Judge slams ACLU attorney for improper conduct in deportation case

The Trump administration had mixed results in the courts with regard to its ambitious crackdown on illegal immigration, but in a case currently under the purview of a federal judge in Texas, the president notched something of a win.

At issue in the aforementioned case was the status of a habeas petition involving suspected Tren de Aragua gang members President Donald Trump wants deported, and according to U.S. District Judge James Wesley Hendrix, an attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) — arguing against the men’s removal — engaged in improper communication with the court via voicemail,” as the Washington Examiner reports.

Questionable voicemail scrutinized

Judge James Wesley Hendrix took aim at ACLU lawyer Lee Gelernt over a voicemail message the attorney left on the chambers’ line after the close of business on April 17.

In the message, Gelernt requested emergency relief intended to halt the transfer of the alleged gang members from detention in Texas to Venezuela under the Alien Enemies Act.

However, Gelernt made that after-hours request without notifying Trump administration lawyers, a move that was ethically questionable and which swiftly drew the judge’s ire.

Hendrix issues rebuke

In a sternly worded Monday court order, Hendrix weighed in on Gelernt’s effort to obtain a temporary restraining order via an “off the record, ex parte, and in the evening” message left in chambers, something he described as a breach of established standards.

Hendrix began by stating the well-accepted proposition that “as a general rule, substantive ex parte communications with the Court are prohibited,” citing precedent stating that such communications “may be fraught with peril, and…judges must take great care with respect to ex parte communications even in the most exigent of circumstances.”

He goes on to cite the Code of Conduct for United States Judges, which says that those in his position should not “permit or consider ex parte communications ‘or consider other communications concerning a pending or impending matter that are made outside the presence of the parties or their lawyers.’”

The only permissible exception to that rule, Hendrix writes is when “the ex parte communication does not address substantive matters and the judge reasonably believes that no party will gain a procedural, substantive, or tactical advantage as a result of the ex parte communication.”

Hendrix then declared, “The ex parte communication from attorney Lee Gelernt, counsel for the petitioners, does not meet this narrow exception,” adding that the communications went “directly to the substance over the petitioners’ first motion for a temporary restraining order and the subsequent motion for the same relief.”

Mission dubiously accomplished

Despite Hendrix’s declaration that the court would “not permit or consider the voicemail” and “did not return Mr. Gelernt’s phone call” or “otherwise have any ex parte communications with the petitioners or their counsel,” the ACLU lawyer still went on to notch a win that prevented — at least for now — the men’s deportation.

After Hendrix denied the ACLU’s initial motion, its lawyer filed another emergency motion, quickly deeming a lack of immediate action on it to be a denial, which prompted an appeal straight to the U.S. Supreme Court.

After the 5^th Circuit Court of Appeals determined that it did not have jurisdiction due to Hendrix’s inaction on the motion up to that point, the nation’s highest court — in the middle of the night — put a temporary halt on the deportations.

Joined by Justice Clarence Thomas, Justice Samuel Alito dissented from the majority’s decision, writing, “[T]he Court issued unprecedented and legally questionable relief without giving the lower courts a chance to rule, without hearing from the opposing party, within eight hours of receiving the application, with dubious factual support for its order, and without providing any explanation for its order,” but whether the ACLU lawyer will be subject to any sanctions whatsoever for his unethical tactics, only time will tell.

The post Judge slams ACLU attorney for improper conduct in deportation case appeared first on Conservative Institute.