Federal investigators probing the extremist group Oath Keepers on charges of seditious conspiracy last year invoked the provision that permits the government to obtain a search warrant from a U.S. magistrate judge anywhere in the country rather than one located where the search is to be executed in a domestic terrorism investigation, according to the newly unsealed court records.The 18-page opinion revealed that in July 2021, prosecutors asked a U.S. magistrate judge in D.C., rather than one in Texas, to approve a court-authorized search of a cellphone owned by a person who appears to match the description of an attorney for the Oath Keepers, Kellye SoRelle. The lawyer was arrested last week in Texas and was with the group’s founder, Stewart Rhodes, outside the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.
The problem is that Reinhart is a so-called magistrate judge. Many commentators have focused on his personal history and political leanings, but much more significant is that he is not really a judge.To be precise, he is not a judge of a court of the United States. The judicial power of the United States is vested in its courts. In the exercise of this power, judges of those courts can issue search warrants. But a magistrate judge is just an assistant to a court and its judges. Not being a judge of one of the courts of the United States, he cannot constitutionally exercise the judicial power of the United States. That means he cannot issue a search warrant.
The Patriot Act does state that magistrates -- and anywhere -- can issue search warrants, and those warrants can be quite broad like the one the FBI executed here. That raises the question of whether the investigation into Trump is a "domestic terror" investigation, as the Oath Keepers are being treated as domestic terrorists and seditious conspirators.
Trump's fundraising arm has recently received several subpoenas, indicating that the DOJ is looking into his whole organization as conspirators of some sort or other. Ty Cobb, who served under Trump, thinks the whole investigation is ultimately about January 6th (and, it should be noted, thinks Trump is guilty and should be disqualified under the 14th Amendment from seeking the Presidency). This is also coherent with Andy McCarthy's general theory that the M-a-L raid was a J6 fishing expedition.
That's swinging for the fences, though. I guess if you hate a guy enough to impeach him twice after failing to get him with a Special Counsel, the Patriot Act and the 14th Amendment are not unthinkable escalations. Trying your political opponents as domestic terrorists is new, but as the Alien & Sedition Acts show, treating your opponents as more-or-less traitors is almost as old as the Republic.
It seems to me that they have figured out a loophole in the structure of the court, and have leveraged it by selecting lower-ranking members that service the judiciary in order to secure warrants on high profile targets. Targets that, perhaps, would be subject to more oversight and scrutiny if the issuing authority were a more senior judge. Once again, the system being gained for petty immediate tactical advantage, while the longer term net effect is to diminish the credibility of the system.
ReplyDeleteMagistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart wasn't a neophyte. He's been a magistrate judge in that district since 2018; before that, he spent a dozen years as Assistant United States Attorney for the Southern District of Florida.
ReplyDeleteHe knew full well what he was doing. Furthermore, as a magistrate judge, he was supervised by an Article III district judge who also knew what Reinhart was doing.
Eric Hines
At the time the Patriot Act came out I was opposed but not entirely alarmed, as 90% of it was a banana we had already eaten under Clinton. I can't tell if this was new material under that post 9/11 legislation or just carryover from earlier invasions. Either way it's not good, but is an illustration of the inexorable pressure on even good rules in a bureaucracy, and why we should assume at every juncture that twenty years down the road it will have morphed into something different.
ReplyDelete