ACLU vs. Clapper, Alexander, Hagel, Holder, and Mueller - 7

Click to enrage

The effort to shut down the government by the neoCon elements within the U.S. House of Representatives has temporarily stalled this case.

The government lawyers in the DOJ who are ticking some judges off, asked for an extension of time in which to respond because. Just because.

The chief judge gave them some time in all civil cases pending in that district in which they were appearing as counsel, an extension which they really liked, so, then they came back to ask for even more time.

In response, the judge (Pauley) on the specific case issued this order:

---

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION;
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION
FOUNDATION; NEW YORK CIVIL LIBERTIES
UNION; and NEW YORK CIVIL LIBERTIES
UNION FOUNDATION,

Plaintiffs,
                                                                           Case No. 13-cv-03994-UA
v.                                                                        Hon. William H. Pauley

JAMES R. CLAPPER, in his official capacity as
Director of National Intelligence; KEITH B.
ALEXANDER, in his official capacity as Director
of the National Security Agency and Chief of the
Central Security Service; CHARLES T. HAGEL, in
his official capacity as Secretary of Defense; ERIC
H. HOLDER, in his official capacity as Attorney
General of the United States; and ROBERT S.
MUELLER III, in his official capacity as Director
of the Federal Bureau of Investigation,

Defendants.

---

WILLIAM H. PAULEY III, District Judge:

    On October 1, 2012, Chief Judge Loretta A. Preska stayed all civil actions in the Southern District of New York where the United States Attorney represents the United States, its agencies, or its employees. By letter dated October 10, the ACLU seeks to lift the stay in this case. By letter dated October 11, the Government opposes that application.

    The Government argues a stay is appropriate because funding for the Department of Justice has expired and appropriations have lapsed. But Plaintiffs allege they are suffering ongoing irreparable harm. An indefinite shutdown cannot shield the Government from defending against claims of ongoing constitutional violations.

    This case presents issues of public importance to the nation and deserves resolution in a timely and efficient manner. As Plaintiffs note, other district courts faced with pressing issues have required the Department of Justice to continue to litigate, despite the shutdown. See ECF No.14, First Unitarian Church of L.A. v. Nat'l Sec. Agency, No. 13 Civ. 3287 (JSW)(N.D.Cal.); ECF No. 11, Priests for Live v. U.S. Dep't of Health & Human Servs., No. 13 Civ. 1261 (EGS)(D.D.C.).

    Accordingly, the stay is lifted and the Court adopts the following schedule:

        1. The parties will file reply briefs on their pending motions on October 25, 2013;
        2. This Court will hear oral argument on November 22, 2013 at 10:30 a.m.

Dated: October 15, 2013
    New York, New York

                                SO ORDERED;

                                /s/
                                WILLIAM H. PAULEY III
                                    U.S.D.J.

---

The next post in this series is here, the previous post in this series is here.