Again, we see more of this -- these very formal, pointedly tactical, pre-telegraphed written lines of questioning, and perhaps more importantly -- exclusions of irrelevant arguments -- by the able Judge (his second batch, thus far) strongly suggest Trump is going to lose on the set of pronouncements that purported to price-gouge the asylum and work visa application process.
Do read it all, just filed last night in Oakland's federal district courthouse. This is going to go very badly, for Trump.
. . . .Defendants dispute Plaintiffs’ procedural argument that they failed to disclose the thinking and data behind the Final Rule. Is it Defendants’ position that their thinking is that USCIS’s financial situation required an increase in revenue to be able to ensure recovery of all direct and indirect costs associated with adjudication and naturalization services? If so, what are Defendants’ best citations to the record to support where the data for that thinking is located? When Defendants respond to this question, they shall cite to page citations in the record and clearly articulate the data points in those citations that support their position. . . .
That is the sitting judge, on Trump's case, taking the time to line out his questions, for the public, on the record, in writing, and in advance -- so that he may immediately strike from the record, any purported "answer" from Team Trump's lawyers. . . that is non-responsive, question-begging or otherwise. . . circuitous. Onward, on a perfect fall Friday. . . smiling.
नमस्ते
No comments:
Post a Comment