Categories
Politics

DOJ appeals particular grasp choice

Documents seized by the FBI from Mar-a-Lago

Source: Ministry of Justice

The Justice Department on Thursday appealed a federal judge’s decision to authorize a special master to review documents seized by the FBI from former President Donald Trump’s Florida residence.

The Justice Department also asked Judge Aileen Cannon to stay her related order, which bars the government from further reviewing classified documents found in last month’s search of Mar-a-Lago, Trump’s Palm Beach resort .

The moves came three days after Cannon approved Trump’s request for a special foreman to sift through the seized materials to identify personal items and records protected by attorney-client privilege or executive privilege.

The DOJ opposed the request, saying it had already completed a privileged review of the documents and that a special master could harm the government’s national security interests.

The FBI seized more than 10,000 government records when it searched Mar-a-Lago on Aug. 8. Many of these documents bore classification marks, including dozens of folders that were empty when picked up by the FBI.

Cannon, who was appointed by Trump, wrote in her ruling Monday in the US District of South Florida that “the country is best served with an orderly process that encourages interest and perceptions of fairness.”

The DOJ’s appeal was filed with the US Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit, which has appellate jurisdiction over Florida district court cases.

The DOJ also asked Cannon to stay its order barring the agency from further reviewing and using the seized classified documents for criminal investigative purposes pending appeal. Last week, the department announced that the FBI had seized more than 100 classified documents during the raid.

The DOJ said in Thursday’s filing that it is likely to succeed in its appeal given the classified records, which represent a fraction of the documents found at Mar-a-Lago.

Trump “does not and could not claim that he possesses or possesses classified records, that he has a right to have those government records returned to him, or that he can make plausible claims of attorney-client records preventing the government from doing so would review or use them,” the DOJ wrote.

This is breaking news. Please check back for updates.

Categories
Politics

Appeals courtroom blocks CDC restrictions on cruises in win for Florida

The Royal Caribbean’s Odyssey of The Seas arrives at Port Everglades on June 10, 2021 in Fort Lauderdale, Florida.

Joe Raedle | Getty Images

A federal appeals court on Friday sided with Florida in its challenge against the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention over federal regulations for cruise ships that the state said were too onerous and were costing it millions of dollars in foregone tax revenue.

The two-page ruling from the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals marks an unusual reversal from the appeals panel’s ruling in the matter delivered on Saturday.

The court did not explain the reason for the change, though the latest ruling came just hours after Florida brought the case to the Supreme Court, seeking to reverse the 11th Circuit’s previous move. That action will likely be withdrawn now.

The CDC rules have hampered the cruise industry from returning fully to business amid the nation’s vaccine-driven recovery from the Covid-19 pandemic. Early in the public health crisis, cruise lines were subject to a number of high-profile outbreaks. The industry was among the hardest hit by the coronavirus.

A federal district court in Florida sided with the state last month in response to a lawsuit filed by Ashley Moody, the Republican attorney general. Over the weekend, the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals temporarily halted that decision, which allowed the CDC rules to remain in place.

The 11th Circuit decision on Saturday was made by a vote of 2-1. Friday’s decision was unanimous.

Shares of cruise lines Carnival Cruises, Royal Caribbean and Norwegian Cruise Line each fell further than the broader market following the release of the 11th Circuit decision on Monday.

On Friday afternoon, Moody brought the case to the Supreme Court in an emergency filing, asking the top court to reverse the appeals court’s decision.

“The CDC’s Order is manifestly beyond its authority, as the district court correctly concluded in preliminarily enjoining it,” Moody wrote in the filing.

Moody said that the CDC’s rules amount to an “an ever-changing array of requirements” that are posted to the agency’s website.

In addition, she wrote, the CDC rules require cruise lines to “establish COVID-19 testing laboratories, run self-funded experiments called ‘test voyages,’ and comply with social-distancing requirements throughout ships, including in outdoor areas like swimming pools and while waiting in line for the bathroom.”

Moody wrote that only five ships out of 65 subject to the CDC’s cruise rules had been approved to sail at the time the 11th Circuit issued its ruling. She wrote in the filing that the restrictions on cruises have cost Florida tens of millions of dollars in tax and port revenues. Without further action, the restrictions were set to remain in place until November 2021.

The CDC did not immediately return a request for comment.

The 11th Circuit decision comes as the nation is seeing a rise in Covid-19 cases, largely among individuals who have not been vaccinated, attributed to the highly transmissible delta variant.

Moody said Wednesday that she had contracted Covid-19 despite receiving a vaccine. In a post Friday on Twitter, Moody said she was still experiencing mild symptoms and encouraged people to get vaccinated.

Categories
World News

Harvey Weinstein appeals rape conviction in MeToo case

Harvey Weinstein enters the courthouse on July 11, 2019 in New York City.

Stephanie Keith | Getty Images

Film producer Harvey Weinstein’s lawyers appealed his conviction of rape and another sex crime on Monday.

69-year-old Weinstein was convicted after a trial in the Manhattan Supreme Court in February 2020.

He is serving a 23-year prison sentence on trial two years after Weinstein’s explosion of explosive sexual misconduct allegations that sparked the #MeToo movement that has derailed the careers of other high-profile men to this day.

In a lawsuit, his attorneys set seven grounds for overturning the conviction of the producer of such films as Pulp Fiction, Shakespeare in Love and Gangs of New York.

These include allegations that Weinstein was denied the right to be tried by an impartial jury when the trial judge denied his challenge to banning a potential juror who wrote an autobiographical book on “The Predators of Older Men Against Younger Women.” and had lied about the substance of the book in the “selection of the jury.

Defense attorneys also argued that Weinstein was denied his right to a fair trial because the jury was allowed to hear allegations of serious sexual misconduct from him that were not the subject of the specific charges he faced and that defense experts were wrongly excluded from testimony became the subject of memories of sexual events.

And, the lawyers argued, Weinstein received “a punishment that was harsh and excessive”.

The complaint is filed with the Appeals Department of the Manhattan Supreme Court.

“We filed a 166-page brief listing some serious errors that were made during the process,” Weinstein’s appellate attorney Barry Kamins said in a statement to CNBC.

“We are confident the Appeals Department will take these issues seriously enough to have the conviction overturned,” said Kamins.

The jury sentenced Weinstein to a first-degree criminal sexual act by forcibly performing oral sex with production assistant Mimi Haleyi in 2006. He was also found guilty of third degree rape for assaulting aspiring actress Jessica Mann in a Manhattan hotel room in 2013.

During the trial, the jury heard testimony from actress Annabella Sciorra, who said Weinstein raped her in her Manhattan apartment in 1993.

Weinstein was not accused of raping Sciorra, but her testimony, along with that of five other women, was admitted by the judge on trial so that prosecutors could show a pattern of predatory behavior by the film mogul. Numerous other women have accused Weinstein of sexual misconduct.

Another Weinstein attorney, Arthur Aidala, said, “With a year behind and emotions waning, the case record confirms what we have always believed: that Mr. Weinstein did not get a fair trial.”

“We will argue that the trial judge violated well-accepted and fundamental principles of New York law and violated Mr. Weinstein’s constitutional rights,” Aidala said. “We are very confident that the Appeals Department will correct these mistakes and send this case back to another judge.”

In addition to the New York case, Weinstein is also facing pending charges filed by the Los Angeles prosecutor in January 2020. She accused him of raping a woman and sexually assaulting a second woman over a period of two days in 2013.

The Los Angeles attorney has an extradition request pending for Weinstein, who is being held in a New York State prison. Weinstein, who has several health problems, tested positive for the coronavirus in prison in March 2020.

Weinstein founded the entertainment company Miramax with his brother Bob Weinstein.

They later founded The Weinstein Company, another film production company that filed for bankruptcy in early 2018 following the damned Harvey Weinstein charges, which were first published in The New Yorker and The New York Times. The Weinstein Company closed later that year.

– CNBCs Kevin Breuninger contributed to this article.

Categories
Politics

Appeals courtroom sends lawsuit over Trump monetary data again to decrease courtroom

United States President Donald Trump arrives to discuss the government’s testing plan for coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in the Rose Garden of the White House in Washington on September 28, 2020.

Carlos Barria | Reuters

A federal appeals court on Wednesday sent a lawsuit over President Donald Trump’s financial reports back to a lower court, further delaying efforts by House Democrats to obtain years of presidential personal and business records.

In its ruling, a three-person jury from the US Court of Appeal for the DC Circuit overturned an earlier District Court ruling and joined a Supreme Court ruling over the summer instructing the lower courts to look more closely at the separation of powers in the case.

Two of these appellate judges were appointed by Democratic presidents and one by Trump.

The House Oversight and Reform Committee issued an eight-year subpoena of Trump’s papers from the accounting firm Mazars USA in 2019. The panel’s democratic majority said it had obtained the records as part of its legislative and supervisory duties and as part of ongoing investigations.

Trump’s lawyers have tried to block publication of the records, arguing that Congress was involved in a fishing expedition to politically violate him.

A U.S. district judge and federal appeals body had previously upheld the subpoena. However, the Supreme Court raised concerns in July about the separation of powers between the legislature and the executive.

In their brief ruling on Wednesday, the appellate judges found that they “have no opinion as to whether this case will be in dispute after the subpoena has expired or whether the parties’ arguments are well founded”.

The board of directors announced that Chairwoman Carolyn Maloney, DN.Y., intends to remit the subpoena to Mazars at the beginning of the next convention.

“It remains crucial that the oversight committee – and the House in a broader sense – is able to ensure an immediate enforcement of the subpoena without the risk of investigative subjects thwarting their efforts by delays in litigation,” the attorney said of the committee to the court of appeal in early December.

A spokeswoman for the oversight committee did not immediately respond to CNBC’s request to comment on the appeals court’s ruling. The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.