Download Brief of the United States in Trump v. Carroll 2d Cir Appeal Case No. 20.3977 filed June 7 2021
Brief of the United States of America in the case of E. Jean Carroll, Case No. 20-3977, Doc. 102, filed June 7, 2021.
One lesson of the last four+ years is clear: People matter. The people that make the decisions in our government matter. Who the prosecutors are, matters.
Whether we have a Department of Justice or a department of career young attorneys intent on CYA, depends on who is in the department.
It also very much depends on who really runs the department.
"Structural checks can be overrated. The survival of our Republic depends as much, if not more, on the virtue of those in government, particularly the upholding of norms by civil servants, prosecutors and military officials. We have grown too jaded about things like professionalism and institutions, and the idea of men and women who take their duties seriously. But as every major moral tradition teaches, no external constraint can fully substitute for the personal compulsion to do what is right." Tim Wu, What Really Saved the Republic From Trump?, NEW YORK TIMES, online Dec. 10, 2020.
The personal compulsion to do what is right, the virtue of those in government, particularly the upholding of norms by civil servants: Were these the characteristics on display of the people that we are looking at in the department of justice?
Were these characteristics on display from them during the last four+ years?
Are they on display now?
Let's look for these characteristics, starting with the individuals featured in the first article in this series, IN MERRICK GARLAND'S DEPARTMENT, PROTECTING 'CAREER YOUNG ATTORNEYS' MEANS "CYA."
JOSHUA M. SALZMAN. This is the person who submitted the reply brief to continue Barr's appeal attempting to substitute the United States for the former guy in the lawsuit E. Jean Carroll filed. She filed a defamation lawsuit after the F.G. allegedly defamed her by calling her a liar after she alleged he raped her. The United States Department of Justice argued in SALZMAN's reply brief that the defamation was a part of the former guy's official duties.
During the time of the F.G. and A.G. Barr, JOSHUA SALZMAN worked at Barr's law firm, the department of justice. He did not always work there; MR. SALZMAN, like some of the others, used to be employed at MERRICK GARLAND'S law firm, WilmerHale.
During the time of the F.G. and A.G. Barr, MARK STERN also worked at Barr's law firm. MARK B. STERN's name is also on the reply brief that MR. SALZMAN filed, appealing for the substitution of the United States in the F.G.'s role as defendant in E. Jean Carroll's lawsuit.
If their appeal is successful, the United States will become the defendant in that lawsuit; the United States cannot be sued in that lawsuit. If their appeal is successful, then, it will gut E. Jean Carroll's lawsuit against the former guy.
A third lawyer who takes credit for the reply brief in E. Jean Carroll's case is MARK R. FREEMAN. He is the current Director of the Appellate Staff, Civil Division, in the justice department. He, too, worked in A.G. Barr's department during the time of the F.G. He, too, worked in MERRICK GARLAND's law firm before that.
As we shall see in this series, among other things, MR. FREEMAN reportedly was instrumental in arguing that the F.G.'s General Counsel, Don McGahn, should not testify under subpoena from the U.S. House of Representatives.
Last but not least, there is Acting Attorney General and MERRICK GARLAND's deputy, BRIAN M. BOYNTON. He alone among the crew did not also work for the former guy or for A.G. Barr during the time that the F.G. was in office. His background is in defending large corporations and other things and people -- including one Betsy DeVos, the F.G.'s Secretary of Education, as we shall also see in this series.
MERRICK GARLAND is responsible for the decisions of these people. Beyond and to the exclusion of every reasonable doubt, as they say, these are MERRICK GARLAND's decisions.
There is no better way to conclude this article than by once again quoting from Professor Tim Wu's piece in The New York Times:
It may sound naïve in our untrusting age to hope that people will care about ethics and professional duties. But Madison, too, saw the need for this trust. “There is a degree of depravity in mankind,” he wrote, but also “qualities in human nature which justify a certain portion of esteem and confidence.” A working republican government, he argued, “presupposes the existence of these qualities in a higher degree than any other form.”
It is called civic virtue, and at the end of the day, there is no real alternative.
Please read the disclaimer. This blog article ©2021 Dennis J. Wall. All rights reserved.