Detentions
By ICE In Courthouses Argued Nov
1 Before SDNY Judge Nathan Now
Tried To Rakoff Case
By Matthew
Russell Lee, Exclusive,
Patreon
Honduras
- The
Source - The
Root - etc
SDNY COURTHOUSE,
Nov 1 – When the targeting and
arrest of non-citizens in and
around U.S. courthouses was
challenged under the First,
Fifth and Sixth Amendments to
the U.S. Constitution, the
U.S. Attorney for the Southern
District of New York has
responded that it is not
really a policy, that there
should be no discovery because
the motion to dismiss it will
make is so strong.
The
case, Doe
v. ICE,
was filed on
September 25.
The initial conference was
held before SDNY Judge Alison
J. Nathan on November 1
starting at 10 am. Inner City
Press live-tweeted it, as
it did recent
trials
involving
Tekashi
6ix9ine and
Honduras'
president's
brother
convicted of
drug
trafficking,
and as it will
the OneCoin /
US v. Scott
trial
beginning on
November 4:
Judge Nathan: I
think there's some difference
between the schedule Judge
Rakoff has you on than here...
And there are different claims
in that case.
Doe's lawyer
Jonathan I. Blackman: We think
we have quite a good chance of
defeating the motion to
dismiss.
Judge Nathan: You
have not yet moved for
preliminary injunctive relief.
Do you intend to? Doe's
lawyer: It depends on the
timing. It's mostly a legal
issue
Doe's lawyer
Blackman: It's really about
the courthouse arrest
directive. What's happened,
it's undisputed: a 17,000
percent increase in courthouse
arrests since the directive
came down
Doe's lawyer
Blackman: Our view of the
shape of the case is that
discovery would be relatively
limited. Document discovery
should go forward despite the
motion to dismiss.
AUSA
Rebecca R. Friedman: There is
no reason for discovery to
move forward because if Your
Honor rules for us, discovery
would be unnecessary. Judge
Rakoff --
Judge Nathan: He
has indicated a date he will
rule by, and a tight schedule
after that
Judge
Nathan: My inclination is to
put you on the same schedule
as you are in the Judge Rakoff
case. What he does may not
impact what I do... I haven't
even seen the motion to
dismiss yet.
AUSA
Friedman: We haven't seen any
discovery request yet. Judge
Nathan: If the case moves
forward before Judge Rakoff,
the government would bear much
of the same work on discovery.
AUSA: A delay is not
burdensome on plaintiffs (!)
Judge Nathan:
Just because the two cases
have been deemed unrelated for
one purpose doesn't mean there
won't be overlap in factual
discovery. Doe's Lawyer, Mr
Blackman: That seems sensible.
Doe's lawyer
Blackman: We would be happy
with Judge Rakoff's schedule,
it would make total sense.
Judge Nathan: The government
anticipate moving on standing,
right? AUSA Friedman: That's
right.
Doe's
Lawyer says Doe must have
standing: he is afraid to go
to Family Court for an order
of protection when his partner
is threatening to blow the
whistle on him to ICE
Doe's lawyer
Blackman: If this complaint
does not survive in full, it
will survive in some form.
AUSA Friedman:
one of the claims is being
brought only by organizations,
not Doe. To the extent there
are organizational standing
issues, that claim would be
[gone]
Doe's lawyer:
Judge Rakoff has said he'll
decide by December 3. And the
government's brief is due that
day...
Judge Nathan:
Judge Rakoff sometimes gives a
bottom line decision, we'll
just have to see...
And Judge
Nathan ruled: "Defendants'
motion to dismiss is due
December 2, 2019; Plaintiffs'
opposition is due December 23,
2019; and Defendants' reply is
due January 13, 2020. Oral
argument on the motion to
dismiss is hereby scheduled
for February 12, 2020 at 2
p.m. The Court also adopts
Plaintiffs' proposed case
management plan, which will be
entered separately. If the
motion to dismiss pending in State
of New York, et al. v. US.
Immigration and Customs
Enforcement, et al., l
9-cv-8876, is granted,
Defendants may renew their
motion to stay discovery in
this case within three days of
that grant."
And, "CIVIL CASE
MANAGEMENT PLAN AND SCHEDULING
ORDER: All parties do not
consent to conducting all
further proceedings before a
United States Magistrate
Judge, including motions and
trial pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
636(c). This case to not to be
tried to a jury. Deposition
due by 2/14/2020. Expert
Deposition due by 2/28/2020.
Fact Discovery due by
3/1/2020. Expert Discovery due
by 2/28/2020. Case Management
Conference set for 3/20/2020
at 03:00 PM before Judge
Alison J. Nathan. SO ORDERED."
Meanwhile, on the
morning of November 1 hours
before the argument Inner City
Press asked the United
Nations, its Secretary General
Antonio Guterres and others:
"November 1-3: On SDNY Federal
court here in the UN's (for
now) host city, what are the
comments and actions if any of
Guterres and separately
Melissa Fleming on the
November 1 court proceeding
Doe v ICE about arrests in and
around courthouses?" Even by 5
pm November 1, no answer at
all.
Inner City
Press will continue to cover
these cases. And these:
Racism in
federal law enforcement in the
Southern District of New York
was alleged and argued on
October 31, with five
defendants in shackles and
Inner City Press the only
media in the SDNY courtroom of
Judge Jed S. Rakoff.
Judge Rakoff asked lead
attorney Christopher Flood
whether the racial disparities
he and his colleague are
alleging are, in fact,
statistically significant.
Passed to Judge Rakoff via his
deputy was the declaration of
Profession Crystal S. Yang
asserting "the racial
composition of targeted
individuals in DEA
reverse-sting stash house
cases brought in the SDNY" for
the past ten years: "46
operations targeted 179
individuals of whom zero are
White, two are Asian and 177
are Latino or Black." This is
followed by regression
analysis.
Assistant US Attorney Domenic
Gentile, alone at the
prosecutor's table, doggedly
returned to these particular
defendants wearing face masks,
and having been recruited
through the lead defendant,
Flood's client.
Judge Rakoff said it was
interesting, but how was it
relevant? He committed to
issuing an order on Flood et
al's discovery motion by
November 12, if only in
bottom-line form, in advance
of a March 2020 trial. Inner
City Press will continue to
report on this case, and on
these issues.
To their
credit, the other defense
attorneys on the discovery
motion include Jennifer Luo,
Michael Tremonte, John Diaz,
Stephanie Carvlin, Xavier
Donaldson, Dawn Cardi, and the
omnipresent Calvin Scholar.
Google has
sued the United States in
response to a subpoena for
e-mail accounts and it has
asked to make its response
under seal. Inner City Press
first exclusively reported on
Google's lawsuit on October
22, here.
More on Patreon here.
On October 31 Inner City Press
was alone in the gallery of
the courtroom of Judge John G.
Koeltl of the U.S. District
Court for the Southern
District of New York when
Google and three Assistant
U.S. Attorneys including
Matthew Podolsky.
At first Judge Koeltl told
Google's lawyer, at the podium
to stop speaking and
disclosing, saying, "I think
we're done."
Then
as if on second thought -
Judge Koeltl has previously
ordered Inner City Press to leave
his courtroom during the
presentment of a John Doe
detainee with an Arabic
language interpreter, a case
that apparently still remains
entirely sealed - Judge Koeltl
said, Some filings are sealed
but the case docketed, it is
public. Indeed it
is.
Since Inner City
Press' exclusive real time
tweet of the case caption on
October 22, here,
when it was assigned to SDNY
Judge Paul A. Engelmayer - who
ordered
Inner City Press not to live
tweet a sentencing in his
courtroom in the Tekashi
6ix9ine proceeding it has live
tweeted the trial of - now the
case is before Judge Koetlt.
As first filed,
Google's lawyer Peter G.
Neiman of Wilmer Cutler
Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP
described it as a "motion to
vacate or modify nondisclosure
order pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 2705(b) on First
Amendment grounds."
On October 29, Judge Koeltl
granted Google's "Unopposed
Motion to Seal," and wrote
that "Google may file its
reply brief, and the motion to
seal the reply brief, under
seal."
The
October 31 proceeding, past 5
pm, was not listed on PACER
nor on the board in the lobby
of the SDNY courthouse at 500
Pearl Street. But Inner City
Press showed up, and heard
Google's lawyer say that U.S.
Attorney Geoffrey L. Berman's
ex parte submission
does not satisfy the
applicable standard.
The AUSA took to
the podium and cited without
more a "very important
interest," alluding to the
Nebraska Press Association
case while working or not
opposing the withholding of
information from Inner City
Press. At the proceeding's
abrupt end the genial court
reporter went back into Judge
Koeltl's robing room,
presumably on the matter of
sealing even this transcript.
We'll have more on this. More
on Patreon here.
Back on October
25 there was a Federal
criminal proceeding publicly
listed on PACER at 2:30
pm in the courtroom of
SDNY Judge Denise L. Cote.
Inner City Press
went to cover
it - and was immediately told
to leave the courtroom. Then
the door was locked.
When US Assistant US Attorneys
Maurene Comey and Christopher
Clore exited some 20 minutes
later, Inner City Press asked
them if they knew the basis
for excluding the Press. Ms.
Comey shook her head.
Inner City Press has since
exclusively reported: Maurene
Comey has only four cases
before Judge Cote. On only one
of the four is Christopher
Clore her co-chair AUSA: the
20 defendant Bronx MacBallas
case named from the initial
and lead defendant, US v.
Xavier Holman, 18-cr-41
(Cote).
But Holman
was already sentenced to 120
months. Keenan McFarland and
Sean Jones also got 120
months. Navone Dozier got 84
month. Jafari Jones and
Francisco Torres also got 84
months; Austin Morrishow got
60 months, described in a
sentencing submission as "one
of the gang's
'shooters.'" So who's
left?
Not listed
as "closed" are Bo Williams,
20 of 20, Deonte Morrison 15,
Nathaniel Fludd 7 and
Toshnelle Foster 2, who while
not sentenced has a sentencing
date in November.
Of these,
only Bo Williams does not have
an appearance by defense
lawyer, although Inner City
Press on October 25 observed
who his lawyer is.
Virtually
every filing
in
18-cr-41-DLC-20
from May
through
September 2019
is listed as
"Sealed
Document."
As
Inner City Press has explained
to judges, executive and
prosecutors, it has full
respect for any legitimate
sealing and / or safety
concern. But to simply order
the Press out of a Federal
courtroom without given a
reason does not comply with
the letter or spirit not only
of case law but of the
principles behind it. More on
Patreon, here.
And the US
Attorney's Office, so
solicitous to some, has not
even responded to Press
requests they put online their
exhibits in the US v.
Michael Jones case
before Judge Koeltl, for
example, a case where they
seek 20 years against an emo
rapper with bad luck with
heroin, while allowing another
in suburban Rockland County
off on 27 months for the same
conduct. Watch this site.
Inner City Press had, as it
exited as ordered without
asking any questions in order
not to be disruptive (or have
its other access for reporting
disrupted), asked Judge Cote's
courtroom deputy what the
basis of asking it to leave,
without the on the record
finding that are required by
applicable Second Circuit
Court of Appeals case law,
was.
The
Deputy said, I'll ask the
Judge if she wants to say. But
the Deputy did not re-emerge,
even after AUSA Comey left. To
their credit, staff of the
Office of the District
Executive when informed
arrived on the scene and,
using their key, went into the
abruptly locked
courtroom.
Minutes
later this explanation was
given: the proceeding involved
a cooperator. The AUSA had
either not sought or had not
obtained permission from "main
Justice" in Washington to
request the sealing of the
courtroom.
So the Judge, a former
prosecutor as others have
noted to Inner City Press - in
fact, the first woman to serve
as SDNY Criminal Division
Chief, to her credit - had
done it sua sponte.
She called the lawyers to a
sidebar moments after Inner
City Press entered the
courtroom, then emerged from
the sidebar to order the
courtroom sealed and the door
locked.
Inner City Press, in-house
media in the SDNY working from
front cubicle in the Press
Room has suggested, to
increase transparency, that
such proceedings be sealed in
advance, rather than on an ad
hoc basis when the press walks
into an open courtroom. That
was an opporunity to be heard,
in advance, would be possible.
It is also advocating for more
opportunities for real-time
reporting from the SDNY, as
recently on the #6ix9ine and
Honduras trials and in 10 days
on OneCoin / US v. Scott.
The responses have largely
been promising.
The
twist to the October 20
sealing of Judge Cote's
courtroom was that it was
partial: it was not only
the lawyers, court staff, and
defendant and the two U.S.
Marshals who remained inside.
So it was a selective sealing.
We hope to have more on this,
reporting with all due
respect, of course. No docket
number. Watch this site.
On a case we can,
we think, report on:
October 23 Inner
City Press exclusive: Asa
Saint Clair was questioned for
wire fraud by the US
authorities at 845 United
Nations Plaza last month, for
his involvement in a dubious
cyber-currency called Igobit,
issued through a UN-linked
"inter-governmental
organization" called the World
Sports Alliance.
Inner City Press has
previously reported on the
World Sports Alliance,
including here
and here and here,
on Burundi.
On October 23 Inner City Press
covering the SDNY was the only
media in the Magistrates Court
when Asa Saint Clair was
brought into the court in
shackles. He was arrested in
California trying to get on a
plane to Madagascar by way of
Paris. More on Patreon here.
Despite telling the government
he was making $50,000 a month,
he was given a publicly funded
Federal Defender lawyer, who
argued he should be
immediately released.
Magistrate
Judge Debra Freeman rejected
the AUSA's request to limit
his use of electronic devices,
and like the US Attorney's
Office made no connection to
the UN itself.
There is a pattern here: in
the Ng Lap Seng case, so
recently in the Second Circuit
Court of Appeals, Ng went to
jail but those he bribed in
the UN remain free and in
action. The same is true for
Patrick Ho of CEFC China
Energy, up to the level of
Secretary General Antonio
Guterres.
Even
in terms of fraudulent coins,
Inner City Press has exposed
and
asked the UN in writing
about the use of Guterres'
image to sell coins by former
UN ambassador of El Salvador Carlos
Garcia. He was
shown in the Ng Lap Seng case
to be helping with money
laundering by Francis Lorenzo,
still someone not sentenced by
SDNY and its AUSAs Richenthal
and Zolkind.
Nor did they ask
on UN official Meena Sur, whom
Inner City Press publicly
exposed as linked to now
SDNY-investigatived WSA, here.
And Garcia
continued his coin scam with
Guterres' image, and now WSA's
Saint Clair is about to be
bailed - even as his case
remained hours later sealed.
Inner City
Press will continue on these
cases. Watch this site.
***
Feedback: Editorial [at]
innercitypress.com
Box
20047, Dag Hammarskjold Station NY
NY 10017
Other, earlier Inner
City Press are listed here,
and some are available in the ProQuest
service, and now on Lexis-Nexis.
Copyright 2006-2019 Inner
City Press, Inc. To request reprint or
other permission, e-contact Editorial
[at] innercitypress.com for
|