Robert Loeb is a partner in Orrick, Herrington and Sutcliffe's Supreme Court and Appellate Litigation practice. The former Acting Deputy Director of the Civil Division Appellate Staff at the U.S. Department of Justice, he has handled hundreds of cases before the court of appeals and the Supreme Court. While at DOJ, he served as Special Appellate Counsel for National Security and International Law matters. Posts here express the views of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the firm, or its clients. This post is for general informational purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal advice.
Subscribe to this Lawfare contributor via RSS.
As Quinta Jurecic reported Friday, in Jaber v. United States, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C.
President Trump’s alleged blocking of members of the public on Twitter on what appear to be viewpoint-based considerations, preventing them from reading his tweets and responding to them, raises serious constitutional issues.
Today, there is much pondering about the strength or weakness of the courts’ latest rulings on Trump's revised immigration Executive Order and prognosticating about what may happen on appeal or when the issue finally reaches the Supreme Court. There are also complaints from those in Trump’s camp that the courts are unduly tying the Executive’s hands from protecting this country from visa and refugee applicants that pose a potential national security risk.
It looks like the DOJ is going to invoke the state secrets privilege after all in the latest CIA torture suit brought by former detainees, marking the first time that the Trump administration will use this powerful legal tool. But in an interesting variation on the typical post-9/11 state secrets cases, this time it is the defendants rather than the plaintiffs who seek to introduce information that the government alleges may harm national security.
A few observations on the future significance of the recent Al-Nashiri ruling.
Yesterday, a civil action was filed in the D.C. federal district court by Larry Klayman, of Freedom Watch, against Democratic Party presidential nominee, Hillary Rodham Clinton. Mr. Klayman represents: Pat Smith, mother of Sean Smith, an American U.S. Foreign Service member and Information Programs Officer, U.S. Consulate General, U.S.
The Nashiri saga has picked up steadily in recent weeks. We now know that in response to last June’s DC Circuit opinion alerting the Administration to constitutional Appointments Clause concerns regarding the military judges serving on the Court of Military Commissions Review, President Obama nominated two military judges—Air Force Colonel Martin T. Mitchell and Navy Captain Donald C. King—on March 14, 2016. The Senate confirmed both on April 28.