Trump “picked the wrong judge,” dealt BLOCKBUSTER ruling by FURIOUS judge
Quick Read
Summary
Takeaways
- ❖A federal judge in Oregon ruled against the Trump DOJ's attempt to access state voter rolls, which contain sensitive personal data.
- ❖The judge explicitly stated the DOJ's 'presumption of regularity' no longer holds, citing a controversial letter from Pam Bondi regarding Minnesota's voter file.
- ❖The 'presumption of regularity' is a legal concept where courts typically assume the Department of Justice acts with legitimate intentions.
- ❖This ruling is significant because it challenges the DOJ's credibility and could influence 23 other similar lawsuits nationwide.
- ❖The host's law firm is actively litigating these cases across 24 jurisdictions to prevent the federal government from obtaining private voter data.
- ❖Access to comprehensive voter rolls is described as essential for any effort to engage in mass voter suppression.
Insights
1Oregon Judge Revokes DOJ's 'Presumption of Regularity'
A federal district court judge in Oregon issued a 'blockbuster ruling' against the Department of Justice, stating that the 'presumption of regularity' no longer applies to the plaintiff (the DOJ). This means the court will no longer automatically assume the DOJ's intentions and stated purposes are legitimate, requiring 'thorough scrutiny' of their claims.
The judge cited a letter from Pam Bondi to the governor of Minnesota, sent on the day of a tragic shooting, attempting to leverage the event to gain access to Minnesota's voter file. The judge found this action so 'insensed' that it destroyed the presumption of regularity.
2Implications for Voter Roll Access Lawsuits
The DOJ is attempting to gain access to comprehensive voter rolls, including social security numbers, in 24 states and Washington D.C. The Oregon ruling directly impacts one of these cases and has the potential to 'blow open' similar cases across the country. The host's law firm is fighting these cases in all jurisdictions.
The guest explains that the DOJ needs this granular data (name, address, date of birth, social security number, party registration) to 'engage in mass voter suppression' and 'kick people off the rolls at scale,' rather than for legitimate reasons.
3Precedent-Setting Potential for Other Cases
While the ruling is from a single federal judge, it is expected to influence other judges presiding over the remaining 23 voter roll cases. The legal community often sees one judge's decision as a 'breadcrumb' for others to follow, potentially creating momentum against the DOJ's credibility in a broader range of cases.
The guest states, 'the way the law develops...is by one judge going first and then others following.' He anticipates other judges will 'read that opinion and say, 'Well, you know what? He made some sense there and maybe I'll follow that lead.''
Bottom Line
The erosion of the 'presumption of regularity' for the Department of Justice could extend beyond voter roll cases, impacting other areas where the government relies on judicial deference.
This could force federal agencies to provide more concrete evidence and transparent justifications for their actions in court, rather than simply being taken at their word, potentially increasing accountability.
Lawyers challenging government actions in various fields can now cite this Oregon ruling to argue for a higher standard of proof and scrutiny against federal claims, especially where there's evidence of questionable intent.
The specific incident of Pam Bondi's letter leveraging a tragedy for voter data access was a critical turning point that directly led to a significant legal defeat for the DOJ.
This highlights how politically motivated or opportunistic actions by government officials can have direct and severe legal consequences, undermining the credibility of the entire department.
Legal challenges against government overreach should actively seek out and highlight instances of perceived bad faith or political maneuvering, as these can be powerful tools to sway judicial opinion and dismantle presumptions of good intent.
Lessons
- Support organizations like Democracy Docket, founded by guest Mark Elias, which are on the front lines of litigating cases to protect private voter data from federal access.
- Stay informed about ongoing legal challenges to voter access and election integrity by subscribing to specialized news outlets like Democracy Docket.
- Encourage legal professionals in other areas to challenge the 'presumption of regularity' when facing government actions, citing the Oregon judge's precedent.
Quotes
"The presumption of regularity that has been previously extended to the plaintiff that it could be taken at its word with little doubt about its intentions and stated purpose no longer holds."
"When plaintiff in this case conveys assurances that any private and sensitive data will remain private and used only for a declared and limited purpose, it must be thoroughly scrutinized and squared with its open and public statements to the contrary."
"If they want to do that, they need the voter roles. Why? Because they don't know who the people are to kick off the roles, right? Like you can't disenfranchise people unless you know who they are by name, by address, by date of birth, by social security number or partial social security number, by party registration, right?"
Q&A
Recent Questions
Related Episodes
“Explosive!” New Republican ballot scandal SURGES INTO NEWS
"A California sheriff and gubernatorial candidate seized over half a million ballots, an act the hosts frame as a dangerous escalation in Republican efforts to undermine election integrity and normalize ballot seizures."
Warnock UNLOADS on Trump SAVE Act. Calls It a Power Grab to Block Voters
"Senator Raphael Warnock vehemently opposes the 'SAVE Act,' framing it as a politically motivated voter suppression tactic that disproportionately disenfranchises eligible citizens under the false pretense of preventing non-existent voter fraud."
Judge Orders Fulton Ballot Docs Unsealed. NC Voting Blocked. Trump Melts Down. MAGA Loses It
"This episode dissects multiple instances of alleged Republican voter suppression and hypocrisy, from unsealed election documents in Fulton County to the backlash against a Spanish-speaking Super Bowl performer, alongside a host's personal account of being scammed by a Black-owned business."
Trump’s Blueprint for Breaking Elections (w/ Ian Bassin) | Mona Charen Show
"Ian Bassin, founder of Protect Democracy, details how Trump's predictable playbook to subvert elections and undermine democratic institutions can be countered through strategic litigation, state-level reforms, and robust citizen engagement."