Trump PANICS as 9,000 DOJ Lawyers QUIT…JUDGES ARE FURIOUS!!!!

Terror, incompetence, cover up. Federal judges are saying that the Trump regime exhibits this cycle all across the country in the efforts to round up migrants and in some cases, US citizens, throw them in detention centers. The cruelty, the incompetence, the cover up over and over again. We know now that there have been thousands, between eight and 10,000 DOJ lawyers, staff, assistants,

who have been either quitting, pushed out, fired, whatever. They can't even keep up with the basic paperwork there and direct targeting of these migrants and terrorizing them intentionally or recklessly or negligently. The courts are saying these are human lives that you are screwing with. And when the court makes an order on, say, a habeas petition to release a migrant who has been unlawfully detained, you're supposed to follow that order. And you're not supposed to, after the court says, what the hell are you doing, leave somebody out in the freezing cold without their license, their phones, calling family members,

where people can quite literally freeze to death. We saw an example of that. Again, the cruelty, the terrorizing, the coverup, the incompetence, all mixed together with the death of a Burmese refugee, Nural Amin Shah Alam, 56 year old, blind and disabled, detained by Border Patrol in Buffalo

last year, thrown in a detention center, released in the past week or so, I think it was on February 19th or so, right around that time period, without any notification of the person's family or without giving this individual any of their belongings in freezing cold Buffalo weather. Then this individual went missing and then their body was discovered in the past week or so frozen to death, frozen to death in Buffalo. And the Border Patrol issued a statement and said, well, we did everything right. We brought this individual into a restaurant and we allowed them to go into a nice warm location.

We were never told that there was family members. We did everything right. Well, then local reporting got the surveillance footage, and it turned out the restaurant they claim they let him into was locked. They just left this man, they left Nurul Amin Shah Alam, this disabled blind person, outside to freeze to death.

And he froze to death. And then they covered it up. How many times is this happening over and over again that we don't even know about? A federal judge in Minnesota on Friday said that the Trump regime has been terrorizing refugees, violating the promise America made to them when they fled persecution at home by locking them up illegally. You had a federal judge say the following,

when the clock strikes 12 a.m. on the 366th day after a refugee was lawfully admitted to the United States, according to the government. Eight USC section 1159 gives the department of Homeland security officials the power to arrest and detain that refugee with no limits on the length of detention.

But because section 1159A provides no such power, the court will issue a preliminary injunction in joining defendants from arresting or detaining refugees in Minnesota on the basis that have not yet been adjusted to lawful permanent resident status, which by law cannot occur until one year has passed. The court will not allow federal authorities

to use a new and erroneous statutory interpretation to terrorize refugees who immigrated to this country under the promise that they would be welcomed and allowed to live in peace, far from the persecution that they fled. Or take a look at the ruling by a federal judge, Judge Zaid Qureshi, out of the federal court in New Jersey, saying that the Trump regime continued to violate

court orders and immigration cases, and says he's prepared to haul in the DOJ and DHS officials under oath. The federal judge, Quarishi, says the following, arguably worse, while the procedures for the government's immigration arrest and detention

may have had the initial appearance of negligence, they have since slid downward into manifest recklessness. Immigrants are swept up into custody and shifted repeatedly around the country without warning or explanation. Efforts by the court in this district to protect detainees rights have been largely frustrated by the government. Earlier this month, the US Attorney's Office conceded to violating 72 orders

issued in immigration habeas cases in this district alone. That number by itself is objectively appalling, but at least one judge has indicated that that number was underreported. The US Attorney's Office has couched these violations as unintentional.

Sadly, the well-deserved credibility once attached to the Distinguished Office is now a presumption that has, quote, undeniably eroded. The government's continued actions after being called to task can now only be deemed intentional. The undersigned will not stand idly by and allow this intentional misconduct to go on. It ends now. And then we heard just very similar language. This court will continue to do whichever is required to protect the rule of law, including if necessary, moving to criminal contempt.

One way or another, ice will comply with court orders. And here's what Judge Schliltz says about the district court in Minnesota hearing cases like this. This too, this representation by the federal prosecutors appear to be untrue. Attached as Appendix B is a list of additional cases in which ICE has violated court orders, most of which violations occurred after the entry of the January 28th order.

Despite the United States Attorney's insurances have redoubled efforts that have led to considerable improvements. Appendix B documents 113 additional orders that ICE has violated in 77 additional cases. Again, above and beyond 97 orders that ICE violated in the 66 cases identified in Appendix A. If anything is beyond the pale, it is ICE's continued violation of the orders of this course. Increasingly, this court has had to resort to using the threat of civil contempt to force ICE to comply with orders. The court is not aware of another occasion in history of the United States in which a federal court has had to threaten contempt again and again to force the United States government to comply with court orders. I want to bring in Harry Lippman from the Talking Feds YouTube channel, Talking Feds Substack. Harry, while all of that's going on, I could point to

every federal judge basically in this country who are writing orders like that. You have Trump regime officials and influencers and former Trump regime officials like Alina Haba, who used to be the United States attorney in New Jersey, attacking Judge Quirici and reposting, breaking Islamic Judge Quirici faces calls to be impeached. And she reposts that and says, I know a thing or two about that judge. So the stochastic terrorism that then exists by these MAGA influencers at the behest of Trump's inner circle, What do you make of it all, Harry?

Where to start, Ben, as you were, I wanna move quickly to the two judges and you're right, they are echoed now around the country and the very well-earned over generations of credibility of the Department of Justice has now been squandered,

a matter that's tragic to former DOJ types like myself, but also eventually really harms the public and the interest in public safety. But I was sort of just listening to you recite some of these anecdotes and more. The blind man in Buffalo, the one from Judge Carisi has to do with someone they just picked up who'd been here for 10 years with a family. And you know, you close your eyes

and it sounds like the kind of report organizations like Amnesty International issue about brutal regimes around the country. And this happening in the United States, happening even with a sort of measure of bluster and defiance from ICE and US officials is really,

for starters, makes you wanna puke. All right, but then there are other systemic things going on. It's really true that once, twice, a dozen, you could ascribe to negligence over work government lawyers especially because so many of them

have been basically conscripted from other places because there's a huge drain of people who have quit or been fired from the offices in New Jersey and Minnesota that normally do these cases. But you've got two things that are happening again and again. The first, and it's what you were just referring to

with Judge Carisi, there's a, that legal part that you were reading has to do with a provision that says, if someone's an applicant for admission, you don't have to give them rights. They show up at the border, I wanna apply,

you have, the US can do a special kinda, sorry, not today, put them back on a plane. And the Trump administration completely abandoning all the interpretations of past administrations. And this is where they've been kicked in the teeth again and again and again by the judiciary and they're just ignoring it. They want to say that anyone who's

here essentially without legal status is an applicant for admission. So this woman that judge Carisi was talking about been here five years and married with a child Applicant for admission will never applied but that's that's their pretty damn far-fetched interpretation and you've talked before about one very conservative court in

the Fifth Circuit that has green-lighted it. But that's something that's going on and it cannot be that ICE just hasn't gotten word. At a very high level, they're saying, essentially, screw the courts. And they want to because if you're ICE, the whole game, Ben, is you get someone and you put them in these detention centers. And we've only had little snapshots

of what life is like in there. Those snapshots are frigging horrifying. They're out of, you know, Bosch paintings sleeping next to overflowing toilets and way too many people and way too long. That's a scandal that's waiting to be revealed.

But what you want to do is grab them, have them, and don't let them get before a judge. And that totally advances their worst kinds of instincts, and that's what's going on with this effort to totally reframe what applicant for admission means. One other recurrent trope that's happening again and again is and and we've had now documentation of this where essentially in Chicago other places they again and again have some have a peaceful

protester who they don't like how they're acting, they arrest them and charge them with obstruction, put them in this hell hole and then release it. All these arrests of peaceful protesters have resulted in zero convictions, a couple of cases still, and we're talking over a hundred instances of people who

are you know there's a few that are still pending but that again that's not that's not just overworked bureaucracy not able to keep its its its head you know on straight that's a policy and that's a policy of abuse. It's not nearly as bad as leaving people in the cold in Buffalo and killing them, but it's pretty goddamn unconstitutional in its own stead. So I just wanna say, even the judges are saying,

I am at the end of my rope and it's a long rope, but they go from, you've tumbled from negligence to recklessness. In some of these ways, they are in intentional scofflaw, unconstitutional conduct. And the least of it, although the one that rankles me again and again, is they've completely squandered the sort of virtue and credibility that the Department of Justice always has had because they've been there to do the right thing.

The United States wins its case when justice is done in its courts. No longer the United States wins its case when Trump's cruel, let's call it what it is, immigration initiative is furthered one way or another. You know, I guess it's impressive that the Department of Justice built up such a reputation over time with federal courts

that it took this long to destroy it. That federal, I mean, I guess saying it somewhat sarcastically, that federal judges were willing to give the benefit of the doubt even when the doubt became clear, even when the clarity became beyond clarity. And they were like, OK, you're just a piece of crap. And it's over. It's over. It's been broken.

But they gave it 14 months for it to really get there, despite violation after violation. These federal judges, again, from both parties, like it reminds me also of the US standing in the world that the post World War Two US world order was such that even our allies were like, OK, but come on, you'll come around. You'll come around. And really right around that same period of time, kind of 14 months or so later, they're all like, all right, we're building new trade relationships and new partnerships and, and you're out and you could do your social media posting and

say, you want to invade Greenland or there's like, you're going to do that. We're out. We'll have, you know, we'll, we'll, we'll still deal with you. I mean, you exist, US, like we're gonna have to acknowledge that you're still this large economic force and you've got the biggest military in mankind, but we can't rely on you and treat you serious.

It just, it took both around 14 months, Harry, to kind of fully sink in and it's happening at the same time in 2026. It's so true. And look, there was a doctrine, right? The presumption of regularity and AUSAs in court

were used to getting their ears boxed by judges who really held them to higher standards. But the flip side of that is when they were doing right and that's what they were doing almost all the time, showing up for work and doing right, they had that tailwind and it is now all gone. And since you mentioned, I know for the

Midas Mighty, this is a little outside our normal discourse, but your point about people around the world, it's not just, oh can we count on you? The consequences for the US's abandonment of its normal moral stature and persuasion on world safety, on foreign policy. I really recommend a great article by Bob Kagan in the Current Atlantic that basically foretells just bedlam and wars because the United States has also Seated its position on in the moral high ground in the world and foreign policy It is both of these things there. They're

Alarming they are huge that they manage as you say to degrade the position so long, but they're also friggin dangerous and bad for the American people in different ways, crime at home and safety abroad. Yeah, the presumption was a powerful one. I remember when you would go in and litigate against the DOJ.

It was the op, you know, you would be looked at, who are you? And you know, and don't get me wrong, law firms could build up good reputations in front of judges. But you did not get the presumption of regularity when you went against the DOJ. And their word was golden in front of the federal judge. Even if you thought that was unfair, that's just the way it was. And now it's changed. So that's

something we've been pointing out here for a long time. These are trends that we've been following the way a meteorologist might follow a storm and say, folks, it's becoming a hurricane. That's what we do here on these legal analysis breakdown. So make sure you all- And just very, very quickly,

though you have a guy like the chief judge in Minnesota says that first thing months ago. I don't know if I, you know, I asked you this and you didn't give it. In the old Department of Justice, that would be a fire drill that everyone would get it straight. Our credibility is on the line here. Not only haven't they gotten it straight, redoubled, redoubled, redoubled and redoubled until judges are saying this ends now. Man,

oh man, that it wasn't easy to do and they've really done it. Everybody, make sure you subscribe to Harry Litman's YouTube channel. It's called Talking Feds. Search Talking Feds right now. Thanks everybody for watching.

Oh, and Harry's got an event coming up with Governor Shapiro. Everybody look at the description below. We're gonna put the description of where you can find out more information. But Harry, what day is it?

It's gonna be great. It's March 14th, Saturday at seven. Still have time to go out Saturday night, but that first hour, hour and a half, we'll be talking to Governor Shapiro. And as long as we're touting something,

can I just say that so mighty are the mightiest mighty that Ben has now taped six interviews or five or six with different governors. I'm green with envy, taped six interviews or five or six with different governors. I'm green with envy, but look for that in the State of the State series coming up on Midas Mighty.