Monday's post (here) detailed the recent declaration by Clifton Johnson, Assistant Legal Adviser for Law Enforcement and Intelligence in the Legal Adviser's Office of the United States Department of State in the Lindsey "foreign official" challenge pending in the Central District of California.
The Lindsey defendants have moved (here) to strike the State Department declaration. Among other arguments made, the Lindsey defendants state as follows.
"The opinion of one employee of the Department of State, or even of the Department of State as a whole, on the terms of the Convention and what the treaty required of the United States, as well as the meaning of the FCPA, a United States criminal statute, has no bearing on the matter before the Court. In any event, it is the job of the federal courts, not the executive branch, to be the final arbiter of what the FCPA actually provides. See generally Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch 137, 177 (1803) (“It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is.”)."
"On the other hand, the foreign policy implications of a particular interpretation, and how to deal with them, are the business of Congress and the President to address. Mr. Johnson’s suggestion to this Court to decide foreign policy is inappropriate. Courts concern themselves with the interpretation of the law as written. Congress is perfectly capable of amending the statute if it decides it is necessary to do so in light of a court’s decision. See generally McNally v. United States, 483 U.S. 350, 360 (1987) superseded by statute, Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988, Pub. L. No. 100-690, 102 Stat. 4181 (“If Congress desires to go further, it must speak more clearly.”)."
Alternatively, the Lindsey defendants argue that if the Court is inclinded to consider the State Department declaration, that it should order Mr. Johnson to appear at the March 24th motion hearing. As noted in an exhibit to the motion to strike, the DOJ has stated that it "will not voluntarily produce Mr. Johnson as a witness at that hearing."
*UPDATED*
In an order yesterday, presiding judge Howard Matz ordered (here) the State Department declaration be stricken.
For additional coverage see here.
The Lindsey defendants have moved (here) to strike the State Department declaration. Among other arguments made, the Lindsey defendants state as follows.
"The opinion of one employee of the Department of State, or even of the Department of State as a whole, on the terms of the Convention and what the treaty required of the United States, as well as the meaning of the FCPA, a United States criminal statute, has no bearing on the matter before the Court. In any event, it is the job of the federal courts, not the executive branch, to be the final arbiter of what the FCPA actually provides. See generally Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch 137, 177 (1803) (“It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is.”)."
"On the other hand, the foreign policy implications of a particular interpretation, and how to deal with them, are the business of Congress and the President to address. Mr. Johnson’s suggestion to this Court to decide foreign policy is inappropriate. Courts concern themselves with the interpretation of the law as written. Congress is perfectly capable of amending the statute if it decides it is necessary to do so in light of a court’s decision. See generally McNally v. United States, 483 U.S. 350, 360 (1987) superseded by statute, Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988, Pub. L. No. 100-690, 102 Stat. 4181 (“If Congress desires to go further, it must speak more clearly.”)."
Alternatively, the Lindsey defendants argue that if the Court is inclinded to consider the State Department declaration, that it should order Mr. Johnson to appear at the March 24th motion hearing. As noted in an exhibit to the motion to strike, the DOJ has stated that it "will not voluntarily produce Mr. Johnson as a witness at that hearing."
*UPDATED*
In an order yesterday, presiding judge Howard Matz ordered (here) the State Department declaration be stricken.
For additional coverage see here.
Post Title
→Lindsey Defendants Move to Strike State Department "Foreign Official" Declaration *UPDATE* Judge Strikes State Department Declaration
Post URL
→https://manufacturing-holdings.blogspot.com/2011/03/lindsey-defendants-move-to-strike-state.html
Visit manufacturing-holdings for Daily Updated Wedding Dresses Collection
