Trump And Kenney Administrations Say No To Compromise In ‘Sanctuary City’ Suit
In the controversial sanctuary city court battle, there is something both Mayor Kenney and the Trump administration agree on:
They don’t favor the compromise suggested by the judge.
The Trump administration doubts that “further attempts at negotiations with the city would be productive” and thinks the best answer is for the city to change its policies, said senior trial counsel Daniel Schwei of the U.S. Justice Department.
The city is “not willing to modify its policy” in regard to a key issue, and the federal government is trying to impose unlawful conditions, wrote Virginia Gibson, representing Philadelphia.
Inside The Philly Courtroom Where You’re Not Allowed To Speak
Philly.com- Lisa Mothee came to Philadelphia Family Court last September confident she’d get the chance to tell her story, and hopeful that the Department of Human Services’ case on the youngest of her five kids would be closed.
Yet, in the courtroom of Judge Lyris Younge, that’s not what happened. After she answered questions about the birth of her daughter, the topic of her four older kids was raised — and Mothee wasn’t permitted to speak. When she tried, according to a transcript, the judge cut her off: “Do not blurt out in court.”
Then, Younge ordered Mothee and her fiance to be handcuffed and held until the kids could be claimed from school and from the babysitter, to be taken into protective custody.
“I didn’t understand how something like this could happen,” Mothee said. “I had all my documents ready, thinking I was going to get a fair hearing. And they tore us apart.”
On Monday, another judge, Joseph Fernandes, who this week and last has been assigned to Younge’s courtroom, took a total of 15 minutes to reverse the removal, allowing Mothee to reunite with her five children. By the afternoon, they were back home.
It’s just the latest overturning of a ruling by Younge, who has faced blistering criticism and reversals from state appellate judges for violating due process and who, the Legal Intelligencer reported last week, is the subject of a probe by the state Judicial Conduct Board.
Supreme Court Decision Delivers Blow To Workers’ Rights
In a 5-4 vote, the Supreme Court case involving millions of private sector employees delivered a blow to workers, ruling they may not bang together to challenge violations of federal labor laws.
“The policy may be debatable but the law is clear,” wrote Justice Neil Gorsuch for the majority. “Congress has instructed that arbitration agreements like those before us must be enforced as written,” Gorsuch writes. “Congress is of course always free to amend this judgment.”
Writing for the four dissenters, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg called the majority opinion “egregiously wrong.” Justice Ginsburg said the 1925 arbitration law came well before federal labor laws and should not cover these “arm-twisted,” “take-it-or-leave it” provisions that employers are now insisting on.