In our response to the government’s petition for Writ of Mandamus, we argue that there are no grounds for relief and that the elements for filing a Mandamus Writ have not been met. The Government could have appealed Judge Facciola’s finding of prima facie proof of vindictive or selective prosecution instead of issuing the Writ; further the Government is not irreparably harmed by Facciola’s finding because the government had multiple opportunities to develop a case that would rebut any selective or vindictive prosecution defense put forth by the Choi legal team.
|By: Robert Feldman Thursday September 22, 2011 12:28 pm|
|By: Jane Hamsher Thursday September 8, 2011 12:30 pm|
How did the Secret Service and Department of Interior know about the protest ahead of time? Dan and the other members of the White House 13 did not disclose publicly that they would be taking part in this action.
Dan and his lawyers tried to compel the government to produce the Secret Service’s emails and other documents that would indicate the government was singling out Choi for punishment, but AUSA George maintained that it was not relevant to the case of whether or not Dan broke the law by chaining himself to the White House fence. Judge Facciola ruled in Dan’s favor and demanded the government turn over the documents, prompting George to seek a delay while she prepares a writ of mandamus. Dan will return to court in a few weeks after a decision has been made on the writ.
|By: Jane Hamsher Wednesday August 31, 2011 2:05 pm|
In a remarkable turn of events, the Department of Justice has elected to file a writ of mandamus to prevent Judge John Facciola from allowing Dan Choi to offer a “selective prosecution” or “vindictive prosecution” defense. The government elected to pursue federal charges against Choi and 12 others for chaining themselves to the White House fence on November 15, 2010 to protest Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.