The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
The First Circuit Is Not A Denny's
According to the Attorney General, the First Circuit's clerk refused to "offer any means of filing" an emergency brief after 5:00 p.m.
After 5:00 p.m. on Thursday, November 6, federal district court Judge John McConnell issued an order requiring the federal government to transfer fund from a school lunch program to pay for SNAP benefits. One might have expected the federal government to take an immediate appeal--this ruling from this particular judge was not unexpected. However, the Department of Justice did not file a brief right that evening. Rather, the brief was filed the morning of Friday, November 7. Why didn't the government file an immediate appeal? The Solicitor General's emergency application to the Supreme Court offered this explanation:
Nonetheless, after 5 p.m. on November 6 (yesterday), the district court directed USDA to pay the full November allotment by November 7 (today). . .
The government filed an emergency stay motion as soon as it was possible to file in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, which was this morning, and requested a ruling by 4 p.m. The First Circuit requested a response due by noon, but as of now, has not yet ruled on the government's motion.
According to Attorney General Pam Bondi, the government was unable to file an emergency appeal to the Fifth Circuit until the following morning because the First Circuit clerk's office would not accept the filing. In a thread, Bondi laid out the chronology.
.@TheJusticeDept just filed a request for an immediate stay of Judge McConnell's utterly lawless Temporary Restraining Order issued yesterday after business hours—yet remarkably forcing @USDA to "raid school-lunch money to instead fund SNAP benefits." That TRO purports to force the government to divert some $5 billion from the school lunch program to SNAP by the end of today.
Why could we file this brief only this morning, with that clock ticking? The First Circuit clerk's office made it impossible to file sooner. Despite being notified by the government of the high likelihood of fast-moving litigation, the First Circuit clerk's office refused to answer its phones until this morning, and refused to offer any means of filing this emergency request until it processed certain paperwork during regular business hours.
So, Judge McConnell exacerbated his own manufactured emergency by starting the government's clock just after the First Circuit closed for the day, forcing an even faster rush today to disadvantage the government further.
It is Congress's job is to end this shutdown and fund SNAP and other programs. We ask the First Circuit to get courts out of the business of deciding how to triage scarce funds during a shutdown. When lawless district courts step in to try to manage the federal fisc, it upends the political process and unacceptably risks compromising the programs for everyone.
Bondi makes two charges. First, she writes that Judge McConnell deliberately waited until after 5:00 p.m. to issue his twenty-seven page opinion. Second, she claims that the First Circuit Clerk's Office, knowing that an emergency filing was coming, refused to answer the phone or process the filing. It could be the case that the Judge issued the order as soon as he was done with it. It could also the case that the staff of the Clerk's office, perhaps short-handed due to the shutdown, simply went home before five and was unable to answer the phone. It is Hanlon's Razor or Occam's Razor? I'll let others decide which explanation is more likely.
But I think these facts demonstrate, quite clearly, that federal courts are not Denny's. They are never expected to operate around the clock, and as a practical matter, are not required to accept unusual filings after hours--even in emergency cases where the federal government demands an immediate filing.
At 6:08 p.m. on Friday, the First Circuit denied an administrative stay. At some point thereafter, the Solicitor General filed his emergency stay application. A ruling was requested by 9:30 p.m.
The Solicitor General also respectfully requests this Court grant an immediate administrative stay of the district court's orders by 9:30pm this evening while the Court considers this application.
I understand that Circuit Justice Jackson acting along, and granted an administrative stay at some point before 9:17 p.m. It does not appear that she referred the case to the full Court. But her order had a wrinkle:
This administrative stay will terminate forty-eight hours after the First Circuit's resolution of the pending motion, which the First Circuit is expected to issue with dispatch.
This timeline will force the government to file yet another frantic appeal to Circuit Justice Jackson again as soon as the First Circuit resolves the pending motion. (As of late Saturday evening, the motion remains pending). We will see if she acts upon it right away, or refers the case to the full Court.
This process differs from the treatment that the Fifth Circuit and a Texas District Court Judge received in A.A.R.P. v. Trump. Remember that the judge was faulted for not responding to an overnight, ex parte phone call from the ACLU. Meanwhile, it seems the First Circuit's clerk wouldn't even pick up its phone. In A.A.R.P., the Supreme Court granted an emergency stay of the district court, moments before the Fifth Circuit ruled. And the Supreme Court's order was not set to expire after the Fifth Circuit's order issued. Instead, it lasted for nearly a month.
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please to post comments
Why couldn't the DOJ file electronically?
This came up before in that AARP case he mentions. Wasn't the problem that even if it were filed electronically that evening, it wouldn't be noticed until someone came to work in the morning? There was no night clerk who could wake up justices in the middle of the night.
If I was drafting an appeal, I wouldn't say that I was unable to file. I would say that I filed but did not receive a ruling on it. And as I am required by midnight to pay the SNAP benefits, and that would cause irreparable harm to the other people that should have the money, I need an appeals court to rule this evening, not Monday morning after Dunkin Donuts.
They could. Prof. Blackman is either deliberately misleading or he's just exposing his inexperience with actual practice yet again.
That's either deliberately misleading or you're exposing your lack of reading comprehension. He's quoting what the government said.
It's rather bad faith to cite a fact "according to Attorney General Pam Bondi," because this DOJ's statements are anti-facts.
ad hominem.
Nice of you to not answer the complaint. What's that you like, "Not Responsive, Immaterial, ..."?
Could be you're a gaslighting asshole as ignorant on the procedural history of this case as you are on constitutional law. The ignorance of constitutional principles being the more egregious sin. And which should disqualify you from making comments here, but you're too much of a stupid asshole to realize that.
They could performatively chuck it in via ECF of course, but as I'm sure you're well aware from your vast experience with actual practice, that in and of itself doesn't get eyes on it in an emergency posture.
Local Rule 27 in the 1st Circuit Rulebook clearly says the filer shouldn't expect the clerk's office to act on an emergency motion outside of normal business hours without special advance arrangements, which of course couldn't be made here because . . . it was already after hours:
Yes, but the claim wasn't "we filed it, but the circuit court didn't act on it." The claim was, "We couldn't file it," which was a lie. Also, the circuit court did act on it, after hours. Why are people ignoring that?
Would you have been happier had they said "couldn't file it to any useful effect"? I doubt it.
Again, as you know good and well, they at the very least had to reach someone in the clerk's office to ask for emergency consideration -- it's not like the clerks just sit there and scour the ECF for new things to jump on ahead of the already full plate of non-emergency stuff they have going on.
Probably because ending their consideration slightly after quittin' time has zero bearing on whether they would have (directly contrary to the expectation set in LR 27) spontaneously picked it up in the middle of the night just because it was filed.
I am always happier when people tell the truth rather than lie, yes.
Out of curiosity: why is any of this an emergency? What’s the hurry?
Because an utterly lawless district court judge made it one. He didn't want to allow time for the federal government to appeal his unconstitutional order.
The judge was ordering the immediate expenditure of many billions of dollars of public funds without authorization by Congress.
I guess it isn't if you just want to lose the case. The judge ordered a multi-billion dollar payout in about 36 hours and refused to stay his order. That puts lawyers back on the clock when in the ordinary course of events they would not be.
I guess the DOJ lawyers could have called up Trump and told him that it was Friday afternoon, they were already 4 beers deep and it might not be a good idea for them to be filing anything. But let's just say that's not optimal strategy for a lawyer.
"What's the hurry" could also be said for the DJ whose order had to be carried out within one business day, no? An order, that once implemented, couldn't be unrung.
I would say that the compressed timeline for the appeal follows directly from the compressed timeline for the original order.
I can see how people not having food would be a reason for urgency. The federal government maybe having to pay out moneys that it ultimately won't, not so much.
Money that wasn’t authorized spent by Congress.
According to Prof. Vladeck — and I trust him a lot more than I do Prof. Blackman — the SG filed his emergency stay petition to SCOTUS before — not "at some point thereafter" — the First Circuit rejected the application for an administrative stay.
It will not require anything franctic. It gives them 48 hours after the First Circuit rules to file the renewed application. And they likely have all weekend to draft that application before the First Circuit rules, so that sounds like about 4 days for the administration to get it done. Prof. Blackman inexplicably thinks that even though he can generate mounds of content within five minutes of events, that practitioners actually paid to do this stuff need weeks.
Take a government job, they said. No nights and weekends, they said. Just boring government stuff for less pay but you have time with your family. They said.
It's a steady paycheck, too. They said.
It's a free country, they can quit.
Sure. But the point is that DaMN is, as usual, being deeply unreasonable while pretending otherwise.
You think it's deeply unreasonable to believe the DoJ works weekends?
It's deeply unreasonable to defend a judge issuing a mid-case order to pay out billions of dollars in 48 hours, and also to defend judges forcing a shut-down government to keep administrative lawyers on emergency standby to answer such quick-turn cases. This is not just "the DoJ works weekends", you dishonest shit.
John Sauer is an "administrative lawyer"?
He doesn't work alone.
Yet another thing for congress to put in the bill to straighten out the district courts. No ruling can take effect until 48 hours when appellate courts are open pass.
As long as there's a no government policy can take effect until 48 hours later also.
There are urgent cases. But by tradition, money is not urgent. If you are owed a million dollars it can wait a few years until the case is over. That you might be bankrupt and homeless by then does not matter to the courts. And so it should be here. Ten billion dollars next month is the same as ten billion dollars today, or the difference is $30 million interest.
Impeachment -- early and often.
Who? The president?
The entire First Circus, and all the District Judges who have authored one of these BS opinions.
Why is forcing the government pay money it statutorily must pay any more or less an emergency than stopping the government from paying money it must pay? If the government is correct, they can just bring a cause of action against the recipients.
It is NOT statutorily required to spend money it hasn't appropriated for the current fiscal year.
The emergency funds have been appropriated.
And the administration has no problem transferring appropriated funds from one account to another when it suits its policy positions.
Who authorized that district judge to re-appropriate them?
Have you read his order?
Did you read my question?
Yes. Did you read his order?
The administration, being the Executive, has the power to execute funds or not execute them.
The Judiciary hasn't that power.
Welp there goes the power of the purse. And the anti-impoundment act.
And the Constitutional structure that has served us for centuries.
nonsense. Congress appropriates. They put money into the purse, and stipulate permissible purpose, time, and amount for it to come out of the purse.
The Executive takes money out of the purse.
Don’t tell Nieporent that. With Trump in the WH, he doesn’t believe in Article II Power, and esp not in the President’s § 1 ¶ 1 Executive power. Rather, he appears to find that power somewhere in the emanations and penumbras of Article III.
"If the government is correct, they can just bring a cause of action against the recipients."
This is not remotely a good faith argument.
Why not? It is only money.
Well, I suppose the argument is that food stamp recipients won't be able to repay anything.
That they are judgement proof do to their financial status may well be irrelevant.
I think this goes the other way -- if the government is required to pay then can do so next week. But if the government is forbidden to pay (e.g. because it's not appropriated) then after it's paid it will be impractical (if not nearly impossible) to claw it back.
Put another way, if the question is about irreversibility, then the government is far more reliable an actor to disburse the funds after a final judgment than recipients are to return them.
Professor Blackman ignores a critical distinction.
The previous case occurred when the government was open.
This case occurred during a government shutdown, when federal clerks’ offices aren’t necessarily fully funded.
Another thing I don't understand:
Per the rule LoB cites:
Counsel who envisages a possible need for an emergency filing, or emergency action by the court, or both, during a period when the Clerk's Office is ordinarily closed should consult with the Clerk's Office at the earliest opportunity. Failure to consult with the Clerk's Office well in advance of the occasion may preclude such special arrangements. Although documents may be filed electronically at any time through CM/ECF, the filer should not expect that the filing will be addressed outside regular business hours unless the filer contacts the clerk’s office in advance to make special arrangements.
Did the government in fact consult with the clerk's office, and tell them they will be filing an immediate appeal should the court rule against them, and that the timing will depend on when the judge rules?
Or did they just blow it off, thinking they had a lock?
I think they did not believe that the preliminary order would require paying out within 48H such that an emergency filing would be necessary (or that the district would stay its order pending appeal).
That is, indeed, unexpected.
Do people not understand that buying groceries is a time-sensitive matter?
Chuck Schumer doesn't.