Abbreviated Pundit Roundup: Contempt in court

Abbreviated Pundit Roundup is a long-running series published every morning that collects essential political discussion and analysis around the internet.

We begin today with Norman L. Eisen, Karen Agnifilo, Andrew Warren, Jacob Kovacs-Goodman, and Siven Watt of Just Security tackling all aspects of the first order of business today in The People of the State of New York v. Donald J. Trump: a hearing to determine whether Trump willfully violated the gag order imposed by Judge Juan Merchan.

To sustain a finding of criminal contempt under the Judiciary Code based on an alleged violation of the court’s gag order, DANY must establish the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt (see 21 N.Y. Jur. 2d Contempt § 36):

1. There was a lawful court order in effect (i.e., that the court had jurisdiction);
2. The court order expressed a clear and unequivocal mandate;
3. Trump had actual knowledge of the order’s terms;
4. Trump violated the order; and
5. Trump’s violation was knowing and willful.

We review all five elements, although the inquiry is likely to focus on 2, 4, and 5.

[...]

We believe that DANY will prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump willfully violated the gag order...

The judge would be on firm legal footing to sanction Trump for all of the statements, but in an abundance of caution, may distinguish some of the repostings for the sake of taking a balanced approach and an incremental one. For example, number 9 simply consists of a complete verbatim article with no editing by Trump. That distinction provides an opportunity for the judge to sanction the other repostings while at the same time further clarifying the scope of the order as reaching even verbatim repostings with no editorial selection or quotation whatsoever. Justice Merchan has shown a propensity to find compromise to be fair to the defendant, and we think he will likely seek that or some other concession here as well, while overall rejecting Trump’s actions.

But wait! There’s more!

Joan Vennochi of The Boston Globe wonders if people are finally getting tired of the shoe salesman’s incessant whining.

In Trump’s world, everyone but Trump is a liar. In Trump’s world, everyone is out to get him, except the MAGA faithful. Call me a crazy optimist, but in the end, his deep persecution complex may be more damaging to his reelection chances than any conviction might be. Face it, how many voters will really care if Trump is found guilty of falsifying records to cover up payments to Daniels as a way to keep damaging news out of the media?

I am not minimizing the consequences of law-breaking or saying he should not be held accountable for it. It’s just that with Trump, the boast that he could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue and still retain his hold on MAGA hearts and minds continues to ring true. If some polling is to be believed, his social media rantings and divisive political style have not stopped voters, generally, from positive thoughts about his term in office.

But what might be taking its toll is the endless whining, coupled with a presence that shrinks with every court appearance. He seems smaller, and not necessarily from weight loss. The candidate who calls Biden “Sleepy Joe” looks tired. In statements before he enters the courtroom and after he leaves it, this always petty man sounds ever pettier.

Jennifer Rubin of The Washington Post says that House Speaker Mike Johnson is no hero for finally allowing a vote on Ukraine aid.

When the vote on Ukraine aid finally came, it was overwhelming, 311-112. That raised the question: Why in the world did such a popular measure take so long? It could have been done long ago, when President Biden requested the aid in October, had Johnson simply ignored the histrionics from pro-Putin House members who take their cues from Donald Trump.

A week … a month … six months ago, the vote to deliver critical aid could have prevented countless Ukrainian deaths. Just last week, Russian missiles struck an apartment building in the northern Ukrainian city of Chernihiv, killing 17 people and injuring at least 61. That was merely one strike among many Russia has successfully carried out in recent months while Ukraine has been hampered by munitions shortages and inadequate antimissile defenses. [...]

These losses to Ukraine and to U.S. national-security interests were entirely avoidable. Had Johnson simply listened to U.S. intelligence experts or even traveled to Ukraine, as several House and Senate members did, and witnessed the carnage, he would have quickly grasped the urgency of a vote.

Chris Geidner of LawDork singles out the cruelty of Chief Justice John Roberts during yesterday’s SCOTUS oral arguments in City of Grants Pass v. Johnson.

On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court was faced with a dystopian, unfeeling argument from the lawyer for the City of Grants Pass in Oregon seeking to justify ordinances that have the effect of criminalizing homelessness in the city of roughly 40,000 people. [...]

The underlying Supreme Court precedent at issue, Robinson v. California, is a 1962 case holding that criminalizing drug addiction, as a status, was an unconstitutional violation of the Eighth Amendment. The Ninth Circuit, in 2018, held in a case involving a Boise, Idaho, ordinance that the reasoning of Robinson applies to block “a city from prosecuting people criminally for sleeping outside on public property when those people have no home or other shelter to go to.” The case in front of the justices on Monday followed from the 2018 decision.

Chief Justice John Roberts displayed a alarming lack of humanity throughout the arguments on Monday, strongly fighting the idea that being homeless could ever be a status because a person can get a home at any point. While other justices questioned the implementation or application of the Ninth Circuit’s rule, Roberts, instead, seemed almost incredulous that we were in court hearing this case.

Sam Levin of the Guardian reports that the DA’s office in Alameda County, CA is reviewing a number of cases because because of notes found that indicate that prosecutors excluded Black and Jewish jurors from  death penalty cases.

Pamela Price, the Alameda county district attorney, whose jurisdiction includes Oakland, announced Monday that her office had uncovered handwritten notes by former prosecutors documenting discriminatory jury selection tactics in the 1990s. US judge Vince Chhabria, who is overseeing a case that led to the records discovery, has directed Price’s office to conduct the review of other cases, she said. [...]

The district attorney’s office released excerpts of prosecutors’ notes from the case of Ernest Dykes, who was sentenced to death in 1995 in Alameda county and whose appeal is ongoing. The documents show prosecutors marked down when prospective jurors were Jewish, repeatedly writing “Jew?” next to some people’s names and in one case appearing to mark when they confirmed the person was Jewish.

In another record, a prosecutor referred to a Black woman as a “short, fat, troll”. A prosecutor also remarked that a Black woman “says race no issue but I don’t believe her”. The prosecutors who wrote the notes were not named.

Missy Ryan and Michael Birnbaum of The Washington Post write about a State Department report that cites human rights violation in Israel, Gaza, and the West Bank before and after the Oct. 7 attack by Hamas.

The State Department’s annual human rights report cited several reported rights violations committed in Israel, the West Bank and Gaza in 2023 by parties including the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), Hamas militants and the Palestinian Authority, before and after Hamas’s Oct. 7 attacks plunged the Middle East into heightened instability and violence. [...]

Secretary of State Antony Blinken said the Oct. 7 attacks, which killed about 1,200 people, and the subsequent death of civilians during Israel’s military response in Gaza “have also raised deeply troubling human rights concerns.”

But Blinken stopped short of announcing a decision the Israeli government has suggested could be imminent to suspend U.S. security aid to elements of the Israeli military because of alleged human rights abuses. While the Biden administration has declined to say whether it plans to bar aid to any unit under the Leahy Laws, Israeli officials have issued preemptive protests in recent days to such a move.

Jennifer McKiernan and Ben Wright of BBC News report that the House of Lords has dropped their opposition to Prime Minister’s Sunak’s bill to send asylum seekers to Rwanda and that the controversial bill has passed.

Rishi Sunak's Rwanda bill will finally become law after a parliamentary showdown ended late in the night.

Plans to send some asylum seekers to Africa have met with fierce criticism, but the bill passed on Monday when the Lords dropped their opposition.

Mr Sunak said in a statement "nothing will stand in our way" now of getting flights off the ground.

But the scheme could still be held up by challenges in the courts.

Ahead of the bill passing, the prime minister said flights to Rwanda would take off within 10 to 12 weeks, missing his original spring target.

Finally today, Carolina Mella of El País in English reports that the citizens of Ecuador have passed a referendum which calls for heightened security measures in order to combat rampant gang violence.

The president of Ecuador, Daniel Noboa, achieved a clear victory on Sunday in most of the 11 questions of a referendum he had called to confront the spiral of violence in the country. The president was seeking popular approval for legal reforms in security, judicial and labor matters, and the answer was not positive in all of them: according to an official quick count by the Electoral Council, “yes” won in nine questions and “no” prevailed in two. But the two questions that were rejected focused on economic proposals and were not related to security, which is the main concern of Ecuadorians. All nine security-related proposals received broad backing.

A question that received resounding support involves the militarization of security. Citizens gave their approval to a constitutional amendment that would allow the Armed Forces to carry out operations together with the police without the need for the government to declare a state of emergency. Voters also approved the idea of allowing the extradition of Ecuadorians accused of crimes, as long as it does not entail applying the death penalty or any other inhuman, cruel or degrading penalty.

The referendum was called by Noboa in the midst of a deep security crisis, prolonged energy blackouts and a diplomatic conflict with Mexico over the assault on the Mexican Embassy in Quito to arrest a former vice president who had taken shelter there. Noboa, a 36-year-old businessman who comes from a wealthy banana exporting family, won the presidential election in October, easily defeating the candidate put forward by former president Rafael Correa, leader of the leftist Citizen Revolution and a controversial figure in Ecuador. Noboa, who does not openly espouse any ideology, received a country mired in violence and controlled by gangs.

Have the best possible day everyone!