming back to America and the judge who ordered him back to America is this judge Judge Paula Zenis who is uh this woman and she is bringing him back she issued an order and that order looked like this and he's coming back he's in El Salvador at that prison down there and they say he's got to come home not that he can go to another facility but put him on an airplane and fly him back and do it immediately now we got some updates on what happened at the hearing because CNN was there they were reporting on what went on when Trump's

2:20 DOJ was arguing about this today and we'll go through all of that and more more discussion on the border because the Democrats went down there today there's Betty Thompson oh look at that outfit looking good Betty they're going down there to inspect I guess the um internment of migrants or something that Trump is uh imposing upon everybody so Benny Thompson's down there i got some reaction here a couple of clips from Wesley Hunt and some spokesp people and then we'll talk about Judge McConnell this judge right here this is the judge that we've had a lot of conversations about because he said that Trump has to bring back that FEMA money and divulge it divest it to all of the

3:07 various states so he came out with a new opinion on this today we'll read through it and see what he said of course a lot of the stuff is being appealed now this is going to be the preliminary injunction portion of this which means it will certainly become a lot more appealable but this judge is also facing impeachment questions and claims based on his problematic history and conflicts and so we'll go through those impeachment resolutions here soon and then hear from Mike Johnson on what can be done with this budget and perhaps even addressing some of these very issues like FEMA funding billions of dollars being grifted out and more then we'll do a quick update on this appeal trump filed on appeal in this case appealing another

3:53 Biden judge James Kellahar Bradar this case got appealed there they filed it in the fourth circuit filed a motion for a stay pending appeal so we'll hit the highlights on that and then discuss what that case means and what the administration is doing so a bunch of good stuff today my friends very glad that you're here with us and we're excited to get into it with you want to remind you that we do members only streams on Saturdays so if you're looking for something to do tomorrow 12:00 noon Eastern time thanks for becoming a mebo we're going to roll out those research files that I was just sharing with you tomorrow so we'd love to have you come and join us we'll explain it and it'll be a little fun conversation so it's a great way to support our show you can join on YouTube you can join on locals watching the watchers.locals.com we had a great

4:39 membersonly stream this morning we really tried to deliver for our members we stream a bunch we have a great community that we're developing and fostering and that's what it's all about community it's going to make you live longer there's science that says that so all right we got a bunch of good business to attend to today so let's get to it man because we got Supreme Court business fresh out of the oven just making sure all of our feeds are percolating appropriately and I do believe they are good all right so let's get to it starting right here the Supreme Court of the United States has finally spoken we've been waiting for something even a little bit of a tidbit of a smorgus board of something and they gave it to

5:25 us today you can see this came down in a per curium opinion so it is the opinion of the court there's not a single judge who's taking ownership of this decision and it looks to be a very close decision a 54 decision because John Roberts would have denied the application for a stay and so some background on this case before we get into it very short opinion from the Supreme Court you can see it's just a couple pages here it's coming up from the district of Massachusetts and you're going to see the very first word here basically is on March 10th the lower level judge did a thing so what did that lower level judge do well they issued this order you can see March 10th is the date of this order that came out from the district of Massachusetts and we'll read through what happened here

6:11 just very briefly so we have some context what the Supreme Court has done but for background this is a judge who is called Mang Jin Jun and as Joe Biden did regularly he appointed a ton of people who were not born in America now that is an interesting pattern from Joe it's curious to me how he can't find people from you know Massachusetts who were born in Massachusetts who could come and interpret the American Constitution based on their American heritage and upbringing and living in the country but Joe Biden did this for a lot of people this guy was born in South Korea in Seoul and has now been uh appointed to be the judge of Massachusetts and is now ruling on

6:58 constitutional issues that impact the entire country acting like he's a natural-born president but he's not so anyways just a little side note there but Joe Biden appointed this guy and he was a Boston city judge before he then went and worked for the ACLU bunch of other things served in the National Guard and was part of the American Bar Foundation joe Biden appointed him and he was confirmed out of committee and so on and so forth so now he's in charge of apparently the country and he decided that accordingly in this order he said "All right you know on March 6 a bunch of these blue states this is this judge writing uh California and Massachusetts and New York and Maryland and all of them they sued the Secretary of Education Linda McMahon they said that

7:44 on February 7th the Department of Education terminated all grants that were awarded under the TQP program the Teacher Quality Partnership Program whatever that is grifting Teachers R Us so plaintiff states filed a TTRO they said "You can't cut off those funds how dare you?" They held a hearing this judge said "I grant their motion and I enter a TTRO against Trump give them back their money." So then Trump says "Wait a minute the waiver of sovereign immunity in the APA does not extend to contract claims which is something we've talked a lot about here." So right it's hard to sue the government because they've got sovereign immunity so they pass laws they say "Well if you want to

8:30 sue because there's a contract breach we're going to set up a special court for you it's called the Court of Federal Claims." They actually did that under the Tucker Act not that Tucker and set that up but you can also sue under the APA but only if there's a waiver of sovereign immunity and specifically there isn't a waiver of sovereign immunity that would allow you to sue if it is a contract claim under the APA there's a whole separate court for that we've talked about this a ton here these judges just don't understand it they're going to get told here in a minute though from Scotas now the states disagree saying "No waiver of sovereign immunity says we can sue you right here we can see you in Massachusetts under this judge from Korea now very recently another session in this district

9:16 examined this precise issue in substantially a similar case to this one massachusetts this is this judge writing says in that case in a thoughtful anal analysis another judge said that the essence of the action was not actually a contract remember they drape these things in constitutional claims even though they're just contracts like we just got our contract canceled by the government but they say "Oh our free association rights were cancelled under first amendment." Says he says "I agree." And this judge is just going to copy and paste Judge Kelly because why you know reanalyze it yeah that sounds good here they say they're seeking relief equitable relief they want the grants reinstated okay it's not because they're not suing because the contract

10:01 was cancelled hello they're suing to just turn the contract back on you know which is like to undo the cancellations oh my gosh and the judge's like "Yeah it's equity it's not contract plaintiffs." It's so ridiculous maybe that's how they do things there in South Korea i don't know the plaintiff states also this blue states seek to enjoin defendants from implementing giving effect to maintaining or reinstating under a different name the termination of any awarded grant so preserve the status quo so I think you're going to win i begin with the likelihood of success on the merits which is considered the most important of the four elements you're going to win this right this judge is he's just going to get told in a minute i think you're

10:48 going to win he writes "The record reflects there was no individualized analysis of any of the programs and that it appears that all the grants were simply terminated you didn't look at him on a case-byase basis we've already gone through this routine with the US aid case." And then they said "Yeah we did marco Rubio was up late last that one night for like three nights he had like five Red Bulls." He was like "Yeah another one just keep it going." Yeah cancelled canceled canceled canceled cancelled cancelled another one cancelled cancelled canceled i see no reason no this judge I see no reasoned explanation articulated for why the department did what they did okay this judge is now in charge of the executive branch it's ridiculous well you didn't explain it good enough for me to approve and sign off on your executive decision

11:34 first the termination lists several theoretical bases for the termination grants it says well it says you're canceled because you do DEI or you're not free from waste or fraud or it could be this he says "Well that's not clear enough i need a reasoned explanation you don't have power unless I sign off on it." There is no indication that the department examined the relevant records to the contrary it feels like they didn't look at these individually at all and so since you didn't look at them individually I find this is arbitrary and capriccious under the APA and award them a victory says the departments they're going to get he's going to get told in a minute for these reasons I think they're going to win wrong under the ABA APA and I'm going to say that it's arbitrary and capriccious sorry judge so the blue states have adequately

12:22 shown that they would be irreparably harmed also if they if we don't grant this TTRO saying an irreparable injury is an injury that cannot be compensated for later and these are two sides of the same coin the termination of funding for California state uh with objective training with the objective of training and developing highqualified community centered teachers has resulted in the loss and mentoring of 26 students and the loss of stipens for 50 incoming students who need these stipens to participate in classroom teaching oh man they are doomed now here in Massachusetts where Boston public

13:07 schools has relied on their money right he's like well we need this money the abrupt termination of this grant has resulted in the loss of three full-times employees again judge these are these are decisions that the president makes these are political decisions if the people are unhappy with these firings Trump can be held accountable at the ballot box what is happening is these judges are substituting the TTRO rules which are not for this okay not to come in and make political judgments and issue nationwide injunctions on the basis of political discretionary decisions this judge is not politically accountable to anybody that's why he can do whatever he wants he might think this is an appropriate benefit because he knows those guys and they save him a parking

13:52 spot at their happy hours but it's apparent he says these harms have already resulted and I agree with the states that these damages and further compensation later down the line are not going to make us whole and so they have established irreparable harm again Scotas is going to reverse this in a minute but he wraps up saying "Finally upon consideration of these the public interest supports these if I don't grant this the record shows if I deny this relief dozens of programs upon which public schools and universities and students and faculty and teachers rely will be gutted that's the point only the strong will survive that's the point on the other hand if I were to grant the TTRO as another court has put it defendants merely would have to disperse the funds all they have to

14:39 do is just give the money out and I find that absent in an in order there's a serious risk that these services are going to be disrupted and it's integral to their daily lives like these are all political considerations that Trump we've already we know we know so for the reasons above this judge wrote Trump shall immediately restore the states to the pre-existing status quo give them all that government money back says Trump is also enjoined prohibited from stopping the funding of them you're also enjoined from stopping the funding of other entities within 24 hours of this order you shall provide notice about these people getting their money back you can you should confirm your

15:24 compliance with this TTRO this TTRO shall become effective immediately upon entry by this court and more by March 11th the party shall give us a briefing and so on obviously Trump was not happy about this and appealed it so of course this was signed off by the South Korean judge called Mong J jun who is now in charge of the executive branch saying "You can't cancel these funds okay you didn't do it to my satisfaction." Now all of this is obviously wrong so Trump appealed it it went up to the Court of Appeals and then it went up to the United States Supreme Court and now that we're caught up here we are trump applies to the Supreme Court wanting to vacate Judge

16:10 Jang's order issued out of Massachusetts so the Supreme Court has come back down what I believe is a 5 to4 decision we can look at it in more detail with John Roberts joining the libs came out and said "All right listen." On March 10th the United States District Court for Massachusetts issued what it styled as a TTRO okay they call it a temporary restraining order and we've here talked a lot about these we know what they are okay they're preliminary injunctions they call them TTRO's cuz they call everything things that are not what they are okay we can see that it's a preliminary injunction on our face even a three-year-old could see that that's an injunction

16:57 well it thinks it's a TTRO it's not it's not it's an injunction everyone knows okay even no matter what you put on it how much wigs or dresses or whatever it's an injunction in joining the government from terminating various education related grants now the order also requires the government from Judge Yang to pay out past due grant obligations and to continue paying obligations as they acrew so everything Trump said with the Department of Vet is reversed now the district court's conclusion writes to the Supreme Court rested on a finding that the states are likely to succeed on the merits of their claims because they were suing under the APA and remember

17:42 tons of lawsuits that we've covered here are also brought under the same claim it's the same type of garbage saying well it's a constitutional loss our rights are being infringed there's no other remedy anywhere else and they're suing on these bases with other things attached to but major claims we've talked about this this statute a lot supreme Court says okay he says they're going to win and it's based on that law because that's what they're suing under so on March 26th then Trump's government filed this application to vacate the judge's lower order and to request an immediate administrative stay which is what they're deciding now although the courts of appeals generally lack appellet jurisdiction over appeals from TTRO

18:28 because they're temporary temporary restraint and they say it's just for like 14 days just chill out okay once we litigate this then you can appeal it up once it comes down and you have a fin you know some finality after the end we get to a preliminary injunction then you can appeal it but it's too early to appeal right just like in criminal law you appeal at the conclusion of the case gener broadly speaking but the Supreme Court says but it's not a TTRO we can see it just like everybody they say several factors council in favor of construing the district court's order as an appealable preliminary injunction we can see it hanging there among other consideration the district court's order from Judge

19:13 Yang carries many of the hallmarks of a preliminary injunction obviously and moreover and they're and they're citing cases so this is like instruction to the to all the other courts right they're reminding hey other circuits if you're issuing a TTRO and you're calling it a TTRO but it has the chromosomes of a preliminary injunction then you you should go with the chromosomes you know see what those look like and the case law for that is Samson and Abbott so you got to follow these guidelines if it's a TTRO masquerading as a preliminary injunction we're going to call it out as a PI so just reminder on that so everybody who's doing this little game now you

19:59 know go read Samson go read Abbott those are our Supreme Court cases we decided this one in 1964 we revisited it again in 2018 so stop with the games injunctions are injunctions now moreover Judge Young's basis for issuing the order is strongly challenged they say Supreme Court as the government Trump is likely to succeed in showing that the district court lacked jurisdiction to order the payment of money under the APA no jurisdiction you can't order what you ordered there because you were or which is it's a contract you're ordering the money to be

20:44 paid that's not what the APA is for hello saying "Hey judge the APA's waiver of sovereign immunity which if you have sovereign immunity the government cannot be sued." So they say "Well there's a law that says the government waves that so we can sue you here under the APA." Supreme Court says "Uh no." The APA's waiver of sovereign immunity does not apply if quote if any other statute that grants consent to the lawsuit meaning the government is agreeing to be sued if that other statute expressly or impliedly forbids the relief which is sought then you can't come and sue under the APA okay so in other words if there's a law

21:31 that says you can't sue for that thing under this statute then you can't go and try to find another statute or forum or bring that same claim under the APA right it's like you can't go from mom to dad if if you go to dad and dad says "Sorry you can't do that." You can't go to mom and she says "Well I'm APA mother so I guess I'll allow you to do it." No they're you're prohibited from that thing you can't use the APA as a safety valve to just go "Well I can't bring it over here because it's specifically statutoily prohibited so I'll just use this catch-all claim to bring a claim." Nor does the waiver apply to a claim that is seeking quote money damages look at the law 5 US code 702

22:21 now it's true right which is what we're talking about so the judges are calling this out specifically these are contract claims for money no they're saying no they're not they're equitable claims to just return the contracts to their status quo position so you mean you want specific performance to reinstitute the contract no we just want them to turn the autopay back on okay so you want money is what you're saying no we just want the checkboxes to be reon so the money goes into your account right yeah got it so you want money damages yeah true the lower court said well you know just because there's a possibility this is what the lower judge just because there's a possibility that there might be money that results in this case right

23:08 the judge is saying well I am yeah I'm ordering a return to the status quo so what they're getting money but that doesn't make this a contract claim i'm just returning it to the status quo because these are constitutional violations that caused a problem here they say 'Well but as we've recognized the APA's limited waiver of immunity does not extend to orders to enforce a contractual obligation to pay money derp hey dumb dumb judge look at this case called Great West Life issued by the Supreme Court in 2002 you can't force money payments under the APA the Tucker Act not that Tucker grants the court of federal claims which how many times have we

23:54 screamed that here the court of federal claims has jurisdictions over suits over any express or comply implied contracts with the United States you're in the wrong courtroom okay and this is everywhere so we've seen there are hundreds of cases that have been filed now a a good portion I'd say over 50% of them have some sort of an APA claim wrapped up in there and most of these are contract claims even you Perkins Koi and all these people there our rights are being violated i don't although I don't know if they came under the APA with their specifically but many of them are saying right our rights are being violated and these are contract cancellations trump has every right to cancel these things and if they want to complain about it

24:40 it's already in US code go sue in the right court you can't go forum shop to for certain judges now as for the remaining state factors this is the Supreme Court writing the states have not even refuted the government's representation that it is unlikely to recover the grant funds once they are dispersed remember this concept too once the money goes out of the government bank account it's gone forever they're not going to get it back and so our response well issue an injunction bond make them post some money up so that they have some skin in the game so that if Trump is successful as these cases appeal up through the courts of appeals and into the Supreme Court if Trump is successful we get the money back otherwise the taxpayers are

25:25 on the hook once this once these funds are gone and paid out to all their Democrat grifters they're going to dump them back into their politicians hands and we're never going to see a dime of it so they say there's no guarantee that the government is going to get any of it back if they win so that's why they want a stay because that money will be gone and the judges in response to the demand from for the injunction bonds has been to just make a nominal injunction bond of $100 and well you know it's just enough that's fine they don't have the funds to come up with it and this will secure their appearance so the Supreme Court continues "No grantee promised to return the withdrawn funds should its grant termination be reinstated." Right so in other words states uh you have not promised to give the money back and the

26:11 district court inclined to impose a bond so by contrast the government compellingly argues that the respondents would not suffer irreparable harm while the TTRO are stayed right they've represented in this litigation the states that they have the financial wherewithal they're going to keep their programs running so if respondents ultimately prevail the Supreme Court says they can get back pay okay they can just go sue in the court of federal claims and get damages they say we're owed uh uh know $10 million okay go sue over there and claim it then you can get it but you don't need a stay that stops Trump from doing all of these changes and if respondents instead decline to keep the programs operating if they want to eliminate the

26:58 programs then any ensuing irreparable harm would be of their own making so if they want to cancel everything then that's fine they've already explained that there is no irreparable harm so that basis from Judge Yang is not good so such self-imposed costs are not the subject of an inquiry on a motion to stay right if they say "Well we have to wind down our services." Well that's your prerogative make that decision if it's not worth it to you to fund these things the federal government was funding then close it so the Supreme Court says we construe the application as seeking a stay pending appeal and grant the stay on March 10th and the March 10th order and the March 24th extension from the lower level judge from

27:43 Massachusetts is stayed pending the disposition of the appeal in the United States Court of Appeals for the first circuit so this is like a roadmap back for the for the court of appeals to say hey we don't think there is any irreparable harm we don't think that there is any really you know merits to their claim under the APA and we don't think the district court even has jurisdiction here so it's it's like a guideline for the court of appeals to dismiss this case and disposition so says it is stayed and disposition of a petition for writ of cersori if it is timely sought now if if the supreme court denies cert the stay shall automatically terminate and in the event cert is

28:29 granted the stay shall terminate upon the sending down of the judgment of this court okay so he's basically given like a if this then that if this then that but we're going to the first circuit everything is on stay till the first circuit disposes of this if the first circuit does not dispose of this Trump will go to the Supreme Court if the Supreme Court denies cert then the stay is terminated right we know oh Supreme Court's not acting on it that judge is right it can be allowed to exist if the Supreme Court grants it then the state shall terminate when they sound send down judgment from the Supreme Court this court which would of course coincide with the judgment so we have the rest of it fleshed out so this judge

29:15 is now stayed Judge Myang John from South Korea now serving in the District of Massachusetts who wrote an order that prohibited every everybody in the Department of Education from doing anything and ordered everybody to go back to the status quo so it's very clear that they're amazing and you know it's uh clear on the merits and they have irreparable harm and boohoohoo all the things he was scolded and reversed by the Supreme Court and what is so nice about this is hopefully all of the other circuits all of the other districts get the memo these APA claims are garbage your contract cancellations were never entitled to you you don't get to enjoy the government

30:02 teat for all eternity go find another source of income stop suing and trying to make constitutional claims the American people have said enough already go find something else to do and thank you for your attention to this matter the Supreme Court dropping a good one and I think this is the beginning right of some solidarity on how the court will address these one at a time peace meal i don't know why they chose this case specifically but they did and it should have reverberations throughout the rest of the cases we're covering here so we'll keep our eye on this thanks for joining us and subscribing as we do all right now let's talk about some other affairs

30:50 that are happening out there and this is another good one a federal judge ordered this guy to come back to the United States he's currently in El Salvador was deported by the Trump administration and she said "Bring him home put him on an airplane and get him back ASAP." We remember Trump deported a bunch of people based on the Alien Enemies Act and we talked about this guy before saying that he was scheduled for deport deportation but was not supposed to be deported specifically to El Salvador so the question really becomes is is Trump one going to bring this guy back and does he have to bring him back or can he just move him to

31:36 another country that is not El Salvador based on the orders from all of these courts now we've talked about this case before it's Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia the judge who ordered him to be flown back into the country is this woman here her name is Paula Zenis from Maryland and it's interesting because I looked up her record and her background and of course she was a Democrat appointee but she was also somebody who sued cops which is curious because the reason these guys were deported was because they were trendy Aaragua alleged gangbangers and of course everybody's claiming that's not true they're innocent barbers and that's all they do is want to make America great so here was interesting is Jeff Sessions back when uh this nomination was happening said she was in a private practice of

32:24 suing cops alleging police brutality zenis was most recently with the Baltimore law firm who represented the family of Freddy Gray six Baltimore police officers charged in connection with that and she made a ton of money right $6.4 million in a settlement there she built a career someone said out of suing the police and has shown a lack of understanding of the reality of law enforcement which is probably why she's bringing back alleged trenda people back into the country like uh bring them back says it's critical that we have judges that respect the rights of the accused but also law enforcement you know or American or the American people president Obama appointed this woman and everyone says she's eminently qualified and so on now I'm not so sure that she had any prior career as a

33:10 jurist but we'll come back on that one but there was a hearing a federal judge Zenis ruled that United States must bring back this guy the Trump administration conceded in a court filing that it deported him because of an administrative error which is kind of being taken out of context it's like deported him to Maryland because I'm sorry to El Salvador because of an administrative error the deportation itself not necessarily the administrative error it was the error that he went to El Salvador he could have gone to any other country but said it could not bring him back cuz he's in custody down there so in the hearing which took place today it appeared to mark the first time that they admitted an error which again is a an error

33:56 between the countries so and there was some testimony about what happened here today says the judge said you know this case is certainly important to Orgo Garcia and his family so in recognition of that this judge says I feel like I can't wait on giving my order i can't wait on it so over the course of the hearing the judge had repeatedly raised issues with the removal to El Salvador said "Well an immigration judge had previously granted him withholding of removal to El Salvador meaning he could suffer prosecution in El Salvador he was still considered removable right that's the thing so he could have been deported but he just couldn't be deported to El Salvador and the error was he got sent to El Salvador now Zinn has cited the status of her ruling saying that he was apprehended

34:43 last month without any legal basis and was was deported without justification of any legal basis which is not true we covered the documents multiple judges uh explained that he was and he didn't show up to court that one time now this was an illegal act congress said you can't do it and you did it anyways the Department of Justice attorneys Ruvini con conceded to Abrego's attorneys that he should not have been deported to El Salvador says "Our only arguments are jurisdictional okay he should not have been sent to El Salvador now Zen is an Obama appointee question why the US could not bring him back why can't we get him back?" She said "Well the first thing I did when I got this case on my desk," said the DOJ lawyer is I asked the same question "the answer I got back is not satisfactory." She's

35:29 like "I don't know el Salvador is not talking to us." All of this points to a functional control said Zenis ruvini called his own lack of information on why they couldn't bring him back frustrating as well the United States can't call someone in El Salvador and just say "Give us this guy back." So the DOJ lawyer appeared to suggest that he had asked the government to return Abrago but they did not heed his advice he then asked the judge for 24 hours but it was unclear what the request was for so another lawyer for Albrego asked the court to order his clients returned to the US saying he isn't asking for micromanaging by the court but the government needs to be put on a leash he said to ensure this is done in a timely manner at least today it doesn't seem like they're taking it seriously Sandival Mashenberg said at Ruini's arguments now during the hearing Zenis also appeared skeptical about the

36:15 alleged ties to MS13 which Trump officials have maintained saying he has not seen sufficient evidence she has not seen sufficient evidence saying when someone is accused of membership in such a violent and predatory organization it comes in the form of an indictment or complaint or some other robust process yeah right robust like the four times you tried to get Trump the government made a choice here to produce no evidence and so they said uh that this person there's not sufficient evidence of this and I don't remember if this was the guy who didn't show up to court or if that was another person so I want to be clear that we're not misstating that but we did read through I think it was Will Chamberlain's thread on this and he gave us some great details this guy had plenty of process and the only withholding was about El Salvador and

37:01 also Will Chamberlain went into the followup on that and said in hindsight El Salvador has been reformed so the basis that the judge used for withholding to El Salvador was about the papooseas remember papoosea guy and the papooseas are should no longer be in threat because El Salvador has cleaned up the papoosea problem now so there's no risk to being returned back to El Salvador so the basis for the withholding is really now moot so the order came down from the judge she says fly him back bring him home she wrote this the following from judge Paula Zenis says you know the court has

37:48 reviewed the motion from Kilmar which is a perfect name for an alleged MS-13 member Kilm Kilmar great says the court has reviewed plaintiff's motion for an injunction and the memo and the briefs and Christy Gnome who's named as the defendant here as well I've read everything the judge writes well Kilmar is a native of El Salvador and was granted withholding of removal in 2019 which this prohibited his removal to El Salvador now the record reflects that Abrago Garcia was apprehended in Maryland without legal basis on March 12th she says and without further process or legal justification was

38:33 removed to El Salvador on March 15th now I'm sure Trump disputes that Abrego Garcia is detained in the Centro de Con the Secott Center and they contend his removal his his lawyers violated the fifth amendment and US code and the APA right there it is again and other applicable legal protections so this judge appointed by Obama who used to sue the cops says "Well based on the record before the court I find that this court retains jurisdiction over this and I believe that they're going to win on the merits because this person was removed to El Salvador in violation of the Immigration and Nationality Act without any legal process at all." We read through it he his continued presence in the El Salvador for obvious reasons constitutes

39:20 irreparable harm you hear that naive Ukay she's talking garbage now the balance of equities and the public interest weigh in favor of returning him to the United States and the issuance of a preliminary injunction without further delay is necessary to restore him to the status quo and avoid the ongoing irreparable harm from his removal and so for these reasons the court directs defendants to return Garcia no later than April 7th 2025 all right so this is spicy so they're going to have to like the DOJ is going to have to go into overdrive right go into that and really communicate with Buchi and try to get this guy back right saying accordingly a memorandum opinion

40:05 if they want to comply with this a memorandum opinion further sets forth the basis of this ruling so she'll she'll release that later saying accordingly it is the 4th day of April and so she now orders that the motion is granted so Trump and Christy Gnome and the rest of Homeland are hereby ordered Rubio everybody to facilitate and effectuate the return of plaintiff Kilmar to the United States no later than 11:59 p.m on Monday April 7th so get him on an airplane and get him back home right now the preliminary relief is issued to restore the status quo this judge has now taken over control of foreign policy and this is a non-citizen by the

40:52 way not even close right to preserve Abrao Garcia's access to due process in accordance with the Constitution and governing immigration statutes the clerk is directed to transmit the orders to all the parties wild right the judge saying "Get this guy back in the United States by Monday at midnight or else." And we remember right this is the real story from Will Chamberlain just want to make sure we are familiar with what we're talking about here this was the guy who had multiple proceedings here's the document bond proceedings respondent Kilmar Abrago Kilmar Armato is a native he's a He's a not a citizen or national this was in 2019 okay what are you talking about

41:39 he's a native of the citizen he arrived at the United States judge he is not admitted or parrolled and he's an alien present without being admitted or parrolled he was held in custody by homeland now the finding that he was a member of MS-13 came up because he asked for bond right there here it is immigration judge reviewed the evidence and found it showed he's a verified member of MS-13 says right here "Therefore Abrego Garcia did not demonstrate that he could be released from custody." After considering the information by both parties the court concluded that no bond was appropriate first reason he failed to meet the burden of demonstrating he would not be a danger as evidence shows that he is a verified member of MS-13 there's your due process judge did you miss it you should follow Will on X the BIA held that this form is

42:28 inherently in trustworthy trustworthy and admissible the respondent says that he erroneously states he was detained in connection to murder he also claims that this this contradicts this and it does appear at odds with the gang field interview sheets okay so this guy's like lying the reason for the arrest given on his form does appear at odds with the gang field interview state sheet which states that the respondent was approached because he and others were loitering outside Home Depot regardless the determination that he's a gang member appears to be trustworthy and is supported by other evidence on the record so how come this judge found that but this the other judge found differently oh yeah the immigration judge also found that he was a flight risk noting that the history is he's

43:14 failing to appear for proceedings pertaining to his traffic violations yeah that's right that's right it was the guy who failed to show up to court he's a flight risk right yeah i can't there's so many i can't keep track of them but yeah it didn't show up to court so you can't no you're not going to show up we're not going to release you this judge ordered what another judge Elizabeth Kesler shout out to Elizabeth a good finding this judge just overruled basically says no evidence that this guy's a flight risk no evidence that he's MS-13 and he was unlawfully arrested what abrego appealed to the Board of Immigration which affirmed the judge's findings he got an appeal that's how much due process he got and they dismissed the appeal fast forward he filed another claim right got another immigration lawyer making trillions

44:00 right now and sued said uh and for another claim for asylum that's when he got the removal to El Salvador prohibition because of the papooseas papusaria Sicilia their papooseas were getting obliterated down there in El Salvador and he fled the country he's like they're wrecking my mama's papooseas so I'm gonna go to America what a great son so he got plenty of process here are the documents okay judge you should read them and then revise your ruling accordingly but she ordered him back into America because that's what the Democrats are doing right now and I guess we'll see what they do we'll see what happens whether they go into the El Salvador prison

44:46 whether they can bring him home and they got to do it by Monday or this judge is going to do the same thing that they're going to do in they've been trying to do in other jurisdictions which is try to hold Trump in contempt just like Judge Boasburg is maybe going to do and just like she's trying to do right it's it's a contempt trap that will lead to an impeachment trap as they instigate a so-called constitutional crisis by stepping way outside of her jurisdiction this guy got plenty of process and really she's lying right to come back in her opinion and drop something so ridiculous saying he got no due process he was apprehended without legal basis we just read it and was deported without further legal justification was removed it was all

45:32 justified right there other immigration judges found for it this is the same guy am I crazy kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia and this is what Will Chamberlain shared with us right here same dude Kilmar Armado Abrego Garcia or just making sure that we can read because apparently the judge can't so we're keep we'll keep our eye on this one obviously the Democrats are trying to turn this into something they went down to the border and Bill Malujan who reports for Fox was sharing this with us says the delegation of House Democrats visiting the southern border today will hold no public events and their visit is closed to press they finally go down to the border now a border patrol source just sent me this photo of Benny Thompson look at him benny Thompson is he What's he doing down

46:18 here is he going to go visit the border is he like going to the casino or something i don't know what he's doing but said he's there they're at the Chula Vista Border Patrol station reached out to the Democrats to inquire about covering the visit as of other media outlets we were told it's not public sorry their visit is to conduct oversight of the Trump administration's border policies we're sure all right so here was Homeland spokeswoman called Trisha Ohio explaining what the truth is about this Kilmar fella people should know who this individual is he's not some Maryland father as the mainstream media will make you believe he's actually a member of MS-13 and who was involved in human trafficking um it's unbelievable the framing of this whether this man is in

47:03 El Salvador or in a US detention center he should be locked up and people should also know who MS-13 is it is a gang that rapes maims and kills Americans for sport they should not be on US soil and any media outlet who tries to make him a darling or a victim should really be ashamed because the American people do know better the American well Judge Zenis and Boasburg and the Democrats and all of the mostly Democrat appointed judges want them in our country they care more about their due process rights than they ever cared about the J6ers or the prolifers or anybody who was trying to survive during COVID they didn't really care about any of our rights but if you're a trendwa gangbanger half the ACLU will come work

47:49 for you for free here's representative Wesley Hunt from Texas i want to start by saying this i'm a military guy a West Point guy and General Patton famously said "Either you lead follow or get out of the way." President Trump has led on this issue the country has followed and those that oppose securing our border must get out of the way and let's let me be clear for the past two years four years basically the Democrat party has obstructed what's happened and progress at the border keep in mind they opposed HR2 that we passed out of the House two years ago uh their their borders are Kla Harris never went down to the border then they blamed us for not securing the border toward the end of his term and then guess what abracadabra snap of his fingers with a with the signing of a few executive orders the border gets fixed and then now they want to go to the border because they lost on this issue

48:36 back in November and they have no leadership so what are they going to see at the border a fixed border because President Trump fixed it in the last 6 weeks and they should have been there for the past four years this derative of duty costed them this last election and then now they're trying to clean up on hour four but it's just too late it's too late for them to try to clean up this mess trump is going to take care of it it would be nice if they would just let our country get rid of gang members in America i don't know why they have to fight us so hard on this but we hope the American people are watching who they are who they're standing for and who they're fighting for and don't forget it all right so let's carry on and talk about this judge

49:22 yeah Judge McConnell this is a fun one cuz he's uh Yeah this is a ridiculous one judge McConnell is furious at President Trump the delay and the bureaucratic compliance strategy that the Trump administration has been deploying is working and they're not liking it remember this judge a lot of concerns about him judge John McConnell appointed by Obama has some very questionable relationships with some nonprofits and NOS's and has been ordering all of Trump's recisions and his cancellations of contracts to be reinstated and this is the case about that FEMA money that Trump canled this

50:08 judge ordered it back and what is happening in this filing you can see they sued everybody look at all these defendants here everybody got sued what is happening here is this judge is ruling on a motion for enforcement so in other words the judge said "Give them their money back." Trump said "Well okay we'll work on it we're going to work on it right now we're going to get the checkbook but it's down uh stairs on the seventh you know first floor whatever it is." So we got to go get the checkbook and before we can give them their money we got to get the checkbook and then when I got the checkbook we ran out of checks don't you hate that got to order some new checks and then once you get the new checks in we wrote the check but we put in the mail and we for got to sign it i know so it's very complicated

50:56 the bureaucracy is massive and monstrous okay and things are hidden in nooks and crannies and tucked away in Nancy Pelosy's butt cheeks no one knows where it is so we if we want to get the files we got to get them out of the cave it's cavernous down there so it's just complicated so it's been slow they say turn the money back on and now they're saying "Judge make them do it enforce this." So the judge then issued this order and says "Listen okay on January 31st I Judge McConnell entered a TTRO that stopped President Trump from pausing the money and I instructed Trump shall not impede the state's access to

51:42 this money." Now the TTRO also stated that if Trump engages in other blocking of these funds you need to let me know about it now within weeks after the court issued the TTRO the states all the blue states continue to experience freezes of their money of numerous grants and awards that went unresolved even after talking with the Trump council so the states filed a motion to enforce this give us our money right now and the court granted it ordering Trump to immediately restore frozen funds immediately end any funding pause during the pendency of this and immediately take every step necessary to

52:28 effectuate the TTRO and Trump's like "Oh we're working on it we're trying dude it's a mess nancy Pelosi has been running this thing for 50 years no one knows where she hid everything we're trying to find it eventually the states filed a second motion to enforce saying "The states are also facing obstacles we're still not getting our millions that were awarded and were obligated to come from FEMA." And they ordered they asked the court to order FEMA to give us our money 1800 I need my money i want it now on March 6th the court issued another injunction ordering that FEMA was stopped you have to give them your FEMA money too now because of the court's issuance of the

53:14 injunction we issued the preliminary injunction meaning the TTRO was expired the court denied the second motion as moot now still the court ordered FEMA to file a status report fema filed the status report and the states responded they said "They're still not giving us our money." So now the states are coming back and they're saying "Make FEMA give us the money." So this judge is saying "Whoa." So this might be civil contempt i don't know so I'm not happy about this we might have There might be civil contempt here did you have notice of what I told you to do was my order clear and unambiguous to get them their money did the contempor in this case Trump have the ability to comply and did you violate it maybe holding Trump in contempt

54:01 the states say that they have not received a substantial dispersement of me our money they highlight that these funding disruptions coincide with Stacy's email that was sent to all staff on February 10th which said "Put a hold toggle in financial hold on all that FEMA government money." But the states have been sitting here like "Hey where is it the processing of the awards has yet to come." In fact Hawaii said "We need $6 million from FEMA." Well they did have that fire you know Oregon wants that money we haven't gotten FEMA funds what happened in Oregon $129 million for what climate change none of the Colorado DPS money came in 33 million for what 14 grant programs have been approved for

54:48 what notice they're all blue states right who are complaining rhode Island's FEMA grants which support nearly a dozen grant programs have been unavailable for more than 30 days for what more arizona which was blue California Colorado Hawaii Illinois Maine Maryland Michigan New Jersey all of them have their FEMA monies frozen so the states contend that at least 215 FEMA grants to at least 19 plaintiff states remain frozen or inaccessible what are all those national emergencies what are those happening is this why they don't have money when North Carolina burns to the ground after a hurricane obliterates the whole region is that why because it's going to uh Vermont for climate windmills or

55:34 something i don't know now here thus the states alleged that FEMA's implementation is appropriate and so so here's this is Trump's strategy on display trump says "Hey we're following FEMA's manual review process." Okay and it's not a pause or withholding it's simply an internal control we're manually reviewing all the grant payment requests before dispersing the funds that's all and by the way Cameron shout out to Cameron acting FEMA administrator he says "I'm reviewing them manually personally in response to Christy Gnome's order." And thus on February 14th

56:19 Valentine's Day Mr hamilton formalized the ordered review process issuing guidance he says that the review of this payment is not the type contemplated before and so we're assuring that there's not any waste fraud or abuse as we're reviewing these payment requests so it's we're we're following the law very deliberately further the defendant asserts that this manual review process is not violative of this injunction your honor you said that we could rely on our own independent authorities to implement this process so we are we're not even following the directive we have an obligation under the rules okay strict compliance with the rules

57:06 when it comes to paying anybody out now ultra strict compliance with the rules your honor the Code of Federal Regulations says that we have an obligation to manage and administer each award in a manner to ensure it's in compliance with the law right we're going to pay them hello we just have to follow the law like you said that's all so we're even doing it manually okay to be in strict compliance but the judge is like "I want you to just turn it all on now." They're like "Oh no no we can't you said we had to follow the law code of federal regulations section 200.3 subsection A says we have to." Now Trump also highlights that relevant grant regulations dictate that costs must be

57:54 necessary and reasonable and so we're analyzing those too there's another subsection right here section 200.404-405 says we have to analyze this too so thus Trump says these regulations in illustrate that FEMA has independent regulatory authority to review payment requests to make sure they're appropriate and lawful before we disperse them so that's all we're doing now the judge says but this law is general and has nothing in this which is which this judge is like if you do this if this is a ch if this is a manual review process basically means there's an indefinite categorical pause on payments right meaning if you go slow and like look at everything it's basically pausing everything we're like

58:40 yeah we know nor does this mean you can conduct a review specifically like you're doing it and this section already prescribes on how it works and so in any event they presented evidence that strongly suggests that this manual review process is covertly based on Trump's order okay so I said you could find an independent basis and follow the law to do these things but the way you're finding independent bases and following the law is basically in total alignment with Trump's EO and it's basically doing the same thing and so I ordered you to not do that secretary Gnome's grant directs a hold okay christy Gnome

59:25 made a memo it was a hold and NGO grants were issued barely a week after the invasion eo and all of these things got cancelled so the judge says this feels a little bit too suspicious to me the temporal proximity between the issuance of the invasion and the OM memo and the na NGO grants further illustrates it's a pause and so it feels like this judge says you guys did all this stuff very coincidentally one after another and it's like judge we've only been here for like a hundred days okay so yeah like there's a lot happening that's why they're happening quickly because we're getting stuff done welcome he says so it feels like Mr hamilton's assertion that

1:00:11 the manual review process was implemented in response to a memo means that the the review process was implemented to comply with the EO and because I've already said the EO is now prohibited this must also be prohibited telling us the court reaffirms its preliminary injunction order saying that Gnome is enjoined from pausing freezing blocking cancelling suspending anything based on the directive including any other freezes dictated described implied or before the recision or any other look materially similar memo directive policy or

1:00:57 practice even the practice so like now you're pra now you're looking at these things independently and anything that results in a categorical pause or freeze of the money that come from Congress so like this judge is so scrambling right so I said you could do this in this and this has happened time and again we did this with US aid you have an in if you have an independent basis go use it trump says totally fine perfectly we'll we'll use our independent basis will pay out only certain people and they follow it the judge freaks has to expand it and again it's showing us the unreasonleness of the judiciary this is this is the judge acting insane by saying "What trump can't pause any money at all under the executive branch or make any of these

1:01:43 changes he's got to restore everything to the status quo." Saying FEMA received notice of this the record makes clear that FEMA's manual review process which is this bureaucratic compliance strict bureaucratic compliance yes your honor we're going to follow the law 100% well basically this manual review process that is literally following the law is akin to an indefinite pause on the dispersement of the funds and this is all based on Trump trump's EO Trump did this and you're basically doing what Trump said to do even though you're not following the same process that Trump said to pro follow wild right now throughout the duration of this injunction FEMA must immediately cease the manual review process so you can't even look at this

1:02:29 manually now and basically turn everything back on immediately comply with the injunction don't impede the money going to the states and direct this order to anybody who orders these things within 48 hours after this order signed by Judge John J mcconnell Jr a Democrat judge who has some very interesting connections with some boards out there that get government money maybe even FEMA money at Crossroads Rhode Island and more so we're going to keep our eye on this case trump of course wants these judges gone i think many of us do and so one person called a representative called Mr clyde introduced this resolution to impeach

1:03:17 Judge McConnell here's what he wrote he says articles of impeachment exhibited by the House of Representatives are now introduced calling this an abuse of power saying Judge McConnell of Rhode Island knowingly politicized and weaponized his office to advance his own political beliefs saying the constitution and the house of representatives have the power of impeachment and the separation of powers means the president has broad authority over the executive branch which includes control of his departments now this judge Judge James McConnell Jr engaged in actions that prioritized his own political views and beliefs over his duties of impartiality he has spent his

1:04:03 entire career displaying his political views and beliefs in his financial contributions as well as his public comments here are some examples judge Ro John James McConnell served as the director of Rhode Island branch of Planned Parenthood and Chief Judge McConnell Jr and his wife contributed $700,000 to Democrats maybe why he became a judge got that nomination right you can pay off the Democrats and they'll nominate you chief Judge John James McConnell Jr has allowed his personal political opinions to influence his decisions and rulings and he's made an array of public comments clearly demonstrating his bias against Trump in

1:04:48 January 2021 Judge McConnell made public comment stating "We fall back on on kind of a stereotypical comment that judges should have no opinions and whatnot." And that's just not true obviously they have opinions we see it now Judge McConnell also made public comments that equated Trump and his first term as president to the Civil War and Jim Crow laws and even likened him to a tyrant mcconnell also made a public comment in January 21 that when sentencing he says the law applies to them where they are for criminals who are women black or transgender so the law applies differently if you're black or trans you've got more victimization because of white dudes and now you get lesser

1:05:34 sentences or something mcconnell also made public comments in January 21 stating when you're sentencing someone that you have to take a moment and realize that this you know this middle class white male privileged person needs to understand the human being who comes before us that may be a woman or may be black maybe transgender maybe poor maybe rich maybe whatever may had experience but not yours and may have to walk in their shoes and understand that the law applies to them where they are Um and then you have to apply the law accordingly oh man that is like the worst type of judge you've ever seen right so different penalties for different people depending on your physical characteristics what a

1:06:21 sick person uh what what's that blindfold doing on Lady Justice for i'm not real sure uh Chief Judge James John McConnell made public comments in January stating "We have formed a committee to look at race in our court have we given disperate sentences between blacks and whites about hiring practices maybe it sounds like white if you're white there it sounds like you're in big trouble." Chief Judge John James McConnell Jr.'s financial contributions

…