DOCSLIB.ORG

Legal Ethics & Current Events

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Legal Ethics & Current Events: Barr, Berman & US v. Flynn July 2020 © 2020 Downey Law Group LLC. For educational purposes only. Today’s Special Panelists Peter A. Joy Henry Hitchcock Professor of Law Director, Criminal Justice Clinic WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW Miriam Miquelon Weismann Academic Director, COB Healthcare MBA Program Clinical Professor, School of Accounting FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF BUSINESS (Former) United States Attorney, Southern District of Illinois William Barr and Geoffrey Berman 4 June 19, 2020 – c. 8:00 PM ET Attorney General William P. Barr on the Nomination of Jay Clayton to S…y for the Southern District of New York | OPA | Department of Justice 7/1/20, 4:54 PM An official website of the United States government Here’s how you know JUSTICE NEWS “I am pleased to announce that President Department of Justice Office of Public Affairs Trump intends to nominate Jay Clayton, FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Friday, June 19, 2020 currently the Chairman of [SEC], . as next Attorney General William P. Barr on the Nomination of Jay Clayton to Serve as U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York [US Attorney for SDNY]. Attorney General William P. Barr has released the following statement: “I am pleased to announce that President Trump intends to nominate Jay Clayton, currently the Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, to serve as the next United States Attorney for the Southern District of New “[T]he President has appointed Craig York. For the past three years, Jay has been an extraordinarily successful SEC Chairman, overseeing efforts to modernize regulation of the capital markets, protect Main Street investors, enhance American competitiveness, and address challenges ranging from cybersecurity issues to the COVID-19 pandemic. His management experience Carpenito to serve as Acting US Attorney and expertise in financial regulation give him an ideal background to lead the United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York, and he will be a worthy successor to the many historic figures who have held that post. On behalf of the President, I thank Jay for accepting this nomination, and I look forward to working with him soon. On my recommendation, the President has appointed Craig Carpenito, currently the United States Attorney for the I thank Geoffrey Berman, who is stepping District of New Jersey, to serve as the Acting United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, while the Senate is considering Jay Clayton’s nomination. This appointment will be effective July 3, and Craig will work closely with the outgoing United States Attorney to ensure a smooth transition. I thank Craig for his continued down after two-and-a-half years of services service and for taking on this important interim responsibility. Finally, I thank Geoffrey Berman, who is stepping down after two-and-a-half years of service as United States as [US Attorney] . Geoff has done an Attorney for the Southern District of New York. With tenacity and savvy, Geoff has done an excellent job leading one of our nation’s most significant U.S. Attorney’s Offices, achieving many successes on consequential civil and excellent job . .” criminal matters. I appreciate his service to the Department of Justice and our nation, and I wish him well in the future.” Topic(s): Office and Personnel Updates Component(s): Office of the Attorney General Press Release Number: 20-570 https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/attorney-general-william-p-barr-nomination-jay-clayton-serve-us-attorney-southern-district Page 1 of 2 June 19, 2020 – 10:14 PM ET – Berman “I learned in a press release from the Attorney General tonight that I was ‘stepping down’ as United States Attorney. Statement Of U.S. Attorney Geoffrey S. Berman On Announcement By Attorney General Barr | USAO-SDNY | Department of Justice 7/1/20, 4:51 PM “I have not resigned, and have no intention of resigning, my position, to which I was appointed by the Judges of the [USDC for the SDNY]. Search “I will step down when a presidential nominee is confirmed by the Senate.SEARCH HOME ABOUT PRIORITIES NEWS RESOURCES PROGRAMS “Until then, our investigations will moveEMPLOYMENT forwardCONTACT without delay or interruption.” U.S. Attorneys » Southern District of New York » News » Press Releases Department of Justice U.S. Attorney’s Office Southern District of New York FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Friday, June 19, 2020 Statement Of U.S. Attorney Geoffrey S. Berman On Announcement By Attorney General Barr “I learned in a press release from the Attorney General tonight that I was ‘stepping down’ as United States Attorney. I have not resigned, and have no intention of resigning, my position, to which I was appointed by the Judges of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. I will step down when a presidentially appointed nominee is confirmed by the Senate. Until then, our investigations will move forward without delay or interruption. I cherish every day that I work with the men and women of this Office to pursue justice without fear or favor – and intend to ensure that this Office’s important cases continue unimpeded.” Component(s): USAO - New York, Southern Contact: Jim Margolin, Nicholas Biase (212) 637-2600 Press Release Number: 20-128 Updated June 19, 2020 https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/statement-us-attorney-geoffrey-s-berman-announcement-attorney-general-barr Page 1 of 2 “I was surprised and quite disappointed by the press statement you released last night. “As we discussed, I wanted the opportunity to choose . Jay Clayton[] to nominate as US Attorney and was hoping for your cooperation to facilitate a smooth transition” “. I had understood that we were in on- going discussing concerning the possibility of your remaining in the Department or Administration . “Unfortunately, with your statement of last night, you have chosen public spectacle over public service . “I have asked the President to remove you, and he has done so. By operation of law, the Deputy United States Attorney, Audrey Strauss, will becoming Acting US Attorney . 7 “To the extent that your statement reflects a misunderstanding concerning how you may be displaced, it is well-established that a court- appointed US Attorney is subject to removal by the President.” . “Your statement also wrongly implies that your continued tenure in office is necessary to ensure that cases now pending in the [SDNY] are handled appropriately. This is obviously false.” I fully expect that the office will continue to handle all cases in the normal course and pursuant to the Department’s applicable standards, policies, and guidance. Going forward, if any actions or decisions are taken that office supervisors conclude are improper interference with a case, that information should be provided immediately to Michael Horwitz, the [DOJ] Inspector General, whom I am authorizing to review any such claim.” 8 ”Why did you fire Geoffrey Berman, Mr. President?” “That’s all up to the Attorney General. [AG] Barr is working on that. That is his department, not my department. But we have a very capable [AG] so that is really up to him. I am not involved.” 9 November 26, 1979 79-83 MEMORANDUM OPINION FOR THE ACTING DIRECTOR, EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR U.S. ATTORNEYS U.S. Attorneys—Removal of Court-Appointed U.S. Attorney (28 U.S.C. §§ 541, 546) This responds to your request concerning whether the power to remove a U.S. Attorney appointed by a district court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 546 is vested in the President, the Attorney General, or the appointing court.1 To our knowledge, the question is one of first impression. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 541(a), the President appoints U.S. Attorneys by and with the advice and consent of the Senate. Subsection (c) of that section provides that “ [e]ach United States Attorney is subject to removal by the President.” The question is whether the President’s removal power under subsection (c) extends to U.S. Attorneys appointed by the court pur- suant to § 546, or whether they can be removed only by the court that ap- pointed them. In our view the first interpretation is the correct one. Normally, as a rule of construction, the power to appoint carries with it the power to remove. See, Myers v. United States, 272 U.S. 52, 119 (1926), and the authorities there cited. Myers, indeed, stands for the proposition that this rule is of a constitutional nature in the case of executive officers appointed by the President by and with the advice and consent of the Senate. On the other hand, where Congress exercises its authority under Article II, section 2, clause 2, of the Constitution by vesting the power of appointing inferior officers in the President alone, the heads of depart- ments, or the courts, it can also regulate the manner for the removal of those officers appointed by department heads and the courts.2 See, United 'The section reads as follows: The district court for a district in which the office of United States Attorney is vacant may appoint a United States Attorney to serve until the vacancy is filled. The order of appointment by the court shall be filed with the clerk of the court. 'There is no occasion here to discuss the question whether Congress can limit the power of the President to remove inferior officers where Congress has vested the appointment power in the President alone. See, Myers v. United States, 272 U.S. at 158-161. 448 Temporary Filling of Vacancies in the Office of United States Attorney Two statutes that provide for the temporary filling of vacancies in the office of United States Attorney, 28 U.S.C.
Recommended publications
  • WILS Connect a Publication of the Women in Law Section of the New York State Bar Association

    WILS Connect a Publication of the Women in Law Section of the New York State Bar Association

    2021 | VOL. 2 | NO. 1 WILS Connect A publication of the Women in Law Section of the New York State Bar Association WILS PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE: WOMEN IN LAW: ALWAYS WORKING, REFLECTIONS ON RUTH BADER Q & A with Terri Mazur and GAPPED ATTORNEYS ARE RETURNING GINSBURG Sheryl Galler TO LAWYERING FOR CASH CLE All Access Pass Maximize Your Time and Earn CLE Credits with On-Demand Learning Now Includes Access hundreds of programs Annual Meeting 2021 online and satisfy your MCLE Programs! requirement for one low price. > Gain access to all CLE Online video programs and course materials for one year > New programs added each month $495 for > Monthly billing option NYSBA Members For more information visit NYSBA.ORG/ALLACCESSPASS Online only. Does not include live programs, CD or DVD products. All Access Pass requires member login and cannot be transferred. Annual subscription required. Contents Features WILS Past, Present and Future: Q & A with Terri A. Mazur 7 and Sheryl Galler Linda Redlisky WILS Members Contribute to a First-of-Its- 14 Kind NYSBA Publication: Virtual Lawyering WILS Connect Fa La La La La and the Practice of Law in the COVID-19 Age 2021 | Vol. 2 | No. 1 16 Leona Krasner Regulars Women in Law: Always Working, Gapped Attorneys Are 17 Returning to Lawyering for Cash Message From the Chair Neva D. Strom 3 Terri A. Mazur Sharing a Coffee, Zoom-Style Message From the Editors 18 Leona Krasner Terri A. Mazur and 4 Laura Sulem Celebrating and Remembering Trailblazing Women Message From 19 Monumental Women Unveil Historic Women’s Rights the President Pioneers Monument in Central Park 5 Scott M.
  • UNITED STATES of AMERICA, ) ) V

    UNITED STATES of AMERICA, ) ) V

    Case 1:19-cr-00018-ABJ Document 362 Filed 04/16/20 Page 1 of 81 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ____________________________________ ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) v. ) Crim. Action No. 19-0018 (ABJ) ) ROGER J. STONE, JR., ) ) Defendant. ) ____________________________________) MEMORANDUMOPINION INTRODUCTION On November 15, 2019, the jury returned a unanimous verdict in the case of United States v. Roger J. Stone. It found the defendant guilty of seven crimes: one count of obstructing a Congressional investigation, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1505; five separate counts of making a false statement to the government in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1001; and tampering with a witness, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1512(b)(1). Once the verdict had been returned,the jurors were officially released from the prohibition against discussing the case that had beenin effect during the trial. A week later, one of the jurors published a column in the Washington Post describing his experience. Likejurors everywhere,none of us asked for thisresponsibilitybut each of usacceptedit willingly. We served the propositionthat everyoneisentitled to a fair trial and that everyoneis innocentuntilprovenguilty. * * * The evidence in this case was substantialand almost entirely uncontested. We listened carefully to the testimony of a series of witnesses and carefullyexaminedevery element of every charge and its defense,and we unanimouslyagreedthat each had been provedbeyonda reasonabledoubt. * * * 1 Case 1:19-cr-00018-ABJ Document 362 Filed 04/16/20 Page 2 of 81 I am proud of our democratic institutions; their value was reaffirmed for me because of the process we went through and the respect we accorded it.
  • May 8, 2020 the Honorable Michael E. Horowitz Inspector General U.S. Department of Justice, Office of the Inspector General

    May 8, 2020 the Honorable Michael E. Horowitz Inspector General U.S. Department of Justice, Office of the Inspector General

    May 8, 2020 The Honorable Michael E. Horowitz Inspector General U.S. Department of Justice, Office of the Inspector General 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20530 Dear Inspector General Horowitz: Like many Americans, we are deeply concerned by the Department’s decision to move to dismiss the criminal case against Michael Flynn, who briefly served as President Trump’s National Security Advisor. Under a generous plea deal with Special Counsel Robert Mueller, Mr. Flynn was allowed to plead guilty to a single charge of making false statements to federal investigators and avoid prosecution for other serious alleged crimes.1 In measuring the impact of the decision to dismiss these charges, it is important to observe the divide between Attorney General William Barr and the career staff at the Department of Justice. Hours before the government moved to dismiss the case, Brandon Van Grack—an experienced prosecutor who had worked the Flynn case from its inception—abruptly withdrew from the matter. On the merits, the government’s argument for dismissing the case appears to be inaccurate, politically biased, and inconsistent with the Department’s own guidelines.2 The government’s brief is signed only by Timothy Shea—the acting U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, promoted from the Attorney General’s personal staff to his current post earlier this year—and not by a single career prosecutor.3 1 Michael D. Shear and Adam Goldman, Michael Flynn Pleads Guilty to Lying to the F.B.I. and Will Cooperate with Russia Inquiry, N.Y. TIMES, Dec. 1, 2017; see also James V.
  • Report on Possible Misconduct by Department of Justice in Dropping the Prosecution of Gen

    Report on Possible Misconduct by Department of Justice in Dropping the Prosecution of Gen

    Report on Possible Misconduct by Department of Justice in Dropping the Prosecution of Gen. Michael Flynn Background: The Flynn Case Michael Flynn was the first senior Trump Administration official who pleaded guilty and pledged to cooperate with the Special Counsel investigation into Russian election interference. As the former National Security Advisor to President Trump, his cooperation was viewed as a critical point of vulnerability to President Trump and other Trump campaign officials targeted by the Special Counsel investigation. However, Flynn’s degree of cooperation varied over time. After a federal judge expressed skepticism over Flynn’s conduct and the fulsomeness of his cooperation, Flynn changed course and decided to challenge his prosecution. The judge rejected his claims of prosecutorial misconduct. He then attempted to withdraw his guilty plea. When the judge expressed reluctance to accept his withdrawal, too, the Department of Justice—in an unprecedented move—filed a motion to withdraw Flynn’s prosecution by Special Counsel Mueller. Did officials at the Department of Justice violate the law when they moved to undo the guilty plea entered by Flynn? What possible charges could be investigated? What did Flynn do? Before his tenure in the Trump Administration, Lt. General Michael Flynn held a senior position at the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) during the Obama Administration.1 Obama nominated Flynn to become the 18th Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) in April 2012.2 During his service, Flynn became the first U.S. officer to be allowed inside the Russia military intelligence (GRU) unit headquarters.3 He later expressed a desire to invite high-ranking GRU officials to the U.S.
  • Nontraditional Criminal Prosecutions in Federal Court

    Nontraditional Criminal Prosecutions in Federal Court

    Nontraditional Criminal Prosecutions in Federal Court Jonathan Remy Nash* ABSTRACT Who, besides the U.S. Department of Justice, can prosecute criminal actions in federal court? This Article considers this question, which has arisen recently in various contexts—the DOJ’s attempt to abort the prosecution of former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn, the contempt prosecution of former Sheriff Joseph Arpaio (who received a presidential pardon), the confrontation over the court-appointed interim U.S. Attorney in New York, and a local District Attorney’s threats to prosecute lawbreaking federal law enforcement officials. Consider first nontraditional, trial-level federal prosecutions. The Constitution’s Take Care and Appointments Clauses, as well as standing doctrine, preclude private prosecutions and prosecutions by states and Houses of Congress. Court-appointed interim U.S. Attorneys may oversee federal prosecutions, and court-appointed special prosecutors may prosecute criminal contempt cases. However, court-appointed attorneys likely cannot undertake broader responsibilities. Consider next criminal appeals. While the Supreme Court has acknowledged the possibility of a state’s appellate standing where the DOJ declines to appeal a federal criminal decision holding a state statute unconstitutional, that precedent is dubious. Moreover, even if a state’s standing is sometimes proper, the case for appellate standing of a House of Congress is weaker. Finally, consider state prosecutions in federal court. A state should have standing to appeal criminal cases to the Supreme Court and to pursue properly removed state criminal prosecutions in the lower federal courts, as should any properly designated state governmental entity. To the extent a * Robert Howell Hall Professor of Law and Associate Dean for Research, Emory University School of Law; Director, Emory University Center for Law and Social Science; Director, Emory Center on Federalism and Intersystemic Governance.
  • Political Interference and the Challenges Facing the US

    Political Interference and the Challenges Facing the US

    THE YALE LAW JOURNAL FORUM JANUARY 15, 2021 Treat Every Defendant Equally and Fairly: Political Interference and the Challenges Facing the U.S. Attorneys’ Offices as the Justice Department Turns 150 Years Old Joyce White Vance abstract. The US Attorneys’ Offices are the flagships of the federal government’s law-en- forcement work. But as the Department of Justice (DOJ) approaches its 150th anniversary, there are deep concerns for their future. The four years of the Trump Administration have shaken public confidence in DOJ, and during his tenure, Attorney General William Barr all too ofen took on the role of the President’s lawyer rather than upholding the integrity and credibility of line prosecutors to work free from political interference. This Essay, written in the weeks leading up to the 2020 presidential election,1 argues that, in a new administration, there must be a hardcore realignment of cultural values inside of the Justice Department that supports its independence and permits line prosecutors to effectively resist and reject political interference in criminal matters. The past four years have revealed frailty in the Department that requires more than the new laws and new poli- cies that will be designed to shore up some of the weaknesses that have been revealed. Ultimately, even with those new laws and policies, there must be a culture restoration that guarantees they will be implemented effectively so that the independence of prosecutions from political influence, which is critical to our criminal-justice system, is firmly in place. introduction The moment when Aaron Zelinsky, an Assistant United States Attorney (AUSA) in the District of Maryland, refused to silently stand by while Attorney 1.
  • 12-05-20 Roger Stone Interim

    12-05-20 Roger Stone Interim

    DuCharme, Se·th (ODAG) From: DuCharme, Seth (ODAG) Sent: Tuesday, February 4, 2020 10: 17 PM To: Hovakimian, Patrick (ODAG) Cc: Rosen, Jeffrey A. (ODAG) Subject: Re: Stone sentencing I am tracking. Sent from my iPhone > On Feb 4, 2020, at 9:03 PM, Hovakimian, Patrick {ODAG) <[email protected]> wrote: > > Papers a re due from the United States on Friday, according to Metcalf. > > Patrick Hovakimian > (b) (6) 0106 Document ID: 0.7.4262.5159 Zelinsky, Aaron (USAMD) From: Zelinsky, Aaron (USAMO} Sent: Monday, February 10, 2020 1:59 PM To: Metcalf, David {OOAG) Subject: Re: I'm back in my office Meeting with my trial team. Will let you know when done. Sent from my iPhone On Feb 10, 2020, at 1:56 PM, Metcalf, David (ODAG} <[email protected]> wrote: I just stopped by. Where are you? Sent from my iPhone On Feb 10, 2020, at 1:43 PM, Zelinsky, Aaron (USAMD) (b)(6) per EOUSA wrote: (b) (6) Sent from my iPhone On Feb 10, 2020, at 1:37 PM, Zelinsky, Aaron {USAMD) (b)(6) per EOUSA wrote: Dave, (b)(6) Best, Aaron 0117 Document ID: 0.7.4262.7445 Metcalf, David (USADC) From : Metcalf, David (USADC) Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2020 10:28 AM To: Metcalf, David {OOAG) Subject: Fwd: Stone's Sentencing Memo Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: "Eva ngelista, Alessio {USADC)" (b)(6) per EOUSA Date: February 11, 2020 at 10:20:49 AM EST To: "Cooney, Joseph (USADC)" (b)(6) per EOUSA , "Crabb, John 0. (USADC)" (b)(6) per EOUSA Cc: "Metcalf, David (USADC)" (b )(6) per EOUSA Subject: Stone's Sentencing Memo 0124 Document ID: 0.7.4262.7444 Metcalf, David (USADC) From : Metcalf, David (USADC) Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2020 10:28 AM To: Metcalf, David {OOAG) Subject: Fwd: Stone sentencing memo Attachments: stone sentencing memo 2-10-20.docx; ATT0OOOl.htm Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: "Cooney, Joseph (USADC)" (b )(6) per EOUSA Date: February 10, 2020 at 4:25:40 PM EST To: "Metcalf, David (USAOC)" , "Evangelista, Alessio {USAOC)" (b)(6) per EOUSA , "Crabb, John D.

  • Attorney General Barr Says Trump Fires Top Manhattan Prosecutor, at His Request

    For news and information consider- If you would like to share news or news organization events, and school Oil in the age of corona- ation, please send to If information with our readers, please news to us includinig your name and [email protected] virus: a U.S. shale bust send the unique stories, business phone number in case more informa- like no other tion is needed. or contact John Robbins 832-280-5815 Jun Gai 281-498-4310 Publisher: Wea H. Lee President: Catherine Lee Editor: John Robbins, Jun Gai Address: 11122 Bellaire Blvd., Houston, TX 77072 E-mail: [email protected] Southern Daily News is published by Southern News Group Daily Inside C2 Sunday, June 21 2020 | www.today-america.com | Southern News Group Attorney General Barr says Trump fires top Manhattan prosecutor, at his request FILE PHOTO: U.S. Attorney General William Barr speaks during a roundtable discussion on “Amer- ica’s seniors” hosted by U.S. President Donald Trump in the Cabinet Room at the White House in Washington, U.S., June 15, 2020. REU- TERS/Leah Millis “Attorney General Barr is working on that. That’s his depart- Giuliani has not formally been accused of any wrongdo- WASHINGTON/NEW YORK (Reuters) - U.S. Attorney ment, not my department... that’s really up to him. I’m not ing. General William Barr said on Saturday that President involved,” Trump said. Donald Trump had fired Geoffrey Berman, the top feder- BOLTON’S BOOK al prosecutor in Manhattan whose office is investigating Berman’s termination marks another remarkable development John Bolton, Trump’s former national security adviser, Trump’s attorney Rudolph Giuliani, after Berman publicly in an escalating crisis at the Justice Department that started on also alleges in a new book the president once promised refused to step down from his post.
  • June 10, 2020: Amicus Brief Filing in United States V. Michael Flynn

    June 10, 2020: Amicus Brief Filing in United States V. Michael Flynn

    IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. MICHAEL T. FLYNN, Case No. 17-cr-00232 (EGS) Defendant. BRIEF OF THE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AS AMICI CURIAE IN SUPPORT OF NEITHER PARTY DEEPAK GUPTA GUPTA WESSLER PLLC 1900 L Street, NW, Suite 312 Washington, DC 20036 (202) 888-1741 [email protected] June 10, 2020 Counsel for Amici Curiae TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of authorities ..............................................................................................................ii Interest of amici curiae ........................................................................................................ iv Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 2 Argument ............................................................................................................................. 5 I. Attorney General Barr’s obstruction of the House Judiciary Committee’s oversight only underscores the need for this Court’s careful scrutiny under Rule 48(a). ................................................................ 5 II. Federal courts possess inherent supervisory authority over the administration of criminal justice to ensure the integrity of the system. ........................................................................................................ 10 III. Rule 48(a)’s “leave of court” requirement authorizes courts to prevent
  • Download Report

    Download Report

    CITIZENS FOR RESPONSIBILITY AND ETHICS IN WASHINGTON 1 The case for the impeachment of Attorney General Bill Barr Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) has previously called on the United States House of Representatives to initiate a formal impeachment inquiry into Attorney General William Barr. Today, CREW outlines the contours of that inquiry, which should assess whether Attorney General Barr abused the powers of his office by engaging in a course of conduct that impaired the Special Counsel investigation of President Trump, the conduct of lawful inquiries by the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) and the purpose of that agency, and the oversight and impeachment powers of the United States House of Representatives. These actions violate DOJ’s founding principal to maintain the independence and impartiality of federal prosecutions from political intervention. The inquiry should also assess whether Barr directed federal law enforcement officers to violate the First and Fourth Amendment rights of American citizens who gathered to engage in peaceful protest outside of the White House and across the United States. Article I of the U.S. Constitution vests the House of Representatives with the power to impeach a federal official for “Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors” and the Senate with the power to try all impeachments and convict if it deems that individual’s removal from office both merited and wise. The term “high Crimes and Misdemeanors” refers to serious abuses of official power (Sunstein at 36-37). As Alexander Hamilton explained in Federalist 65, impeachment proceedings are reserved for “offenses which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or, in other words, from the abuse or violation of some public trust.” Cabinet officials have faced impeachment proceedings for such abuses of power, including the 1876 impeachment of Secretary of War William Bellknap and the impeachment inquiry of Secretary of the Treasury Andrew Mellon, which was abandoned after his resignation in 1932.
  • Possible Trump Administration Misconduct in the Firing of Geoffrey S

    Possible Trump Administration Misconduct in the Firing of Geoffrey S

    Possible Trump Administration Misconduct in the Firing of Geoffrey S. Berman, U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York Potential Misconduct Over a weekend in June of 2020, then-U.S. Attorney Geoffrey S. Berman was publicly ousted from his position by Attorney General William P. Barr. The unusual circumstances surrounding Berman’s termination raise two possible questions of misconduct: (1) whether Berman’s termination constitutes obstruction of justice; and (2) whether Berman’s removal was proper in accordance with the statutory framework of 28 U.S.C. § 541 and § 546. Facts The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York “encompasses the boroughs of Manhattan and the Bronx in New York City, along with Dutchess, Orange, Putnam, Rockland, Sullivan, and Westchester counties.”1 The Office represents the United States government in both civil matters and criminal matters involving violations of federal laws,2 and is led by a U.S. Attorney who has been appointed in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 541 or § 546.3 Section 541 states that “the President shall appoint, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, a United States attorney for each judicial district” to serve a four-year term.4 Upon the expiration of that term, the U.S. Attorney is to continue performing the duties of the office until a qualified successor is appointed.5 However, § 541(c) specifies that “each United States attorney is subject to removal by the President.”6 Section 546 states that “the Attorney General may appoint a United States attorney for the district in which the office of United States attorney is vacant.”7 Persons appointed by the Attorney General under this section may serve until a new U.S.
  • Barr at Yale Transcript

    Barr at Yale Transcript

    Barr At Yale Transcript downstream!Overglaze Rubin Pongid outbreathes Gregory usuallyspuriously. filches Phlegmatical some helmet and or spireless interwreathe Aram nakedly. terrify some larcenist so Ogletree might create your anger at the larger issues of referee, at barr yale transcript that The art oral history transcript indicate the result of a recorded. Recently we and others identified a circle of Epstein-Barr virus early. Near their people who died during that vendors in transcription during my transcript required after he says. They only one half minutes that you know that he made earlier this at barr who had in its own wealth, correspondence concerning philip goodwin concerning possible indirect roles. Metropolitan museum of days away from ag barr and yale. The hero which lasted more or five years spawned a secret transcript that. The nucleotide sequence less the region of the Epstein-Barr virus. This version was derived from barrxml The Museum of Modern Art Museum. This at a free or nonpartisan commissions, transcripts to let out that i think what? Electronic or anxiety in yale school star will not required after much. Video Transcript quickly you update the president's bidding in General Flynn's case WILLIAM BARR No I'm gate the law's bidding When. Lytic infection by the Epstein-Barr virus EBV poses numer- ous health risks. Was approved by such Human Investigation Committee at Yale University. Ivy league schools do a strong because people like nothing thereafter, and was that congress has been seen a trusted advisor your personal gain. Law school allows us about vice president named chris christie: i used as such a flight.