Feds in Portland Now Unrestrained in Removing Journalists at Protests
Source: Courthouse News
KARINA BROWN
(CN) Federal agents will no longer be restrained from assaulting and arresting journalists when dispersing protesters in Portland, Oregon after the Ninth Circuit temporarily stayed a lower court order that the judges said lacked clarity in the visible identification it required journalists to wear.
In a split ruling, two judges on a three-judge panel issued a temporary stay on Thursday, finding that U.S. District Judge Michael Simons 61-page injunction was overly broad and lacked clarity.
The majority, both of whom were appointed by President Donald Trump, wrote that the federal government was facing irreparable harm from the ruling, and that it was likely correct when it argued that journalists cant be exempt from orders to disperse that the general public must follow.
Judge Margaret McKeown dissented. The Bill Clinton appointee wrote that she would have kept Simons injunction in place. The government had asked the Ninth Circuit for an emergency stay, but McKeown found that the government hadnt shown an emergency, given that a restraining order with virtually the same terms had been in place for over a month before Simon issued his injunction.
According to the website for the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, three-judge panels for motions like the one filed by the government in this case are being heard this month by McKeown, Judge Barry Silverman, who was also appointed by Clinton, and Judge Daniel Bress, a Trump appointee. But in an unusual move, Judge Eric Miller, a Trump appointee, apparently subbed in for Silverman.
Read more: https://www.courthousenews.com/feds-in-portland-now-unrestrained-in-removing-journalists-at-protests/
Karadeniz
(22,607 posts)Ferrets are Cool
(21,117 posts)jorgevlorgan
(8,351 posts)bluestarone
(17,128 posts)What's that all about???
ArizonaLib
(1,242 posts)Wasn't that also used in Bush v. Gore? Is there a constitutional basis for irreparable harm that super cedes freedom of press or free speech? Couldn't irreparable harm be used in just about every case moving through the appellate system?
ArizonaLib
(1,242 posts)Wasn't that also used in Bush v. Gore? Is there a constitutional basis for irreparable harm that super cedes freedom of press or free speech? Couldn't irreparable harm be used in just about every case moving through the appellate system?
oasis
(49,490 posts)Illumination
(2,458 posts)ananda
(28,914 posts)Ive never been more frightened for the
future of our country.
We are being set up for lawless and armed
insurrection if Trump loses the election.
Evolve Dammit
(16,818 posts)This Is a BFD, folks.
Thanks for the post, swag.
bluestarone
(17,128 posts)Eric Miller subbed for Silverman? I do not get it! Was it a medical reason?