Contempt

 

Wasn’t there a Brigitte Bardot movie by that name?

Now Judge Boasberg has further ignored the Supreme Court, e.g., that he has no jurisdiction in the case of the deportation of Abrego Garcia, and stated that the Trump administration should be prosecuted for contempt.

Reminds one of the Mae West line after she was hauled into court on obscenity charges. Her entourage accompanied her and was essentially having a party in the courtroom. The judge pounded his gavel and said, “Miss West, are you trying to show contempt for this court?”

Whereupon Mae West batted her eyelashes and said sweetly, “Oh, no, your honor. I’m doing my best to conceal it.”

So for the Trump administration.

This also reminds one of the events in New Orleans after the battle. Jackson had maintained martial law, as the British had not departed despite having been decimated in the battle. No official word of peace had arrived. Jackson refused to lift martial law until the British left the area entirely. A state senator wrote a newspaper article objecting to the continuing martial law, and Jackson arrested him for inciting mutiny. A federal judge, Dominick Hall of the New Orleans Circuit Court, demanded that the senator be released; Jackson arrested the judge and then threw the judge out of the city. When the British finally departed, and word was received of the Treaty of Ghent, Jackson lifted martial law. The senator and the judge returned to town. The judge then hauled Jackson into court on contempt charges. Jackson appeared in court and was fined $1,000 by the judge for contempt. Jackson paid the fine and walked out of the courthouse. A cheering crowd carried him on their shoulders back to his hotel.

Ultimately, in 1844, the federal government refunded the money following an act initiated by John Tyler. Jackson was criticized repeatedly for his decision to maintain martial law after the battle. He never apologized.

At least that’s what I am told.

The historian James Parton once observed, “…the maintaining of martial law in New Orleans two months too long, which many condemn, and, I think, should condemn; yet most of the citizens of the United States will concur in the wish that when next a [foreign] army lands upon American soil, there may be a Jackson to meet them at the landing place….”

Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 15 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Percival Thatcher
    Percival
    @Percival

    The danger that had led to the declaration of martial law was still present.

    • #1
  2. Susan Quinn Member
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    That judge was as arrogant as Boasberg! Is it normal for these judges to overrate their importance and power? Nah…

    • #2
  3. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    I can see why Jackson would do what he did, at the end.  But frankly I would have been more satisfied if Jackson had arrested and jailed the judge for attempted blackmail (or something) of a US official.

    • #3
  4. ctlaw Coolidge
    ctlaw
    @ctlaw

    Nanocelt TheContrarian: Now Judge Boasberg has further ignored the Supreme Court, eg, that he has no jurisdiction in the case of the deportation of Abrego Garcia, and stated that the Trump administration should be prosecuted for contempt

    I think you are conflating the D MD Garcia case:

    https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69777799/abrego-garcia-v-noem/?filed_after=&filed_before=&entry_gte=&entry_lte=&order_by=desc

    with the D DC TdA case:

    https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69741724/jgg-v-trump/?filed_after=&filed_before=&entry_gte=&entry_lte=&order_by=desc

    https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.278436/gov.uscourts.dcd.278436.81.0_5.pdf

    https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.278436/gov.uscourts.dcd.278436.80.0_2.pdf

    • #4
  5. Nanocelt TheContrarian Member
    Nanocelt TheContrarian
    @NanoceltTheContrarian

    kedavis (View Comment):

    I can see why Jackson would do what he did, at the end. But frankly I would have been more satisfied if Jackson had arrested and jailed the judge for attempted blackmail (or something) of a US official.

    Even Old Hickory could be a little bit of a squish at times. 

    • #5
  6. Nanocelt TheContrarian Member
    Nanocelt TheContrarian
    @NanoceltTheContrarian

    ctlaw (View Comment):

    Nanocelt TheContrarian: Now Judge Boasberg has further ignored the Supreme Court, eg, that he has no jurisdiction in the case of the deportation of Abrego Garcia, and stated that the Trump administration should be prosecuted for contempt

    I think you are conflating the D MD Garcia case:

    https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69777799/abrego-garcia-v-noem/?filed_after=&filed_before=&entry_gte=&entry_lte=&order_by=desc

    with the D DC TdA case:

    https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69741724/jgg-v-trump/?filed_after=&filed_before=&entry_gte=&entry_lte=&order_by=desc

    https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.278436/gov.uscourts.dcd.278436.81.0_5.pdf

    https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.278436/gov.uscourts.dcd.278436.80.0_2.pdf

    So Boasberg’s contempt citation did not refer to Abrego Garcia? Just to the Tren de Aragua gang members that were on the same flight? If so then I completely conflated those cases. 

    • #6
  7. Stad Coolidge
    Stad
    @Stad

    kedavis (View Comment):

    I can see why Jackson would do what he did, at the end. But frankly I would have been more satisfied if Jackson had arrested and jailed the judge for attempted blackmail (or something) of a US official.

    And what about excessive fines?  $1000 was a lot of money back then . . .

    • #7
  8. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    Two questions:

    1) Will this be prosecuted by the Trump DoJ?

    2) Does the President’s “absolute” pardon power come into play? 

     

    • #8
  9. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Django (View Comment):

    Two questions:

    1) Will this be prosecuted by the Trump DoJ?

    2) Does the President’s “absolute” pardon power come into play?

     

    Some of it would be federal crimes, some of it seem like state crimes and could not be pardoned by Trump.  Although maybe Hochul and/or the gov of Virginia might do it.  But they couldn’t pardon her for the federal beefs.

    • #9
  10. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Django (View Comment):

    Two questions:

    1) Will this be prosecuted by the Trump DoJ?

    2) Does the President’s “absolute” pardon power come into play?

     

    Some of it would be federal crimes, some of it seem like state crimes and could not be pardoned by Trump. Although maybe Hochul and/or the gov of Virginia might do it. But they couldn’t pardon her for the federal beefs.

    Not James’ problems. I was thinking about Boasberg threatening to hold members of Trump’s administration in contempt. 

    Now Judge Boasberg has further ignored the Supreme Court, e.g., that he has no jurisdiction in the case of the deportation of Abrego Garcia, and stated that the Trump administration should be prosecuted for contempt.

    • #10
  11. Steve C. Member
    Steve C.
    @user_531302

    If you peel away the emotional argumentation, most of these cases will eventually be resolved in the President’s favor. 

    • #11
  12. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    Steve C. (View Comment):

    If you peel away the emotional argumentation, most of these cases will eventually be resolved in the President’s favor.

    I am convinced that many judges rule on emotion rather than the Constitution. 

    • #12
  13. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Django (View Comment):

    Steve C. (View Comment):

    If you peel away the emotional argumentation, most of these cases will eventually be resolved in the President’s favor.

    I am convinced that many judges rule on emotion rather than the Constitution.

    These aren’t typical criminal cases, but there’s been some analysis showing that in many civilian cases, the single best predictor of outcome is whether the judge was hungry.

    • #13
  14. Steve C. Member
    Steve C.
    @user_531302

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Django (View Comment):

    Steve C. (View Comment):

    If you peel away the emotional argumentation, most of these cases will eventually be resolved in the President’s favor.

    I am convinced that many judges rule on emotion rather than the Constitution.

    These aren’t typical criminal cases, but there’s been some analysis showing that in many civilian cases, the single best predictor of outcome is whether the judge was hungry.

    I hope nothing more than an ironic just so story.

    Correlation, causation etc.

    • #14
  15. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Steve C. (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Django (View Comment):

    Steve C. (View Comment):

    If you peel away the emotional argumentation, most of these cases will eventually be resolved in the President’s favor.

    I am convinced that many judges rule on emotion rather than the Constitution.

    These aren’t typical criminal cases, but there’s been some analysis showing that in many civilian cases, the single best predictor of outcome is whether the judge was hungry.

    I hope nothing more than an ironic just so story.

    Correlation, causation etc.

    Why would judges who make bad decisions, just happen to be hungry when they do so?

    “I need to make a bad decision here, so I shouldn’t eat anything first.”

    • #15
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.