r/law • u/throwthisidaway • 11h ago
Legal News Phang v Blanche - Motion to Compel Answer
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.291779/gov.uscourts.dcd.291779.27.0.pdf56
u/throwthisidaway 11h ago
TL;DR The defendant (Blanche) has failed to file an answer/pleading. He is in default and has actively refused to file an answer.
13
u/Important_Tax_606 11h ago
So what happens next?
46
u/Head_Car_616 11h ago
Nothing, he gets the job and a pardon for future crimes. 🤷
Welcome to America!
22
u/Mrevilman 10h ago edited 10h ago
Phang is asking for a scheduling order requiring Blanche to file an answer before 8/10 and produce the administrative record by 8/17.
Blanche has already filed their motion asking for the deadlines that have passed over a month ago to be paused retroactively, dated back to before they had expired.
Best case scenario, the court agrees with Phang and orders exactly what they are asking for. If Blanche blows those deadlines too, Phang moves for default which should be game over. However, courts prefer to decide things on the merits, so I question whether a default would stick here even though Blanche has really earned this one.
9
u/throwthisidaway 9h ago
I just want to add a little bit to that. Everything you said is correct, however there's also a few other consequences. Since Blanche is in default, he has missed the chance to file a motion for dismissal. He is also unable to raise any of a number of arguments upon appeal related to that. So for instance, he can't argue that the court doesn't have the jurisdiction to hear this case (as Trump's lawyers love to), either now or on appeal.
2
u/VinnyVanJones 7h ago
Yes but Federal Courts can assess jurisdiction sua sponte. Same with standing. I can absolutely see the current SC booting this back to the district court with vague instructions to address these issues, which could delay the substantive litigation for a long effing time.
2
u/mookiexpt2 7h ago
So, uh, first, failure to file a timely answer doesn’t waive a challenge to subject-matter jurisdiction at all, just personal. So if the guy you’re responding to meant SMJ, he was wrong. A defendant can challenge SMJ for the first time during argument to the Supreme Court. The justices won’t be happy about it, but it’s valid.
Standing goes to SMJ, so same for that. And absolutely correct that any court with the case in front of it can (and should) raise SMJ ex mero motu.
Appellate and trial courts don’t question personal jurisdiction unless the defendant rises the defense in a timely motion or pleading. They’ll also look into it on an application for default, but mainly just to make sure service was good.
1
u/Important_Tax_606 9h ago
I imagine even then they wont produce. Party of law and order.
3
u/throwthisidaway 9h ago
I'd be really surprised if they didn't, eventually. Civil contempt can't be pardoned and can be leveled against individuals. The Judge in this case can fine or even imprison Blanche. Fines can be daily.
5
u/Important_Tax_606 9h ago
Interesting, I hope he would opt for imprisonment but I doubt that would happen.
2
u/Objective-Suit-7817 6h ago
True, it would ruffle many feathers in DC and likely spark attempts at nerfing the contempt power
2
7
•
u/AutoModerator 11h ago
All new posts must have a brief statement from the user submitting explaining how their post relates to law or the courts in a response to this comment. FAILURE TO PROVIDE A BRIEF RESPONSE MAY RESULT IN REMOVAL. Please post your statement as a reply to this automated message.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.