By Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon
BBC - Guardian UK - Honduras - ESPN
SDNY COURTHOUSE, Feb 22 – In case of E. Jean Carroll, argument on making the US a defendant seemed set to begin, back on October 21, 2020. DOJ lawyer Stephen Terrell, who asked to adjourn it since he was barred from U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York courthouse due to Virginia being on quarantine list, called in. Inner City Press live tweeted it, below.
Jump cut to February 22, 2022, when Trump's lawyers argued to amend their complaint to include new provisions of NYS' anti-SLAPP law. Judge Kaplan heard and spoke to the arguments; Inner City Press live tweeted here:
Judge Kaplan says courts have found it doesn't apply in Federal court, so might be futile.
Judge Kaplan: Where is that case you are citing from?
Trump's lawyer: The Eastern District.
Judge Kaplan: Last I checked, what I have on my wall gives me just as much say as that judge over there, doesn't it?
Trump's lawyer: I suppose it does, Your Honor.
Judge Kaplan: And why can't Ms. Carroll cite this anti-SLAPP law against Mr. Trump's counter-claim?
Trump's lawyer: She could. That's what litigation is all about. I'm not trying to get into the merits --
Judge Kaplan: Oh, I understand you're not trying to get into the merits.... This is a he said - she said case. Mr Trump says it didn't happen, and some other things. If Ms. Carroll prevails that it did happen, obviously there was a substantial basis. But she could lose and that could still be the case...
Trump's 2d lawyer: We're seeking to preserve our rights for our client. On attorneys' fees, it can't be futile if our client would be entitled to attorney's fees if wins at trial. Judge Kaplan: But it would be futile if the statute doesn't apply in Federal court
Judge Kaplan: Thank you I have your points [and will issue a ruling at a later date]. I have a deliberating jury and have to get back to them. [Inner City Press is covering that case too, US v. Johnson for Instagram threats to Sen Manchin, here
OBack on October 27, 2020 Judge Lewis A. Kaplan ruled, "the allegations have no relationship to the official business of the United States. To conclude otherwise would require the Court to adopt a view that virtually everything the president does is within the public interest by virtue of his office. The government has provided no support for that theory, and the Court rejects it as too expansive. The President of the United States is not an "employee of the Government" within the meaning of the relevant statutes.... Accordingly, the motion to substitute the United States in place of President Trump [Dkt. 3] is denied."
On December 10, 2020 Marc Kasowitz for Trump asked for a stay of all proceedings, arguing that the District Court is divested of jurisdiction during the appeals to the Second Circuit. "Moreover, the district court is divested of jurisdiction even '[w]hen qualified immunity is in issue' on appeal," citing Garcia v. Bloomberg, 11-cv-6957 (Rakoff).
Back on October 21, Judge Kaplan denied any postponement, and noted he "is not authorized to vary the existing restrictions on entry into the courtroom."
Judge Kaplan begins: I had an application to adjourn and I denied it. What do you want to do?
US: We elect to submit on the briefs, with no argument.
Ms. Kaplan: Jean drove some distance to be in court today. This is essentially a dispositive motion....
Ms Kaplan: There is no exception to sovereign immunity for intentional torts. We'd like a chance to further brief.
Judge Kaplan: I invoke the principle that new arguments in a reply brief will not be considered. Does the US agree? US: Yes.
Judge Kaplan: Matter is taken under submission. I'm sorry so many people were inconvenienced. Adjourned.
The case is (still) named Carroll v. Trump, 20-cv-7311 (Kaplan).
Then:
***
Your support means a lot. As little as $5 a month helps keep us going and grants you access to exclusive bonus material on our Patreon page. Click here to become a patron.
Feedback: Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
