A Federal Judge Tells Congress What It Can Do With Its Urgent “Fast and Furious” Litigation

The law, lawyers, and the court.
Oct. 4 2013 1:49 PM

Shutdown Slapdown

A federal judge tells Congress what it can do with its urgent “Fast and Furious” litigation.

U.S. Representative Darrell Issa (R-CA)
Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., has only himself and his colleagues to blame for the delay of his committee's lawsuit against the Justice Department.

Photo by Joshua Roberts/Reuters

As we end the first week of a government shutdown that manages to be both catastrophic and juvenile at the same time, it’s heartening to see that at least some folks in positions of authority have managed to recognize it for the empty theater it really is. U.S. District Court Judge Amy Berman Jackson has been charged with ruling on the endless, sprawling lawsuit brought by Rep Darrell Issa’s House Oversight and Government Reform Committee seeking to hold Eric Holder in contempt for failing to turn over documents related to an investigation into the Obama administration’s “Fast and Furious” operation. The suit has plodded on for almost two years, after Holder refused to comply with House subpoenas digging into a disputed ATF undercover operation aimed at gun traffickers on the Mexican border. The Obama administration has asserted executive privilege over certain documents demanded by the California Republican’s committee and also suggested that the issue was not appropriate for resolution in the courts.

Dahlia Lithwick Dahlia Lithwick

Dahlia Lithwick writes about the courts and the law for Slate. Follow her on Twitter.

On Monday night, DOJ’s effort to have the suit dismissed altogether was rejected by Judge Jackson. The suit will go on. The usual suspects rejoiced. But then, in light of the shutdown, DOJ asked the court to delay court proceedings, explaining that its appropriations had lapsed on Sept. 30,  and that “Absent an appropriation, Department of Justice attorneys and employees are prohibited from working, even on a voluntary basis, except in very limited circumstances, including ‘emergencies involving the safety of human life or the protection of property.’”

Federal courts around the country have been struggling this week to contend with truly hellish delays in the administration of justice. Almost every civil case that involves the U.S. government has been halted in the New York courts. The ACLU acceded to a delay in a challenge to the Obama drone strikes policy. DOJ sought a stay in a massive case regarding the proposed merger of US Airways and AMR and in the voting-rights lawsuit challenging the Texas voter ID law.

Advertisement

Nevertheless, the oversight committee filed a motion requesting that the suit against Eric Holder go forward, claiming that the “Department’s Contingency Plan provides that Department employees may continue to work on matters necessary to the discharge of the President’s constitutional duties and powers.” In other words, the matter was sufficiently urgent that furloughed DOJ lawyers should be forced to volunteer their services to work on the case without pay.

In an order yesterday, Judge Jackson made pretty clear what she thought of that argument. At 11 a.m. she granted the Justice Department’s stay, ordering it to get back in touch with her within two days of operations resuming, at which time the legal proceedings will resume as well. Judge Jackson made her feelings about the urgent need for this particular suit to press forward rather plain:

There are no exigent circumstances in this case that would justify an order of the Court forcing furloughed attorneys to return to their desks. Moreover, while the vast majority of litigants who now must endure a delay in the progress of their matters do so due to circumstances beyond their control, that cannot be said of the House of Representatives, which has played a role in the shutdown that prompted the stay motion.

In other words: You break it, you bought it. Case closed.

TODAY IN SLATE

Foreigners

More Than Scottish Pride

Scotland’s referendum isn’t about nationalism. It’s about a system that failed, and a new generation looking to take a chance on itself. 

What Charles Barkley Gets Wrong About Corporal Punishment and Black Culture

Why Greenland’s “Dark Snow” Should Worry You

Three Talented Actresses in Three Terrible New Shows

Why Do Some People See the Virgin Mary in Grilled Cheese?

The science that explains the human need to find meaning in coincidences.

Jurisprudence

Happy Constitution Day!

Too bad it’s almost certainly unconstitutional.

Is It Worth Paying Full Price for the iPhone 6 to Keep Your Unlimited Data Plan? We Crunch the Numbers.

What to Do if You Literally Get a Bug in Your Ear

  News & Politics
Weigel
Sept. 16 2014 7:03 PM Kansas Secretary of State Loses Battle to Protect Senator From Tough Race
  Business
Moneybox
Sept. 16 2014 4:16 PM The iPhone 6 Marks a Fresh Chance for Wireless Carriers to Kill Your Unlimited Data
  Life
The Eye
Sept. 16 2014 12:20 PM These Outdoor Cat Shelters Have More Style Than the Average Home
  Double X
The XX Factor
Sept. 15 2014 3:31 PM My Year As an Abortion Doula
  Slate Plus
Slate Plus Video
Sept. 16 2014 2:06 PM A Farewell From Emily Bazelon The former senior editor talks about her very first Slate pitch and says goodbye to the magazine.
  Arts
Brow Beat
Sept. 16 2014 8:43 PM This 17-Minute Tribute to David Fincher Is the Perfect Preparation for Gone Girl
  Technology
Future Tense
Sept. 16 2014 6:40 PM This iPhone 6 Feature Will Change Weather Forecasting
  Health & Science
Medical Examiner
Sept. 16 2014 11:46 PM The Scariest Campfire Story More horrifying than bears, snakes, or hook-handed killers.
  Sports
Sports Nut
Sept. 15 2014 9:05 PM Giving Up on Goodell How the NFL lost the trust of its most loyal reporters.