Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe Trump administration knows that the Supreme Court won't let a Cabinet secretary be dragged into court to testify 🧵
Cristian Farias
@cristianfarias.com
Why theyre doing this:
The Trump administration knows that the Supreme Court wont let a Cabinet secretary be dragged into court to testify. (She may file an affidavit, as shes already done in this litigation.)
So the only recourse here is to pierce executive and/or attorney-client privilege.
Im not a betting man, but my guess is that James Boasberg has been around the block long enough that hes going to go for it. May even appoint outside counsel.
One possibility: Because his inquiry relates to criminal contempt, he may invoke the crime-fraud exception to attorney-client privilege.
Another one:
James Boasberg has been around the block long enough that he doesnt need to pierce attorney-client privilege. All he needs is testimony from everyone except the top brass, including the general counsel, to get at the nature of what lower-level employees communicated up the chain.
Remember: The lawyers who received the judges orders in the courtroom on March 15, 2025, only had one job: Telling their clients about the order and the need to comply.
If everyone down the chain understood that unambiguously, then you dont need top brass or the privileged advice they got.
More fundamentally:
Judge Boasberg may be trying to set precedent in the D.C. Circuit for how judges ought to deal with an administration openly defying court ordersand exploring the tools available to the judiciary when the Executive branch wont prosecute a criminal referral against itself.
@cristianfarias.com
Why theyre doing this:
The Trump administration knows that the Supreme Court wont let a Cabinet secretary be dragged into court to testify. (She may file an affidavit, as shes already done in this litigation.)
So the only recourse here is to pierce executive and/or attorney-client privilege.
Im not a betting man, but my guess is that James Boasberg has been around the block long enough that hes going to go for it. May even appoint outside counsel.
One possibility: Because his inquiry relates to criminal contempt, he may invoke the crime-fraud exception to attorney-client privilege.
Another one:
James Boasberg has been around the block long enough that he doesnt need to pierce attorney-client privilege. All he needs is testimony from everyone except the top brass, including the general counsel, to get at the nature of what lower-level employees communicated up the chain.
Remember: The lawyers who received the judges orders in the courtroom on March 15, 2025, only had one job: Telling their clients about the order and the need to comply.
If everyone down the chain understood that unambiguously, then you dont need top brass or the privileged advice they got.
More fundamentally:
Judge Boasberg may be trying to set precedent in the D.C. Circuit for how judges ought to deal with an administration openly defying court ordersand exploring the tools available to the judiciary when the Executive branch wont prosecute a criminal referral against itself.
Why theyâre doing this:
— Cristian Farias (@cristianfarias.com) 2025-11-26T11:55:32.266Z
The Trump administration knows that the Supreme Court wonât let a Cabinet secretary be dragged into court to testify. (She may file an affidavit, as sheâs already done in this litigation.)
So the only recourse here is to pierce executive and/or attorney-client privilege.
This is not throwing Kristi Noem under the bus. This is a designed to insulate from judicial scrutiny any and all high-level communications about how the decision to defy a court order was made.
— Cristian Farias (@cristianfarias.com) 2025-11-26T13:03:04.393Z
The Trump administration is trying to shut this inquiry down.
2 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
The Trump administration knows that the Supreme Court won't let a Cabinet secretary be dragged into court to testify 🧵 (Original Post)
In It to Win It
Wednesday
OP
tanyev
(48,421 posts)1. Helpful fashion tip:
How to Tell if a Shirt is Too Small
3. Horizontal Lines or Wrinkles
Horizontal lines or wrinkles can appear around the bust, waist, or back when a shirt is too tight. These lines indicate that the fabric is being stretched beyond its intended capacity.
https://bacciinc.com/blogs/women-dress/how-to-tell-if-a-shirt-is-too-small-for-women?srsltid=AfmBOop0kYW_JN1tmAhEOFL6iTicCXgefprkbZQT0PlGCIwL-uJtAuo8
3. Horizontal Lines or Wrinkles
Horizontal lines or wrinkles can appear around the bust, waist, or back when a shirt is too tight. These lines indicate that the fabric is being stretched beyond its intended capacity.
https://bacciinc.com/blogs/women-dress/how-to-tell-if-a-shirt-is-too-small-for-women?srsltid=AfmBOop0kYW_JN1tmAhEOFL6iTicCXgefprkbZQT0PlGCIwL-uJtAuo8
Youre welcome, Kristi.
spanone
(140,804 posts)2. She is a despicable hack.
I'll stop there.