Eric Columbus
@EricColumbus
Ok now I think I get this motion. DA wants to make crystal-clear that Trump cannot attack his family. Gag order, read fairly, encompasses the DA’s family, but not 100% clear. Judge’s daughter discussed just for optics. Here’s a thread, with caveat that I’m out walking my dog. 1/
Eric Columbus
@EricColumbus
Judge’s order gags Trump from attacking, among others, “counsel in this case (other than the DA)” and “family members of any counsel.” Does the parenthetical in the first quote extend to the second? Logic says no. And DA wants judge to so say expressly, to protect his family. 2/
Eric Columbus
@EricColumbus
Whereas the original order plainly does *not* extend to the judge’s daughter. The judge is not a “staff member” so neither he nor his daughter are included. 3/
Eric Columbus
@EricColumbus
Tellingly, Trump’s reply defends his right to attack the judge’s daughter but is silent on whether he may attack the DA’s family. 4/
Andrew C Laufer, Esq
@lauferlaw
“Trump’s attorneys say the daughter is fair game…” really isn’t the hill legal counsel should want to die on, metaphorically
“That picture was on the back of a pick up truck that was traveling down the highway. Democrats and crazed lunatics have not only called for despicable violence against President Trump and his family, they are actually weaponizing the justice system against him.”
What Democrats have called for violence against his family?
"Choose your leaders with wisdom and forethought. To be led by a coward is to be controlled by all that the coward fears… To be led by a liar is to ask to be told lies." -Octavia E. Butler
AndyinPA wrote: ↑Sat Mar 30, 2024 12:47 pm
What Democrats have called for violence against his family?
Survey says "none."
And for anyone who does, the other 99 percent of us would have no problem rising up and condemning the call. That's the actual difference between good people and shitty people.
“Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.” —John Adams
Lisa Rubin
@lawofruby
NEW: According to reporting & judging from Trump’s social media, his camp is considering another motion to recuse Judge Juan Merchan on the basis of his daughter’s leadership of an online strategy firm that has, among other clients, worked for Biden & other Dem candidates. 1/
Trump moved to recuse Merchan last May—and his daughter was the principal reason why. 2/
In particular, Trump argued New York law demands recusal where the judge knows that their spouse or a person “known by the judge to be within the sixth degree of relationship to either of them … has an interest that could be substantially affected by the proceeding.” 3/
How, you might ask, would the case substantially affect his daughter’s interest? The argument is basically that because her firm has created digital fundraising campaigns for one or more candidates directly referencing the NY indictment, she financially benefits from the case’s very existence (and its continuation). 4/
But most of the argument was about the firm’s past. Indeed, while noting the firm worked for the Biden-Harris campaign in 2020, the motion was fuzzier about its current work, explaining only the firm “continues to promote messaging directed, at least in part, against President Trump.”
To the extent that Trump is considering a *new* recusal motion, note that one reason why is because disqualification motions are not eligible for interlocutory — or mid-case — review. Rather, to appeal their last recusal bid, he’ll have to wait until after a verdict.
But if, as Trump has asserted, even the appearance of bias demands recusal, an argument based on the work of Merchan’s daughter’s firm is not frivolous. On the other hand, it’s hard for legal experts following the case to see that when 1) it comes *this close* to trial; and…
and 2) he continues to ratchet up his social media campaign against the judge’s daughter, including by posting her picture tonight. I am not yet convinced that Trump has shown or can show she has an interest that has been or will be “substantially affected by the proceeding.”
But even if Merchan should be disqualified, Trump’s jeopardizing the safety of the judge’s family member is unacceptable.
Lisa Rubin's reporting has been pretty good, and she's a lawyer with litigation experience (civil cases only, I believe), but I don't think that she's done her homework here.
And I haven't refreshed my knowledge either, but based on my recollections of prior study, Judge Merchan's daughter's activities are nowhere close to being an "interest that could be substantially affected by the proceeding."
And yes, appearance of impropriety (not "appearance of bias," that's not a thing) can be a real issue in recusal motions, but it's not a super-charged bonus card that lets you take a clearly deficient argument with respect to an affected interest and then whine "but there's an appearance of impropriety."
I think that Trump's game is different. Personal animus on the part of the judge can be grounds for recusal, but not when the claimed animus is the result of personal attacks on the judge from the defendant himself. The law on that is clear. But I don't know how far that principle has been tested. Take, for instance, the limit situation of a defendant out on bail who murders the judge's daughter. I don't think that the judge could remain on the case.
Thus, if, for instance, a MAGA mob attacked and injured Justice Merchan's daughter, fair minded people might agree that the judge needed to step aside, even though Trump's attacks were likely a contributing cause of the assault.
I'm not saying that Trump plans to go that far. But I'm wondering if he's planning to escalate the attacks to the point where his lawyers could argue, not withstanding the principle that a defendant shouldn't be able to force recusal by his bad conduct, that it wouldn't be humanly possible for the judge to set aside his concern for his daughter in ruling on Trump's case.
In particular, Trump argued New York law demands recusal where the judge knows that their spouse or a person “known by the judge to be within the sixth degree of relationship to either of them … has an interest that could be substantially affected by the proceeding.”
That would seem to require an awful lot of recusin' ...
chancery wrote: ↑Sat Mar 30, 2024 10:57 pm
I'm not saying that Trump plans to go that far. But I'm wondering if he's planning to escalate the attacks to the point where his lawyers could argue, not withstanding the principle that a defendant shouldn't be able to force recusal by his bad conduct, that it wouldn't be humanly possible for the judge to set aside his concern for his daughter in ruling on Trump's case.
KKKlayman's tactic of suing a judge he didn't like then demanding the judge recuse because KKKlayman's suit would inevitably create bias or the appearance of impropriety never worked, did it?
And if the Trump attorneys squeal that their client's harassment caused problems, despite his being warned in this case and in others to knock it off, doesn't that invite a charge for criminal contempt? And such a charge could be supported be the attorneys' own descriptions of how Trump's acts were contemptuous? Lock him up!
In particular, Trump argued New York law demands recusal where the judge knows that their spouse or a person “known by the judge to be within the sixth degree of relationship to either of them … has an interest that could be substantially affected by the proceeding.”
That would seem to require an awful lot of recusin' ...
Isn’t the theory that everyone in the entire world is separated by only 6 degrees of separation?
In particular, Trump argued New York law demands recusal where the judge knows that their spouse or a person “known by the judge to be within the sixth degree of relationship to either of them … has an interest that could be substantially affected by the proceeding.”
That would seem to require an awful lot of recusin' ...
Isn’t the theory that everyone in the entire world is separated by only 6 degrees of separation?
Yep! That’s a lot of recusing!
Degrees of relationship is NOT degrees of separation!
For 2 people, count from each up to their most recent common ancestor (by blood or marriage) and add the numbers.
So 1 for you and a parent, 2 for you and a brother, sister or grandparent.
And 6 for you and a great-great-great-great-grandparent, a second cousin or a first cousin twice removed.
Donnie going after the Judge’s daughter to get the judges reclusion is such clear contempt for the court that he should have to be held to account for it in the judge’s court.
The number of lefty lawyer talking heads out there saying that it's perfectly fine to attack Merchon and his daughter is astounding; well, they don't say that, they just say they don't think Merchon will change the order, or hold fuckhead accountable for his attacks.
Philly Boondoggle
Degrees of relationship is NOT degrees of separation!
