Latest news with #NewYorkCityBarAssociation
Yahoo
26-05-2025
- Yahoo
Pigeon-costumed activists cry fowl over NYC pet shop as cops try to defuse tensions
Flock off! Pigeon-costumed bird-lovers Saturday clashed with employees of a pigeon-supply store in Brooklyn – where the screaming matches were so intense they had to be broken up by cops. Animal-rights activist Tina Piña Trachtenburg corralled roughly a dozen fellow bird enthusiasts to join her outside Broadway Pigeon & Pet Supplies to protest owners Michael and Joey Scott over allegations they illegally kidnap and sell Big Apple pigeons to Pennsylvania hunters for target practice. Trachtenburg, known as Mother Pigeon, previously told The Post she believes the Scotts raided a flock she feeds at Maria Hernandez Park fewer than two miles away April 1 to restock their bird supply. Netting pigeons on public property, including city parks, is illegal and considered animal abuse, according to the city's website. Pigeon shoots are illegal in New York, but they are still legal in Pennsylvania, and while it does not appear to be illegal for a New York business to provide the birds for them, activists say it is beyond cruel. The Scotts argued that the activists are pigeonholing the wrong people — with the brothers claiming they breed the birds they sell and aren't required to ask what their buyers do with them. 'I can't say that somebody didn't come in here that I don't know and then bring them [to Pennsylvania],' he told The Post, likening the sale of pigeons to selling feeder fish or mice used as snake food. 'That's not my business to ask what they're doing with the birds,' Joey said. Back in July 2008, the store's lawyer admitted that the shop sold birds to a pigeon broker in charge of a pigeon shooting tournament in Pennsylvania, The Post reported. Many pigeons used for Pennsylvania target practice are illegally trapped in New York City and transported across state lines, according to a 2018 report from the New York City Bar Association. The report found that some of the birds 'suffered a slow and painful death, were denied veterinary care, and in some cases, had their heads torn off and bodies smashed by children hired to collect their bodies.' Joey previously told The Post that his birds, peddled for about $10 a pop, have been sold for weddings, funerals and dog trainers that 'kill them. 'Some people come [buy birds] to do voodoo sacrifices, I'm sure,' he added. Michael walked away when asked by a reporter whether he sells to out-of-state hunters. Joey said their pigeons are bred on the rooftop coop above the Bushwick building they own, are descendants of the birds they inherited from their grandfather in 1971 — and not a single one is from the street. 'Netting' pigeons has been a phenomenon for decades in the Big Apple, activists say, with 311 reports dating back to at least 2010. Last month, a Pennsylvania man was arrested after he was caught on camera netting a flock in Manhattan, and another poacher was spotted in Jackson Heights, Queens. Activists argue the netters are becoming more brazen because 'lackadaisical prosecution' has failed to deter the growing crime. 'You don't see my brother in that picture,' Joey argued of the photo from Manhattan, adding that there are 'a lot more pet shops' that are accused of netting besides his. 'They never caught me, they never caught my brother,' he said of the protesters. 'The fact is that people do it all the time. But whoever [it is], they're not selling to me.' The protest got so heated at points that a half-dozen police officers were at the scene to try to defuse tensions, including one who had to break up several verbal spats between the pigeon store's secretary and an activist. A longtime customer, who declined to give his name to The Post, taunted protesters outside the shop by shaking a cardboard box of about a dozen live pigeons he just purchased for his Bronx coop. 'When people buy the birds and they abuse them, it has nothing to do with [Michael],' the customer told The Post. 'If people buy birds and do what the f–k they want, it's none of his business,' he said. 'He's here to make money.'
Yahoo
16-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Former U.S. attorney who refused to drop charges against NYC mayor quietly returns to spotlight
It had the makings of a significant news event — the first public appearance of a former U.S. attorney who resigned in protest after defying the Trump administration. But the panel featuring Danielle Sassoon proved most notable for how careful she and a famed former New York prosecutor were in avoiding any direct remarks about the president or his Justice Department. The New York City Bar Association event underscored the unease, public silence and caution hovering over much of the legal community four months into Donald Trump's second term as president. A former federal prosecutor who now works at a large law firm summed up the dynamic in one word: 'Fear.' 'People are keeping their heads down,' said the lawyer, who asked not to be named due to fear of retaliation from Trump. 'Scared of being audited. Scared of being investigated. The federal government is very powerful.' Sassoon was the top federal prosecutor in Manhattan until February, when she resigned rather than carry out orders from Trump appointees in the Justice Department to drop federal corruption charges against New York City Mayor Eric Adams. A half dozen other federal prosecutors in New York and Washington subsequently refused to drop the charges and resigned in one of the highest-profile public rebukes of a president since Watergate. On Tuesday, a dozen reporters and a smattering of camera crews descended on the New York City Bar Association's majestic, six-story neoclassical headquarters. A routine continuing legal education event focused on female lawyers specializing in white-collar crime drew attention for one reason: Sassoon. In a blue carpeted meeting room lined with mahogany walls and portraits of Supreme Court justices, Sassoon was scheduled to conduct a 45-minute 'fireside chat' with Mary Jo White, the first woman to serve as the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York. Known as an aggressive prosecutor with an independent streak, White oversaw the prosecutions of organized crime leader John Gotti and the leaders of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. Jenna Dabbs, herself a former federal prosecutor in Manhattan, introduced Sassoon and White and thanked Sassoon for attending the session weeks after giving birth to her third child. Sassoon, dressed in black pants and a black vest, thanked her. Dabbs then came the closest of any speaker to directly addressing the unprecedented events occurring in the Justice Department under the second Trump administration. She praised Sassoon's brief tenure as the acting U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, which handles cases in Manhattan, the Bronx and part of Westchester County, as 'principled, courageous and brave.' In a protest letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi, Sassoon had said that Adams' lawyer had proposed what amounted to a 'quid pro quo.' Federal prosecutors would drop graft charges against Adams in exchange for Adams' cooperation in the Trump administration's immigration crackdown. After Bondi declined to meet with her, Sassoon resigned. Dabbs said Sassoon had 'upheld the oath' she had taken to defend the Constitution. 'She acquitted herself in a manner reflective of the finest traditions of that office, regrettably at some personal cost,' Dabbs said. After a warm round of applause, Sassoon asked White about the role mentors had played in her career. White responded that Sassoon herself was now a role model. 'You're that right now,' White said. 'You're an extraordinary lawyer and you're the epitome of integrity and strength.' White then thanked Sassoon for her conduct in the Adams case without naming Adams, Bondi or Trump. 'You didn't choose to deal with what you had to deal with,' White said. 'But how you handled that was exceptional, and I thank you.' Sassoon asked White if she came under political pressure during her tenure in 1990s. 'There's obviously a spotlight right now on the relationship between the White House, the DOJ, SDNY, after what happened in the SDNY when I was there — the relationship between politics and prosecution,' Sassoon said. 'How is it different from when you were U.S. attorney?' White responded carefully and again did not name Trump, Bondi or Adams. 'It's always been an issue,' she said. Speaking in broad strokes, she said the independence of the Southern District, which earned the moniker the 'Sovereign District,' had 'served the public interest very well.' Asked by Sassoon whether she had any advice for people who serve as U.S. attorneys, White was blunt but vague. 'You should be prepared to resign two or three times,' she said, prompting laughter from the crowd. But White declined to say exactly why she had threatened to resign. In response to a question from Sassoon about what kind of investigations white-collar defense lawyers could expect, White expressed concern about the DOJ 'Weaponization Working Group' established by Bondi, which critics say is an effort by Trump to take revenge on his perceived enemies. Again speaking in general terms, White invoked a famed 1940 speech by Attorney General Robert Jackson where he warned federal prosecutors never to abuse their 'immense power' by targeting individuals for political or personal reasons. 'If you ever turn to focusing on a person and trying to find a crime, you've lost your way,' said White. When Sassoon asked the audience for questions, it quickly became clear that White, not Sassoon, would respond. White answered several questions in general terms and again shied away from mentioning Trump by name. Asked by a reporter if she had any comment on Bondi's tenure as attorney general, White replied, 'I do not.' With that, the event ended. This article was originally published on
NBC News
16-05-2025
- Politics
- NBC News
Danielle Sassoon's quiet return to the spotlight
It had the makings of a significant news event — the first public appearance of a former U.S. attorney who resigned in protest after defying the Trump administration. But the panel featuring Danielle Sassoon proved most notable for how careful she and a famed former New York prosecutor were in avoiding any direct remarks about the president or his Justice Department. The New York City Bar Association event underscored the unease, public silence and caution hovering over much of the legal community four months into Donald Trump's second term as president. A former federal prosecutor who now works at a large law firm summed up the dynamic in one word: 'Fear.' 'People are keeping their heads down,' said the lawyer, who asked not to be named due to fear of retaliation from Trump. 'Scared of being audited. Scared of being investigated. The federal government is very powerful.' Sassoon was the top federal prosecutor in Manhattan until February, when she resigned rather than carry out orders from Trump appointees in the Justice Department to drop federal corruption charges against New York City Mayor Eric Adams. A half dozen other federal prosecutors in New York and Washington subsequently refused to drop the charges and resigned in one of the highest-profile public rebukes of a president since Watergate. On Tuesday, a dozen reporters and a smattering of camera crews descended on the New York City Bar Association's majestic, six-story neoclassical headquarters. A routine continuing legal education event focused on female lawyers specializing in white-collar crime drew attention for one reason: Sassoon. In a blue carpeted meeting room lined with mahogany walls and portraits of Supreme Court justices, Sassoon was scheduled to conduct a 45-minute 'fireside chat' with Mary Jo White, the first woman to serve as the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York. Known as an aggressive prosecutor with an independent streak, White oversaw the prosecutions of organized crime leader John Gotti and the leaders of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. Jenna Dabbs, herself a former federal prosecutor in Manhattan, introduced Sassoon and White and thanked Sassoon for attending the session weeks after giving birth to her third child. Sassoon, dressed in black pants and a black vest, thanked her. Dabbs then came the closest of any speaker to directly addressing the unprecedented events occurring in the Justice Department under the second Trump administration. She praised Sassoon's brief tenure as the acting U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, which handles cases in Manhattan, the Bronx and part of Westchester County, as 'principled, courageous and brave.' In a protest letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi, Sassoon had said that Adams' lawyer had proposed what amounted to a 'quid pro quo.' Federal prosecutors would drop graft charges against Adams in exchange for Adams' cooperation in the Trump administration's immigration crackdown. After Bondi declined to meet with her, Sassoon resigned. Dabbs said Sassoon had 'upheld the oath' she had taken to defend the Constitution. 'She acquitted herself in a manner reflective of the finest traditions of that office, regrettably at some personal cost,' Dabbs said. After a warm round of applause, Sassoon asked White about the role mentors had played in her career. White responded that Sassoon herself was now a role model. 'You're that right now,' White said. 'You're an extraordinary lawyer and you're the epitome of integrity and strength.' White then thanked Sassoon for her conduct in the Adams case without naming Adams, Bondi or Trump. 'You didn't choose to deal with what you had to deal with,' White said. 'But how you handled that was exceptional, and I thank you.' Sassoon asked White if she came under political pressure during her tenure in 1990s. 'There's obviously a spotlight right now on the relationship between the White House, the DOJ, SDNY, after what happened in the SDNY when I was there — the relationship between politics and prosecution,' Sassoon said. 'How is it different from when you were U.S. attorney?' White responded carefully and again did not name Trump, Bondi or Adams. 'It's always been an issue,' she said. Speaking in broad strokes, she said the independence of the Southern District, which earned the moniker the 'Sovereign District,' had 'served the public interest very well.' Asked by Sassoon whether she had any advice for people who serve as U.S. attorneys, White was blunt but vague. 'You should be prepared to resign two or three times,' she said, prompting laughter from the crowd. But White declined to say exactly why she had threatened to resign. In response to a question from Sassoon about what kind of investigations white-collar defense lawyers could expect, White expressed concern about the DOJ ' Weaponization Working Group ' established by Bondi, which critics say is an effort by Trump to take revenge on his perceived enemies. Again speaking in general terms, White invoked a famed 1940 speech by Attorney General Robert Jackson where he warned federal prosecutors never to abuse their 'immense power' by targeting individuals for political or personal reasons. 'If you ever turn to focusing on a person and trying to find a crime, you've lost your way,' said White. When Sassoon asked the audience for questions, it quickly became clear that White, not Sassoon, would respond. White answered several questions in general terms and again shied away from mentioning Trump by name. Asked by a reporter if she had any comment on Bondi's tenure as attorney general, White replied, 'I do not.' With that, the event ended.
Yahoo
22-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
We sat with 350 lawyers as they strategized fighting Trump. Big Law was absent — but Smaller Law is itching to fight.
We sat with 350 attorneys for the NYC Bar Association's "Defending Justice" program. There was great alarm over Trump's Big Law executive orders and attacks on the judiciary. "What we are witnessing today is not normal, and it must not be normalized," the bar's president said. It's a staid and stately room, the New York City Bar Association meeting hall in Midtown Manhattan. The century-old walls are trimmed with red velvet and high Corinthian columns, and famous alumni, including Thurgood Marshall and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, look down from their oil portraits. The hall was far from staid on Monday night, though, as Business Insider sat with 350 New York City lawyers for a program called "Defending Justice." Instead, there were calls for protests, op-ed writing, and lawsuits. "We should bring as many lawsuits as we possibly can to stop the administration from doing what it can," urged civil rights lawyer Ilann Maazel, a panelist. At least two lawyers used the decidedly extra-legal term "five-alarm fire." Some spoke of their plans to attend a May 1 protest and their concerns over having their phones searched at the US border. "If you can go on Signal, I recommend you do," one lawyer told another over a post-panel buffet table. The unrest in the room had two main causes. The first concerned attacks on judges, including recent threats to their safety and the Department of Justice's flirting with the outright defiance of a court's order. The second concern was President Trump's executive orders targeting Big Law firms. The White House has cited national security risks and claims of racism concerning DEI efforts when it imposed penalties on Paul Weiss, Perkins Coie, and others. Paul Weiss and eight other firms struck a deal, while Perkins and three other firms, all hit with similar orders, have sued and won temporary court orders blocking Trump's EOs from going into effect. The legal profession is duty-bound to speak out against Trump's attacks on the judiciary and his EOs, the bar's president, Muhammad U. Faridi, told the group. "Lawyers do not serve the executive — they serve the law," Faridi said, kicking off the evening's program. "What we are witnessing today is not normal," he added. "And it must not be normalized." Monday's program was subtitled "Mobilizing the Legal Profession to Stand Up for the Rule of Law." So we were not surprised when much of the four-hour program focused on resistance. Throughout the night, the call to resist came with words of anger. An audience member demanded that the group "expel from this membership all the partners of Paul Weiss." This was gently shot down from the dias by Maazel, who called instead for urging Big Law's capitulators to reconsider. "It's not too late to change your mind," Maazel said to a round of applause. Maazel, a partner at the law firm Emery Celli, said the big firms that cut deals with the Trump administration could still push back if Trump tries to move the goalposts. And he urged lawyers in the room, including retired lawyers, to step up and help anyone targeted by the administration. "There is an inexhaustible need for lawyers right now," he said. "Our phones are ringing off the hook." Sometimes the call to resist came with an invocation of history. Vince Warren, executive director for the Center for Constitutional Rights, helps defend Mahmoud Khalil, the Columbia University graduate student arrested by federal immigration authorities for his role in pro-Palestine demonstrations on campus. As a panelist on Monday night, he drew parallels between the US and authoritarian tendencies of India and Hungary, where lawyers or their clients can be "disappeared." "We have to envision ourselves as fighting for our own lives," he said. Some said the obstacles to resisting Trump were significant. A lawyer who retired after a career in banking worried he may have to buy his own legal malpractice insurance policy if he wanted to volunteer. For his whole career, he said, his employers had always dealt with that. Another raised a similar issue: He no longer had access to pricey legal research tools like Westlaw or Lexis. Christopher Pioch, a business litigator who moderated one of the panels, said that Big Law firms don't incentivize their younger lawyers to be civically involved. Most have policies that encourage pro bono, but the focus is generally on billable work. "Because of how we've quantified everything, you really miss out on participating in organizations like the bar association because there's no benefit to doing so," said Pioch. The evening's conversation also touched on the red-hot divide between those Big Law firms that have cut deals with Trump and those that are fighting back. A few firms — including Paul Weiss, Milbank and A&O Shearman — have agreed to collectively devote $940 million in pro bono time to priorities that dovetail with Trump's interests. Meanwhile, firms that have resisted Trump's demands, including Jenner & Block, Covington & Burling, and WilmerHale, stand head and shoulders above other firms when it comes to volunteering for pro bono projects, one speaker noted. Panelist Shira A. Scheindlin, a retired US district court judge, earned the biggest applause of the evening by wishing aloud that the law firms that capitulated had not. "If the law firms had all acted collectively and resisted those clearly unconstitutional orders, I think those orders would've quickly disappeared," the retired judge said of the Big Law divide. (Scheindlin noted that only Justices Alito and Thomas dissented from the Court's order blocking Venezuelan deportations — and got the night's biggest laugh by urging, "Pray for the good health of the remaining seven justices.") Other lawyers noted that the rules of ethics can be barriers to collective action. When one lawyer suggested that large law firms agree not to poach clients from competitors who've been singled out by Trump, one member from the audience muttered to her seat-mate, "A client can choose whoever they want." Many in the room described fear around taking action. Scheindlin said some judges have had pizzas sent to their homes by people using the name of Judge Esther Salas's son. Salas is a federal judge whose son and husband were shot dead by a disgruntled litigant who showed up on her doorstep. Many described a fear among lawyers of losing one's job solely for speaking out. One participant described a recent protest at Bryant Park where a small group of lawyers wore masks out of concern for appearing in an online photo seen by their bosses. Lawyers who worked for nonprofits mused about the possibility of their organization's tax-deductible status being subject to an audit. Another said his nonprofit moved its archives to a secure location offsite and encouraged other lawyers to think about what would happen if their offices were raided by the FBI. Still, among the rows and rows of lawyers, some hope broke through the anger and frustration. There was a good deal of gratitude directed towards the judiciary. "The attitude in which we're living now is one of fear and intimidation," and yet many judges have been "very brave, very courageous," said Scheindlin, the retired judge. "Can you imagine if we did not have a judiciary right now?" she asked from the dais. "Every one of these executive orders would be carried out." Maazel noted three reasons there is "room for hope." One was Harvard University's decision to sue the Trump administration. The second was the Supreme Court's late-night order over the weekend barring further deportations under the Alien Enemies Act. The third reason for hope? A recent town hall held by Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley in Fort Madison, Iowa. "So all these folks in Iowa — these are not, you know, Manhattan liberals — they were very upset, not with tariffs, not with inflation, but with a man who was sent to El Salvador without any kind of due process," Maazel said, referring to Kilmar Abrego Garcia, the Salvadorean national who was deported despite a court order that allowed him to seek legal protection in the US. "And that just gave me the illuminance of hope." Read the original article on Business Insider
Business Insider
22-04-2025
- Politics
- Business Insider
We sat with 350 lawyers as they strategized fighting Trump. Big Law was absent — but Smaller Law is itching to fight.
It's a staid and stately room, the New York City Bar Association meeting hall in Midtown Manhattan. The century-old walls are trimmed with red velvet and high Corinthian columns, and famous alumni, including Thurgood Marshall and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, look down from their oil portraits. The hall was far from staid on Monday night, though, as Business Insider sat with 350 New York City lawyers for a program called "Defending Justice." Instead, there were calls for protests, op-ed writing, and lawsuits. "We should bring as many lawsuits as we possibly can to stop the administration from doing what it can," urged civil rights lawyer Ilann Maazel, a panelist. At least two lawyers used the decidedly extra-legal term "five-alarm fire." Some spoke of their plans to attend a May 1 protest and their concerns over having their phones searched at the US border. "If you can go on Signal, I recommend you do," one lawyer told another over a post-panel buffet table. The unrest in the room had two main causes. The first concerned attacks on judges, including recent threats to their safety and the Department of Justice's flirting with the outright defiance of a court's order. The second concern was President Trump's executive orders targeting Big Law firms. The White House has cited national security risks and claims of racism from DEI efforts when it imposed penalties on Paul Weiss, Perkins Coie, and others. Paul Weiss and eight other firms struck a deal, while Perkins and three other firms, all hit with similar orders, have sued and won temporary court orders blocking Trump's EOs from going into effect. The legal profession is duty-bound to speak out against Trump's attacks on the judiciary and his EOs, the bar's president, Muhammad U. Faridi, told the group. "Lawyers do not serve the executive — they serve the law," Faridi said, kicking off the evening's program. "What we are witnessing today is not normal," he added. "And it must not be normalized." A call for resistance Monday's program was subtitled "Mobilizing the Legal Profession to Stand Up for the Rule of Law." So we were not surprised when much of the four-hour program focused on resistance. Throughout the night, the call to resist came with words of anger. An audience member demanded that the group "expel from this membership all the partners of Paul Weiss." This was gently shot down from the dias by Maazel, who called instead for urging Big Law's capitulators to reconsider. "It's not too late to change your mind," Maazel said to a round of applause. Maazel, a partner at the law firm Emery Celli, said the big firms that cut deals with the Trump administration could still push back if Trump tries to move the goalposts. And he urged lawyers in the room, including retired lawyers, to step up and help anyone targeted by the administration. "There is an inexhaustible need for lawyers right now," he said. "Our phones are ringing off the hook." Sometimes the call to resist came with an invocation of history. Vince Warren, executive director for the Center for Constitutional Rights, helps defend Mahmoud Khalil, the Columbia University graduate student arrested by federal immigration authorities for his role in pro-Palestine demonstrations on campus. As a panelist on Monday night, he drew parallels between the US and authoritarian tendencies of India and Hungary, where lawyers or their clients can be "disappeared." "We have to envision ourselves as fighting for our own lives," he said. Some said the obstacles to resisting Trump were significant. A lawyer who retired after a career in banking worried he may have to buy his own legal malpractice insurance policy if he wanted to volunteer. For his whole career, he said, his employers had always dealt with that. Another raised a similar issue: He no longer had access to pricey legal research tools like Westlaw or Lexis. Christopher Pioch, a business litigator who moderated one of the panels, said that Big Law firms don't incentivize their younger lawyers to be civically involved. Most have some policies that encourage pro bono, but the focus is generally on billable work. "Because of how we've quantified everything, you really miss out on participating in organizations like the bar association because there's no benefit to doing so," said Pioch. Fear and loathing in Big Law The evening's conversation also touched on the red-hot divide between those Big Law firms that have cut deals with Trump and those who are fighting back. A few firms — including Paul Weiss, Milbank and A&O Shearman — have agreed to collectively devote $940 million in pro bono time to priorities that dovetail with Trump's interests. Meanwhile, firms that have resisted Trump's demands, like Jenner & Block, Covington & Burling, and WilmerHale, stand head and shoulders above other firms when it comes to volunteering for pro bono projects, one speaker noted. Panelist Shira A. Scheindlin, a retired US district court judge, earned the biggest applause of the evening by wishing aloud that the law firms that capitulated had not. "If the law firms had all acted collectively and resisted those clearly unconstitutional orders, I think those orders would've quickly disappeared," the retired judge said of the Big Law divide. (Scheindlin noted that only Justices Alito and Thomas dissented from the Court's order blocking Venezuelan deportations — and got the night's biggest laugh by urging, "Pray for the good health of the remaining seven justices.") Other lawyers noted that the rules of ethics can be barriers to collective action. When one lawyer suggested that large law firms agree not to poach clients from competitors singled out by Trump, one member from the audience muttered to her seat-mate, "A client can choose whoever they want." Pizza delivery death threats Many in the room described fear around taking action. Scheindlin said some judges had pizzas sent to their homes by people using the name of Judge Esther Salas's son. Salas is a federal judge whose son and husband were shot dead by a disgruntled litigant who showed up on her doorstep. Many described the fear among lawyers of losing one's job solely for speaking out. One participant described a recent protest at Bryant Park where a small group of lawyers wore masks for fear of appearing in an online photo seen by their bosses. Lawyers who worked for nonprofits mused about the possibility of their organization's tax-deductible status being subject to an audit. Another said his nonprofit moved its archives to a secure location offsite and encouraged other lawyers to think about what would happen if their offices were raided by the FBI. Still, among the rows and rows of lawyers, some hope broke through the anger and frustration. There was a good deal of gratitude directed towards the judiciary. "The attitude in which we're living now is one of fear and intimidation," and yet many judges have been "very brave, very courageous," said Scheindlin, the retired judge. "Can you imagine if we did not have a judiciary right now?" she asked from the dais. "Every one of these executive orders would be carried out." Maazel noted three reasons there is "room for hope." One was Harvard University's decision to sue the Trump administration. The second was the Supreme Court's late-night order over the weekend barring further deportations under the Alien Enemies Act. The third reason for hope? A recent town hall held by Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley in Fort Madison, Iowa. "So all these folks in Iowa — these are not, you know, Manhattan liberals — they were very upset, not with tariffs, not with inflation, but with a man who was sent to El Salvador without any kind of due process," Maazel said, referring to Kilmar Abrego Garcia, the Salvadorean national who was deported despite a court order that allowed him to seek legal protection in the US. "And that just gave me the illuminance of hope."
