Latest posts tagged with #dnj on Bluesky
Deleted my original comment, but NJ is also addressing ICE/USAO violations. At issue was a no transfer injunction, one of 17 recently violated. #DNJ
Judge Farbiarz crafts a narrow remedy requiring #ICE + #USAO-NJ to file declarations (proof of compliance).
Farbiarz warns criminal contempt is next.
RE: US v. Naviwala — the court will consider the major questions doctrine with respect “to whether the government has any authority to delegate the duties and powers of a U.S. Attorney while that office is and remains vacant.”
!!
#USAO #Naviwala #DNJ #postHabba #triumverate #Bondi #Blanche
This seems suspect, especially if Francey Hakes expects #DNJ (where the U.S. attorney’s office is already ruled by a triumvirate of unqualified non-PAS attorneys) to contribute to the jump teams.
I think it’s safe to say this isn’t what Congress intended when it set up 93 distinct offices. 👎
Feb 4). He also limited briefing to the parties; no amicus briefs. So it’s likely we’ll find out sooner than later whether the district court thinks the triumvirate acting as de facto U.S. attorney is valid.
Does DOJ wait for that before going to SCOTUS? I’ll have to sleep on it. Thoughts?
#DNJ
curious if anyone is covering this today; i was going to try to get there but schedule changed and im not in Newark now.
the case is U.S. v. Naviwala #2:24-cr-00099 (consolidated with U.S. v. Torres #2:24-cr-00378).
#USAO-NJ #DNJ #FVRA
![Case 2:24-cr-00099-MWB Document 299|
Filed 01/22/26 Page 1 of 4 PageD: 6982
U.S. Department of Justice
United States Attorney's Office
District of New Jersey
970 Broad Street 7 door
Newark, New Jersey 07102
January 22, 2026
Hon. Matthew W. Brann
Chief United States District Judge
U.S. Courthouse and Federal Office Building
240 West Third Street
Williamsport, PA 17701
Re:
United States v. Raheel Naviwala, Crim. No. 24-099
United States v. Daniel Torres, Crim. No. 24-378
Dear Chief Judge Brann:
Please accept this letter in lieu of a formal brief responding to the amicus curiae brief ("ACB") of the Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers of New Jersey.
The core problem with the amicus's position-and the defendants'-is their
presumption that the powers of a U.S Attorney are being divided. In fact, the Attorney General has delegated a subset of her own powers-powers involving functions that "the Constitution" does not "require" her to "personally perform [.]" Kennedy v. Braidwood Mgmt., Inc., 606 U.S. 748, 785 n.6 (2025). As the Government explained in its responsive brief ("RB"), even if Congress were to eliminate the office of U.S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey, the Attorney General would still have control over all litigation by the United States in the District and could delegate that control the same way she has here. RB19-20.
Furthermore, even if there were a Senate-confirmed or judicially appointed U.S.
Attorney in place, the Attorney General could order that person to report to three Main Justice attorneys having the same docket allocation that is in place here. Id.
The Attorney General's control over litigation in this District involving the United States does not depend in any way on the existence or identity of a U.S. Attorney.](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:j22jo3rt2jtdh2nbaemoprcf/bafkreid3nsopizojwa4ce2qndytfoueharr5ehfkmj6fswulm6qage5mra)
Case 2:24-cr-00099-MWB Document 299| Filed 01/22/26 Page 1 of 4 PageD: 6982 U.S. Department of Justice United States Attorney's Office District of New Jersey 970 Broad Street 7 door Newark, New Jersey 07102 January 22, 2026 Hon. Matthew W. Brann Chief United States District Judge U.S. Courthouse and Federal Office Building 240 West Third Street Williamsport, PA 17701 Re: United States v. Raheel Naviwala, Crim. No. 24-099 United States v. Daniel Torres, Crim. No. 24-378 Dear Chief Judge Brann: Please accept this letter in lieu of a formal brief responding to the amicus curiae brief ("ACB") of the Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers of New Jersey. The core problem with the amicus's position-and the defendants'-is their presumption that the powers of a U.S Attorney are being divided. In fact, the Attorney General has delegated a subset of her own powers-powers involving functions that "the Constitution" does not "require" her to "personally perform [.]" Kennedy v. Braidwood Mgmt., Inc., 606 U.S. 748, 785 n.6 (2025). As the Government explained in its responsive brief ("RB"), even if Congress were to eliminate the office of U.S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey, the Attorney General would still have control over all litigation by the United States in the District and could delegate that control the same way she has here. RB19-20. Furthermore, even if there were a Senate-confirmed or judicially appointed U.S. Attorney in place, the Attorney General could order that person to report to three Main Justice attorneys having the same docket allocation that is in place here. Id. The Attorney General's control over litigation in this District involving the United States does not depend in any way on the existence or identity of a U.S. Attorney.
The #ACDL-NJ filed its amicus brief in support of the criminal defendants seeking motions to dismiss their indictments on the basis that Bondi’s appointment of the NEW 3-man executive board acting as one U.S. attorney for the #DNJ is ALSO unlawful. The DOJ has filed its response. It’s unconvincing.
As you know, one of my hobbies is scrutinizing PJ Bondi’s unlawful U.S. attorney scheming; especially in #DNJ. Post-Habba, #CA3 Chief Judge Chagares again designated #MDPA Chief Judge Brann to hear challenges to Bondi’s latest #USAONJ framework.
Several defs argue the 3-man exec. board is unlawful.
⚖️More #USAttorney news: law.com updates on the tenuous situation in #NJ; in a shocking turn, lawyers don’t like Pamela Jo Bondi’s solution to replace the disqualified Habba with a 3-person executive board acting as one de facto US attorney. Lawyers wonder, who’s lawfully in charge? 🤔 #DNJ #USAO
Post Alina Habba ® @AlinaHabba X.com STATEMENT FROM ALINA HABBA, ACTING U.S. ATTORNEY AND SPECIAL ATTORNEY TO THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL For the past five years, I've fought for justice on behalf of the American people, and in my tenure under our great Attorney General Pam Bondi and Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, we made New Jersey safer. Camden had its first murder-free summer in 50 years. We drove down crime, took violent offenders off the streets, caught terrorists, and put away child predators. While I was focused on delivering real results, judges in my state took advantage of a flawed blue slip tradition and became weapons for the politicized left. For months, these judges stopped conducting trials and entering sentences, leaving violent criminals on the streets. They joined New Jersey senators, who care more about fighting President Trump than the well being of residents which they serve. For four years, I fought against lawfare aimed at President Trump and against politics infecting our justice system. What these obstructionists misunderstood is that my loyalty is not to politics, a title, or a ZIP code. It is to this great country. As a result of the Third Circuit's ruling, and to protect the stability and integrity of the office which I love, I have decided to step down in my role as the U.S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey. But do not mistake compliance for surrender. This decision will not weaken the Justice Department and it will not weaken me. My fight will now stretch across the country. As we wait for further review of the courts ruling, I will continue to serve the Department of Justice as the Senior Advisor to the Attorney General for U.S. Attorneys. Make no mistake, you can take the girl out of New Jersey, but you cannot take New Jersey out of the girl. -DECEMBER 8, 2025- 1:46 PM • 12/8/25 • 469K Views
“. . . you can take the girl out of New Jersey, but you cannot take New Jersey out of the girl.”
— Unknown; NJ High School Yearbook
✌️🇺🇸⚖️
#Habba #NJ #DNJ #NJUSAO
#RuleOfLaw #lawsky #USA #Bondi
#Acting #Interim #Vacancy #FVRA
#SpecialAttorney #BlueSlip #CA3 #PAS
#Reform #FederalVacancies
For context: the confirmation vote was at 6:18pm — *after* Chuck Grassley took to the Senate floor and made an example out of one of our own #DNJ judges to threaten any federal judge who dare makes a mistake using AI.
do I hate farmer Chuck? yes.
do I think it’s a legit threat? ALSO YES.
Who’s ready for the Alina Habba appeal before the Third Circuit tomorrow?!?!?
Me!! I am! It’s me! It’s finally here!
Abbe Lowell for appellees!
USA v. Giraud, Jr. et al
James A. Byrne Courthouse @ 11:00AM
Judges Restrepo, Smith & Fischer (Obama, GW Bush, GW Bush)
#CA3 #USANJ #DNJ #Habba
Judge Bissell 🫶 #DNJ #NJ
I missed this open letter from the Article III Coalition on Constitution Day
keepourrepublic.org/wp-content/u...
keepourrepublic.org/wp-content/u...
⚖️ NEW: United States v. Giraud, Nos. 25-2635 & 25-2636 (3d Cir. Aug. 19, 2025) — the government filed its opening brief in the Third Circuit appeal of the district court’s order disqualifying Alina Habba from acting as U.S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey.
#NJ #CA3 #Habba #NJUSA #DNJ
Case 2:25-cr-00436-MWB Document 67 Filed 08/19/25 Page 1 of 11 PagelD: 540 Krovatin Nau LLC ATTORNEYS AT LAW Gerald Krovatin Helen A. Nau* Also Admitted in NY* 60 Park Place, Suite 1100 Newark, New Jersey 07102 973-424-9777 Fax 973-424-9779 www.krovatin.com August 19, 2025 VIA ELECTRONIC FILING Hon. Matthew W. Brann, Chief Judge United States District Court Middle District of Pennsylvania Herman T. Schneebel Federal Bldg. & U.S. Courthouse 240 West Third Street, Suite 218 Williamsport, PA 17701 Re: United States v. Cesar Humberto Pina Crim. No. 25-436 Dear Chief Judge Brann: We write to address briefly an argument that the Government made for the first time in its "Post-Argument Brief" (ECF 66) ("Government Brief"), which was filed yesterday. In Section III of its Brief, pp. 11-14, the Government argues that even if the Court concludes that Ms. Habba cannot serve as U.S. Attorney in any capacity, "dismissal of the Pina Indictment is not proper for several reasons. Those issues were not the subject of any of the Court's questions at the hearing on August 15, 2025, nor did any of the parties address them in their arguments. With the Court's indulgence, we must address a critical point that the Government made for the first time in its supplemental brief. The Government argues that dismissal of an indictment would be appropriate if a Government violation "substantially influenced the grand jury's decision to indict," citing Bank of Nova Scotia v. United States, 487 U.S. 250, 256 (1988). The Govemment continued: Here, Ms. Habba did not present any evidence or the Indictment to the grand jury, nor did she attend those presentations to the grand jury. Nor does Pina identify any
Case 2:25-cr-00436-MWB Document 67 Filed 08/19/25 Page 2 of 11 PagelD: 541 Krovatin Nau LLC ATTORNEYS AT LAW Hon. Matthew W. Brann, Chief Judge August 19, 2025 Page 2 other way in which Ms. Habba's precise role in the USAO-NJ affected the Indictment's substance. Government Brief at 13. In an accompanying footnote 4, the Government further stated, "We are submitting directly to the Court ex parte the relevant grand jury transcript and internal documents showing which AUSAs reviewed and approved the Indictment." Id. Count Six of the Pina Indictment (ECF 44), which Ms. Habba signed, alleges that Mr. Pina bribed a public official in the City of Paterson, New Jersey. Prior to the return of the Indictment, Ms. Habba made public statements about her intention as U.S. Attorney to investigate several New Jersey public officials, including the Governor, the Attorney General and Sen. Booker's hometown of Newark, and she announced that she would specifically target the City of Paterson, stating, "I'm looking at you, Paterson" over the city's immigration policies.' True to her word, during Ms. Habba's tenure as U.S. Attorney, the United States has sued four (4) New Jersey cities, including Paterson, accusing them of obstructing federal immigration authorities.
Case 2:25-cr-00436-MWB Document 67 Filed 08/19/25 Page 3 of 11 PageID: 542 Krovatin Nau LLC ATTORNEYS AT LAW Hon. Matthew W. Brann, Chief Judge August 19, 2025 Page 3 prejudiced by the inclusion of a Habba-influenced Count Six in the Indictment, it would lend further weight to, and constitute an additional ground in support of, his motion to dismiss the Indictment. It is not Mr. Pina's intention to distract the Court's attention from the weighty issues about Ms. Habba's tenure as U.S. Attorney that the Court is already considering. However, the Government "opened the door" to this issue by including it for the first time in its Post-Argument Brief. We would be remiss if we did not respond in kind on behalf of Mr. Pina, certainly at the risk of some later argument that Mr. Pina waived this issue by not raising it now. Respectfully submitted, KROVATIN NAU LLC LOWELL & ASSOCIATES, PLLC DEMOCRACY DEFENDERS FUND s/ Norman L. Eisen Norman L. Eisen, Esq. Joshua Kolb, Esq. Cc: All Counsel via ECF
I missed this important addition to the US v. Pina docket. You love to see competent lawyering prevail over (this) DOJ lawyering (hopefully. . .)! Plus, this is the argument all of us would love to make.
Waiting patiently 🫠 on Chief Judge Brann’s important ruling on Habba’s appointment.
#DNJ
![Filed 08/18/25 Page 1 of 11 PagelD: 510
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
UNLOSIAN OF ANCKICA
: Crim. No. 25-436 (MCA)
CESAR HUMBERTO PINA
MR. PINA'S SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF IN FURTHER SUPPORT OF HIS MOTION TO DISMISS THE INDICTMENT AND TO ENJOIN ALINA HABBA FROM SUPERVISING HIS PROSECUTION!
Case 2:25-cr-00436-MWB Document 65 Filed 08/18/25 Page 2 of 11 PageID: 511/
Mr. Pina, by and through his counsel, submits this additional Supplemental
Brief to respond to a few issues raised at the August 15, 2025, hearing. (ECF 63.)
Al the August 15, 2025, hearing, the Government indicated that the issue of Ms. Habba's appointment is before this Court because "the District Court (Judges of New Jersey] precipitated this constitutional confrontation that did not need to happen." (8/15/25 Tr. at 15S:3-S.) It is not the judges who caused this crisis. This issue is actually before the Court because the President, through his Attorney General, has attempted to side-step the statutorily required "advice and consent" process in order to get an unsuccessful nomince appointed as the U.S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey. The Administration- not the District Court Judges- has defied the statutory framework that Congress set out in S U.S.C. § 3345 and 28
U.S.C. $ 546.
I. THE GOVERNMENT IS INCORRECT THAT MR. PINA'S READING OF THE FRA WOULD AMOUNT TO A PERMANENT BAN FOR MS. HABBA.
The Government suggested at the hearing that Mr. Pina's reading of
subsection 3345(bX1)(B) of the FVRA would amount to the "broad sanction" of a
"lifetime ban" for Ms. Habba. (8/15/25 Tr. at 17:12-16.) But subsection
3345(b)(I)(B) imposes no such "continuing disability." (Id. at 18:12-13.)
To state the obvious, Ms. Habba is not "banned" from serving as U.S.
Attorney. She may assume that position at any moment if she is nominated again by](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:j22jo3rt2jtdh2nbaemoprcf/bafkreifrcye5go7xgpjqptb2lqjrkgxp26upweuqsibe627vf6jvmxifuq)
Filed 08/18/25 Page 1 of 11 PagelD: 510 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY UNLOSIAN OF ANCKICA : Crim. No. 25-436 (MCA) CESAR HUMBERTO PINA MR. PINA'S SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF IN FURTHER SUPPORT OF HIS MOTION TO DISMISS THE INDICTMENT AND TO ENJOIN ALINA HABBA FROM SUPERVISING HIS PROSECUTION! Case 2:25-cr-00436-MWB Document 65 Filed 08/18/25 Page 2 of 11 PageID: 511/ Mr. Pina, by and through his counsel, submits this additional Supplemental Brief to respond to a few issues raised at the August 15, 2025, hearing. (ECF 63.) Al the August 15, 2025, hearing, the Government indicated that the issue of Ms. Habba's appointment is before this Court because "the District Court (Judges of New Jersey] precipitated this constitutional confrontation that did not need to happen." (8/15/25 Tr. at 15S:3-S.) It is not the judges who caused this crisis. This issue is actually before the Court because the President, through his Attorney General, has attempted to side-step the statutorily required "advice and consent" process in order to get an unsuccessful nomince appointed as the U.S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey. The Administration- not the District Court Judges- has defied the statutory framework that Congress set out in S U.S.C. § 3345 and 28 U.S.C. $ 546. I. THE GOVERNMENT IS INCORRECT THAT MR. PINA'S READING OF THE FRA WOULD AMOUNT TO A PERMANENT BAN FOR MS. HABBA. The Government suggested at the hearing that Mr. Pina's reading of subsection 3345(bX1)(B) of the FVRA would amount to the "broad sanction" of a "lifetime ban" for Ms. Habba. (8/15/25 Tr. at 17:12-16.) But subsection 3345(b)(I)(B) imposes no such "continuing disability." (Id. at 18:12-13.) To state the obvious, Ms. Habba is not "banned" from serving as U.S. Attorney. She may assume that position at any moment if she is nominated again by
Case 2:25-cr-00436-MWB Document 65 Fied 08/18/25 Page 3 ol 11 PageID: 512 the President and confirmed by the Scnate. See 28 U.S.C. § 541. Ms. Habba already served as Interim U.S. Attorney while her nomination was pending, which Section 546 allows, but her service cannot continue forever in that role without Senate confirmation. Because Ms. Habba was not the First Assistant for at Icast 90 days before the U.S. Attorney position became vacant, the FVRA plainly provides that she cannot serve as Acting U.S. Attorney after being nominated to fill that position. See 5 U.S.C § 3345(b)(1)(ii). The Govemment argues that Ms. Habba is not subject to subsection 3345(b)(I)'s bar because her nomination was submitted before, not after, her purported assumption of the Acting U.S. Attorney role under Section 3345(a)(1). As the Government made clear at the hearing, its interpretation of subsection 3345(bX(1) rests entirely on the fact that "the submit language is in the present tense." (8/15/25 Tr. at 16:17) (emphasis added). The Govemment advanced the same textual argument in its briefs, in which it relied on Dole Food Co. v. Patrickson, 538 U.S. 468, 478 (2003), for the proposition that "a statutory provision expressed in the present tense requires consideration of status at the time of the (relevant) action, not before." Giraud, Gov't Opp. Br. at 12-13 (internal quotation marks omitted). The Government's textual argument is wrong for multiple reasons. First, because subsection 3345(a)(1) refers to the person serving as "first assistant" at the time of the last Senate-confirmed official's departure, it would have been impossible for the Case 2:25-cr-00436-MWB Document 65 Filed 08/18/25 Page 4 of 11 PagelD: 513 President to have "submitted" that person's nomination before subsection 3345(a)(1) was triggered. The President does not submit a nomination before a vacancy arises, so using the word "submitted" would have made little sense in this context.
Case 2:25-cr-00436-MWB Document 65 Fied 08/18/25 Page 3 ol 11 PageID: 512 the President and confirmed by the Scnate. See 28 U.S.C. § 541. Ms. Habba already served as Interim U.S. Attorney while her nomination was pending, which Section 546 allows, but her service cannot continue forever in that role without Senate confirmation. Because Ms. Habba was not the First Assistant for at Icast 90 days before the U.S. Attorney position became vacant, the FVRA plainly provides that she cannot serve as Acting U.S. Attorney after being nominated to fill that position. See 5 U.S.C § 3345(b)(1)(ii). The Govemment argues that Ms. Habba is not subject to subsection 3345(b)(I)'s bar because her nomination was submitted before, not after, her purported assumption of the Acting U.S. Attorney role under Section 3345(a)(1). As the Government made clear at the hearing, its interpretation of subsection 3345(bX(1) rests entirely on the fact that "the submit language is in the present tense." (8/15/25 Tr. at 16:17) (emphasis added). The Govemment advanced the same textual argument in its briefs, in which it relied on Dole Food Co. v. Patrickson, 538 U.S. 468, 478 (2003), for the proposition that "a statutory provision expressed in the present tense requires consideration of status at the time of the (relevant) action, not before." Giraud, Gov't Opp. Br. at 12-13 (internal quotation marks omitted). The Government's textual argument is wrong for multiple reasons. First, because subsection 3345(a)(1) refers to the person serving as "first assistant" at the time of the last Senate-confirmed official's departure, it would have been impossible for the Case 2:25-cr-00436-MWB Document 65 Filed 08/18/25 Page 4 of 11 PagelD: 513 President to have "submitted" that person's nomination before subsection 3345(a)(1) was triggered. The President does not submit a nomination before a vacancy arises, so using the word "submitted" would have made little sense in this context.
LEGAL ARGUMENT 1. SECTION 546(d) IS A JUDICIAL "HARD STOP" Congress deliberately created a sequence for filling U.S. Attorney vacancies. To read § 546(a) as authorizing successive, back-to-back interim appointments would nullify § 546(d). Courts must avoid interpretations that render statutory provisions superfluous, void, or insignificant. RadLax Gateway Hotel, LLC v. Amalgamated Bank, 566 U.S. 639, 645 (2012); TRW Inc. v. Andrews, 534 U.S. 19, 31 (2001). Thus, the judicial appointment authority in § 546(d) must be given meaningful effect. United States v. Baldwin, 541 F. Supp. 2d 1184, 1192 (D.N.M. 2008). The legislative record confirms this construction. The House Judiciary Committee explained in 2007 that its amendments were enacted to restore the important role of the district courts in appointing interim United States Attorneys and to prevent indefinite control of these offices by the Executive. H.R. Rep. No. 110-58, at 6-7 (2007). DOJ's reading would reinstate the very indefinite control Congress sought to prevent. Il. FRA CONTINUITY FORBIDS A POST-VACANCY FIRST ASSISTANT The FVRA provides that "the first assistant to the office of such officer shall perform the functions and duties of the office temporarily in an acting capacity" when a vacancy arises. 5 U.S.C. § 3345(a)(1). The statute's continuity design presumes that the person already serving as First Assistant at the time of the vacancy steps in. Gonzales & Gonzales Bonds & Ins. Agency, Inc. Case 1:24-cr-00768-MWB Document 143 Filed 08/18/25 Page 3 of 5 PagelD: 942 v: United States Dept. of Homeland Sec., 107 F.4th 1064, 1068-69 (9th Cir. 2024). The requirement that the first assistant must have served in that position for at least 90 days during the 365-day period preceding the vacancy further underscores Congress's presumption that the first assistant will already be in place and familiar with the office's functions when the vacancy arises. See § 3345(b)(1). The Supreme Court has stressed the FVRA's
if so, what remedy exists.
Amicus curiae ACDL-NJ did not submit supplemental briefing.
🔗 to the govt’s brief in opposition: storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...
Preview of Pina & Giraud briefs in support ⬇️ (will upload in full later).
We await Chief Judge Brann’s ruling.
#DNJ
(2/2)
US Attorney Habba & © @USAttyHabba Follow The Department of Justice has identified the following cities in New Jersey as sanctuary cities with laws that impede enforcement of federal immigration initiatives: NEWARK PATTERSON HOBOKEN & JERSEY CITY No more sanctuary cities in NJ. As @AGPamBondi stated: "Come to the table or see us in court." Attorney General Pamela Bondi + © @AG... • 1d Any sanctuary jurisdiction that continues to put illegal aliens ahead of American citizens can either come to the table or see us in court. Today @TheJusticeDept delivered demand letters to sanctuary cities, counties, and states — a key step in our strategic effort to eradicate Show more Office of the Attorney General Washington, B. G. 20530
our strategic effort to eradicate Show more Oftice of the Attarney General Washington, H. J. 20530 August 13, 2025 Gavin Newsom Governor of California c/o David B. Sapp, Legal Affairs Secretary 1021 O Street, Suite 9000 Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear Governor Newsom, The United States has a long history of cooperation with state and local law enforcement For too long, so-called sanctuary jurisdiction policies have undermined this necessary cooperation and obstructed federal immigration enforcement, giving aliens cover to perpetrate crimes in our communities and evade the immigration consequences that federal law requires. Last edited 4:35 PM • 8/15/25 • 24K Views 489 Reposts 9 Quotes 1.5K Likes 15 Bookmarks
If legally possible; the sooner, the better. Less than an hour ago, Alina Habba retweeted AG Bondi’s letter to Gavin Newsom, and called for the termination of “sanctuary” status of cities in NJ including Newark, Patterson, Hoboken, and Jersey City.
It’s past time for Habba to GTFO.
#NJ #DNJ
Case 1:24-cr-00768-MWB Document 126 Filed 08/11/25 Page 1 of 2 PagelD: 559 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V. JULIEN GIRAUD JR., and JULIEN GIRAUD III, Defendants. No. 1:24-CR-00768 (Chief Judge Brann)* ORDER AUGUST 11, 2025 Amicus curiae the Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers of New Jersey ("ACDL-NJ") has moved for leave to participate in the oral argument in this matter scheduled for 10:00 a.m. on Friday, August 15, 2025.' ACDL-NJ represents that the Girauds consent to the motion and the Government takes no position on it.? The Government has not opposed ACDL-NJ's motion. For the same reasons that the Court granted ACDL-NJ's motion for leave to file an amicus brief, the Court finds that ACDL-NJ's participation in oral argument will aid in the resolution of the legal questions presented in this matter. Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: • The Honorable Matthew W. Brann, Chief United States District Judge for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, sitting by designation. ' Doc. 120. Id. at 2. Doc. 117 at 2.
Case 1:24-cr-00768-MWB Document 126 Filed 08/11/25 Page 2 of 2 PagelD: 560 1. Amicus curiae ACDL-NJ's motion for leave to participate in oral argument is GRANTED. ADCL-NJ will be permitted 10 minutes of oral advocacy and may respond to questions from the Court where appropriate. BY THE COURT: s/ Matthew W. Brann Matthew W. Brann Chief United States District Judge for the Middle District of Pennsylvania Specially Presiding 2
⚖️ RE: the challenge to Alina Habba’s “acting” status; today, the Court granted the NJ-ACDL’s motion for leave to participate in oral argument this Friday, finding that their participation “will aid in the resolution of the legal questions in this matter.”
Onward! #DNJ #FRVA #546 #RuleOfLaw
NEW in the Giraud case: NJ-ACDL files a motion to participate in oral argument next Fri, 8/15 on the challenge to Alina Habba’s status as “acting” US attorney for the district of NJ, arguing it’s “uniquely positioned to address the complex constitutional and statutory issues” presented. #DNJ
Y’d #SenatorCoryBooker #DNJ waste time talking for 25H 2 protest #DonaldTrump policies, then vote 4 #Ambassador2China weeks later.
Booker #votedYes4DavidPerdue.
WTF is wrong w/spineless dimwit who doesn’t know how 2 fight?
Fight means fight, Resist means U don’t vote 4 anything. #MitchMcConnell
When I saw that LibsofTT girl in a picture on a ridealong, I started going through potential legal consequences but I was just too tired to follow up.
But I thought, someone else is going to F up with these photo ops and it’s going to be SO obvious.
Enter Alina Habba, ladies & gents 🤣
#DNJ
I know many are critical of law professors who editorialize and make “worthless” political statements by signing their names to letters like this one, which airs united concerns over alina habba as #USattorney for the #DistrictOfNewJersey. i think its important, though —
#rutgerslaw #shulaw #dnj
