SCt orders admin to facilitate return of wrongly deported Maryland man
- Thread starter BradStevens
- Start date
If this is true, the attorney should be fired. I don’t know about the other lawyers here, but I would never repeat a conversation with a client to the court.
Asked why the US couldn’t simply ask for Abrego Garcia’s return, Reuveni said, “The first thing I did when I got this case on my desk is ask my clients the same question,” adding that he did not get a direct answer.
Agreed. But the money is less concentrated and doesn’t directly go to the senators benefit.
Not really, but he didn't break confidentiality anyway. It's not a breach to simply say you didn't get an answer.
Huh? He was putting daylight between himself and the client/government. That’s verboten . His sole duty is to represent the government.
Huh? You said he broke confidentiality. I said he didn't. I don't know what this daylight complaint has to do with any of that.
Open your eyes. There’s genius all around. Messi 2011-2014. Taylor swift 10 minute live version of all too well. Lonesome dove. Confederacy of dunces. Border trilogy. Frank bascombe series. Angela’s ashes. Vanderpump rules scandoval
Both are true. He broke confidentiality (client silence or obfuscation is irrelevant ) and by doing that he clearly implied a separation from the clients position.
Absolutely. A lawyer must not discuss client communications with the court. The lawyer is not part of the client decision making process.
Attention, officer (above you) on deck! Stand tall, shut the hell up and listen.
"Bring him back" is not how the Supreme court spelled "FACILITATE".
You are now approved for shore leave and I don't care if we are 1,000 miles off shore. Get off my boat now, for willfully spreading total bullshit!
SWIM for it swabby!
I heard that 13 members had to have an episiotomy to simply pass the first book.
Is that true?
tooot toooot.. if it floats like a boat and smells like a quack, either way, You are relieved. tooot toooot.
Need to reread this. Probably been 25 years….For the uninitiated the greatest letter ever written
The Ignatian Approach To The Essay
My young heir was cloistered in his bedchamber last evening working on an essay about a book he did not like, written by an author he disdains. I took the textwww.theamericanconservative.com
Please confine your correspondence to orders only is probably my favorite sentence I’ve ever read
Wasn't the court asking why their order wasn't carried out? I get a person could refuse to answer. Does the government have that same right? In a way it seems strange the government can refuse to answer in a legal dispute. But I guess if the government can make a 5th plea, the court could find contempt since there is no evidence the government tried to fulfill the order?
Not only did Reunevi needlessly blow the privilege, his hamfisted answer to the judge’s question was well beneath the standard of care. He told the judge that was also the first question he had, he asked his client, and he didn’t get a direct answer.. That’s not good lawyering. That’s not even mediocre lawyering. He needs to have told his client that “exact point is the heart of the hearing and I can’t stand there holding my dick when I’m asked the question. We’ve got to work through this and give the court an answer.”
It isn't attorney-client privilege to say your client hasn't gotten back to you because you aren't disclosing A/C conversations. Nothing disclosed and it isn't confidential. Of course the attorney has an ethical obligation to answer truthfully and not permit his or her client to commit fraud or knowing lie. The lawyer isn't the problem--all eyes watching this case and there is a frigging order that says tell me what you did. The problem is the Justice Department screwed up and won't correct its mistakes.
Strongly disagree. The attorney reported that was the first question he thought of, so he asked his client, and the client did not give a direct answer. That is a client communication.
The only proper and most truthful answer is “ your honor, I don’t know why.”
Well then I get out the baseball bat and beat up the client until I get some cooperation. I call that client control.
So if a judge asks you to do something, you can tell him to go to a very warm place? That typically isn't how it is on TV.No. But that wouldn’t stop a judge from so ordering.
But that very warm place is sort of home to lawyers, so it probably is much less of an insult.
That’s an improvement over Transgender Visibility Day of last Easter.You really think our President is trying to avoid divisions?
You could have just said, "yeah, that's not normal" or "that is certainly not a uniting statement" or something along those lines. You are doing the "MAGA two step," which is to do a whatabout.
Context tho. It’s always relevant bc that was the alternative. Had it been Shapiro etc. not so much. But walz. Mercy. Coh is right
Because a message of inclusion to LGBT is just so awful.
Trump only knows how to be divisive and his defenders only know how to defend and yabbut for it
Bc it’s stupid and front and center with everything the administration did and why it got curb stomped
Dems should never lose. Gross incompetence and stupidity is the only path
