State of Hawaii v. Trump

Filing 233

MOTION for Leave to File a Brief Amicus Curiae, Raising Political Question Nonjusticiability, from Professor Victor Williams of the America First Lawyers Association, in Support of President Donald J. Trump - by Amicus Victor Williams. (Attachments: # 1 Transmittal Letter dated March 13, 2017) (emt, )

Download PDF
ORIGINAL Victor Williams, FH-ED IN THE LIMITED STATES DISTRICT CCXIRT Appearing Pro Se DISTRICT OF HAWA# ^MAR 16 2017 at o'clock and SUE BEITIA", cleriT" V America First Lawyers Association www, americafirstlawvers .com 5209 Baltimore Ave, Bethesda, MD 20816 (301)951-9045 UNITED STATES DISRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAII STATE OF HAWAIT, ISMAEL EISmKH,et al Plaintiffs No. 17 cv 005(DKW/KJM) V. DONALD J. TRUMP,et al Defendants MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE A BRIEF AMICUS CURIAE, I^ISING POLITICAL QUESTION NONJUSTICIABILITY, FROM PROFESSOR VICTOR WILLIAMS OF THE AMERICA FIRST LAWYERS ASSOCATION, IN SUPPORT OF PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP Plaintiffs have consented to, and Defendants do not oppose,the attached Motion respectfully seeking leave ofthe Court to file this amicus curiae brief. Comes now Professor Victor Williams seeking leave ofthe Court to file an omicus brief(attached)in support ofthe Defendants respectfully asserting that this Court does not have subject matter jurisdiction in this matter as the case presents a nonjusticiable political question. The proposed brief has unique information and perspective that can help the Court beyond the help that the lawyers for the parties have thus far provided. Prospective Amicus asks this Court to exercise its inherent authority to allow the filing. STATEMENT OF IDENTITY,INTEREST AND AUTHORITY OF AMICUS Plaintiffs have consented to, and Defendants do not oppose,the attached Motion respectfully seeking leave ofthe Court to file this amicus curiae brief. Appealing to the Court's broad discretion to allow such a filing, Amicus avers his significant interest in this case and suggests that the proffered brief will be of unique assistance to the Court. Professor Victor Williams is a Washington, D.C. attorney and law professor with over twenty years' experience ~ formerly affiliated as fulltime faculty with both the Catholic University of America's Columbus School ofLaw and the City University of New York's John Jay College of Criminal Justice. Professor Williams has particular knowledge and expertise regarding the text, history, and interpretation of Article II and Article III ofthe U.S. Constitution with many scholarly and popular publications. He earned his J.D. from the University of California-Hastings College ofthe Law. After completing an extemship with both Ninth Circuit Judge Joseph Sneed and Eleventh Circuit Judge Gerald Bard Tjoflat and a two-year clerkship with Judge Brevard Hand ofthe Southern District of Alabama, Williams did advanced training in federal jurisdiction and international law(LL.M.)from Columbia University's School ofLaw and in economic analysis ofthe law (LL.M.)from George Mason University's Scalia School ofLaw. In past. Professor Victor Williams has been granted leave to file amicus briefs in other lower courts as well as by the U.S. Supreme Court. Professor Williams has published scholarship and commentary that offered strong support for the constitutional discretion and prerogatives ofthe past four presidents (without regard to their party affiliation). Professor Williams zealously advocated for timely Senate confirmation ofthe judicial and executive nominees of both George W.Bush and Barack Obama. Although these past presidents often pursued policy ends at odds with Professor Williams' personal policy preferences, he continued to defend their constitutional authority. But now,Professor Williams' acknowledges that his ultimate policy preference to always "put America first" is clearly reflected in President Trump's agenda and early actions. Williams was an early primary supporter of candidate Donald Trump. In spring 2016, Williams launched a widely-reported legal action, after obtaining "competitor candidate standing" as a write-in candidate in several late primary states, to challenge the ballot eligibility of(naturally-bom Canadian) Ted Cruz.(www.victorwilliamsforpresident.comT See e.g., Debra Weiss, Law Profa Write-in GOP Candidate to Challenge Ted Cruz Eligibility, ABA JOURNAL, April 11,2016, http://www.abaioumal.coni/news/article/law prof enters gop presidential race t o challenge ted cmzs eligibility/ and Pete Williams,Law Professor Challenges Cruz on Citizenship, Candidacy, NBC News,April 11, 2016, http://www.nbcnews.coni/news/us-news/law-professor-candidate-challenges-cruzcitizenship-n554046. After Senator Cruz withdrew from the GOP primary,Professor Williams also withdrew from the primary race, formerly endorsed Donald Trump, and founded Super PAC(GOP Lawyers)rallying Lawyers and Law Professors (www.goplawvers.comI to support Donald Trump in the general election. See Victor Williams, Trump Will Bring Return to Rule ofLaw and Economic Growth, The Hill, Nov. 6,2016. campaign/304291-trump-will-bring-retum-to-rule-of-law-and-economic ,Victor Williams,Law Professor Now Proudly in Basket ofDeplorables, THE HiLL, Sept. 20,2016,, and Inside the Beltway:'Lawyers for Trump'Founded" WASH.TIMES, July 4, 2016. The campaign group has now transformed into the "America First Lawyers Association"( which Professor Williams chairs, to advance the Trump administration's "America first" nominations, policies, and programs. See e.g. Victor Williams,B.C. Law Professor Makes Casefor Sessions' Senate Confirmation, STREET INSIDER, Jan. 9, 2017, http://markets.financialcontent.coni/streetinsider/news/read/33555004 UNIQUE CONTRIBUTION OF THE AMICUS BREIF Prospective Amicus offers that the proffered brief will make a valuable contribution to the existing briefing in this case as it presents an alternatively focused theory asserting that the claims against the president's January 27,2017 executive order raise a nonjusticiable political question. Amicus respectfully argues that the Court does not have subject matter jurisdiction in this matter. And Amicus further respectfully suggests that this Court has an obligation to examine this subject matter deficiency, in full, before proceeding further in this adjudication. Ifa case presents a political question, the judiciary lacks subject matter jurisdiction to decide that question. See Victor Williams, Travel Ban Challenges Present a Non-Reviewable Political Question, JURIST - Forum,Feb.15, 2017. There are no judicially manageable standards by which the Court can endeavor to assess the President's interpretation of classified and military intelligence and his resulting decision—^based on that intelligence—^whether to restrict entry offoreign-soil aliens visiting from certain terrorist-breeding nations. The Court's inquiry is thus barred by the patent political question, and any assertion by that such inquiry is necessary to a second-order statutory analysis would not make the inquiry or the first-order controversy justiciable. El-Shifa v. United States, 607F3d 836(D.C. Cir. 2010){en band). But both technical and prudential understandings ofthe political question doctrine require this Court to reject review ofthis matter. Submitted on March 13,2017 IS, fog Pro Se America First Lawyers Association 5209 Baltimore"Ave, Bethesda, MD 20816 (301)951-9045 americafirstlawvers@, CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on March 13, 2017,the foregoing motion with proposed brief was filed with the Clerk ofthis Court using the U.S. Mail(as pro se prospective Amicus is not a registered ECF user) and served on parties by electronic transmission using their email address registered with the ECF account. /sA^ctor.Willi o se America First Lawyers Association 5209 Baltimore Ave, Bethesda, MD 20816 (301)951-9045 /

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?