Judge Kopf once told me about how he trusted the representations of the government. It wasn’t that they were right all the time, but that he believed that the government was due the presumption of regularity, that it would not lie to a judge or refuse to abide the court’s order. We argued about this, my position being that AUSAs and federal agents were no more prone to truthfulness than defense lawyers.

While the judge wouldn’t go so far as to say that defense lawyers weren’t truthful (though defendants were another story), he still believed that AUSAs and federal agents were entitled to inherent belief unless and until proven otherwise.

Then again, Judge Kopf never had to deal with the Department of Justice or ICE/CBT under the Trump administration. Judge James Boasberg, formerly head of the FISA court and who was considered your basic law and order judge much like Judge Kopf, is still coming to grips with the reality that the government has no intention of complying with his orders and, to be blunt, just doesn’t give a damn what he has to say.

On December 22, 2025, this Court issued a Memorandum Opinion finding that the Government had denied due process to a class of Venezuelans it deported to El Salvador last March in defiance of this Court’s Order. See J.G.G. v. Trump, 2025 WL 3706685, at *19 (D.D.C. Dec. 22, 2025). The Court offered the Government the opportunity to propose steps that would facilitate hearings for the class members on their habeas corpus claims so that they could “challenge their designations under the [Alien Enemies Act] and the validity of the [President’s] Proclamation.” Id. Apparently not interested in participating in this process, the Government’s responses essentially told the Court to pound sand.

Judge Richard Leon, granting a preliminary injunction against Secretary of War Defense Pete Hegseth’s sanctioning of Captain/Astronaut/Senator Mark Kelly, refused to be the first judge ever to deny free speech to a retired service member.

Defendants respond that Senator Kelly is seeking to exempt himself from the rules of military justice that “Congress has expressly made applicable to retired servicemembers.” Defs.’ Opp’n at 1. Horsefeathers! While Congress has chosen to apply the Uniform Code of Military Justice to military retirees as well as active-duty servicemembers, see 10 U.S.C. § 802(a)(4), that choice has little bearing on the scope of First Amendment protections for retirees. The First Amendment “is a limitation on the power of Congress,” NLRB v. Cath. Bishop of Chicago, 440 U.S. 490,499 (1979), not the other way around!

Judge Nancy Brasel in the District of Minnesota, held that the government was violating the constitutional rights of its civil detainees.

U.S. District Judge Nancy Brasel said it appeared the Trump administration had surged law enforcement into the Twin Cities without accounting for “the constitutional rights of its civil detainees” held by Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

“The government suggests—with minimal explanation and even less evidence—that doing so would result in ‘chaos,’” wrote Brasel, an appointee of President Donald Trump. “The Constitution does not permit the government to arrest thousands of individuals and then disregard their constitutional rights because it would be too challenging to honor those rights.”

And remember that guy shot in the leg between the murders of Renee Good and Alex Pettri because he attacked agents with a shovel and they were defending themselves?

The United States of America, by and through its undersigned attorneys, hereby respectfully moves the Court for an order to dismiss with prejudice the Complaint filed in this matter against the defendants, Alfredo Alejandro Aljorna and Julio Cesar Sosa-Celis, pursuant to Rule 48(a) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.

Newly discovered evidence in this matter is materially inconsistent with the allegations in the Complaint Affidavit, filed on January 16, 2026, as ECF 1-1, as well as the preliminary-hearing testimony (ECF 18, 19) that was based on information presented to the Affiant. Accordingly, dismissal with prejudice will serve the interests of justice.

In plain English, the agents lied and video proved they lied. Dismissing with prejudice almost never happens. You know what else almost never happens?

Federal prosecutors tried and failed Tuesday to obtain a criminal indictment of six Democratic lawmakers who took part in a video last year urging military personnel to refuse to carry out illegal orders, two people briefed on the development said.

Jeanine Pirro couldn’t manage to get a single vote out of the grand jury to indict this ham sandwich, atop losing the sub sandwich guy, Comey and Tish James.

The word of the government can no longer be presumed to be accurate and truthful. This isn’t to say that every word out of every United States Attorney or federal agent is a lie, except for DHS spokesperson Trish McLaughlin. But it is to say that a new presumption has replaced the presumption of regularity.

I wonder what Judge Kopf would have made of this. Actually, I know that answer. Much as we disagreed about things, he was a person of great integrity, leaving me with no doubt he would have been horrified and disgusted to watch as the presumption of regularity died.