Latest Breaking News

They argue that the President's House is maybe not part of the Independence Park site, and so it is not included in the relevant agreements. They argue that the removal of the materials is not a completed act under the relevant agreements. They argue that the most recent agreement (called the Third Amendment to the agreements) is no longer in force, while the agreement itself clearly states that it is perpetually in force unless superseded explicitly.

Honestly, the lawyers for the NPS ought to be ashamed of themselves. They know these are bullshit arguments in the service of "Stephen Miller can do whatever he wants."

In this case, the agreements are so clearly relevant and the removal so clearly required consultation with the City that one can only imagine that it is a test case for Miller to see just how far right wing judges will bend over to allow Trumpian overreach. It's not a close call here in terms of the law and governing agreements. Unless, and this is possible too, Miller and Co. didn't know about the clear-as-day agreements about the site and just decided to do what they wanted, trying to piece together these absurd arguments after the fact.