Well, Sure, If You Really Want Me To
Stop me if you’ve heard this one. You and your college roommate get along fine except where dishes are concerned. Somehow you two just can’t manage to stick to an agreement on getting ‘em washed. More or less, y’all take turns promising to wash ‘em and then avoiding washing them until the other badgers the one into finally washing them.
So today, as on many days before, one of you comes home to find the dishes piled from the sink to the ceiling and the other roommate just sitting there watching TV. Argh! “You said you’d wash ‘em yesterday and you didn’t! You suck!” And on and on in this manner for the next fifteen minutes.
Finally the lazing roommate looks up and sighs. “Well, fine. I’ll do the stinkin’ dishes–if you really want me to.”
“If you really want me to.” As though the fifteen-minute rant about how she was supposed to do the dishes and how infuriating it is that she didn’t do the dishes was somehow unrelated to a standing request that she do the dishes? I don’t know about you, but this sort of response makes me see red.
And so we leave the Realm of Hypothetical Situations and return to Reality…
…where I’ve received word from Zuhair Mahd that the U.S. did in fact file over 70 pages of documentation relating to the FBI name check in response to Judge Miller’s order that they do so by September 14. (They filed in the evening of September 13. I’m glad, I guess, that I’m not the worst procrastinator in the country.) Perhaps I should have used scare quotes: “Relating to.” Allegedly relating to. The contents included inconclusive printouts from a computer in the process of tracking activities to do with the name check, or something, and also further declarations that the FBI cannot disclose the results of the name check to either Zuhair himself or even to the U. S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.
Lovely. But here’s the bit that really galls me. Apparently they also indicated that they can arrange to submit that information to the court for review in camera (privately in the judge’s chambers) if the court orders them to do so.
If the court orders them to do so. “All right, fine, I’ll do the dishes. I mean, if you really want me to.”
THE COURT: All right. I am not going to quibble with you anymore. You have not proved to me that you have complied with my order, and you have until September 14 to do so…. It’s unacceptable to me for you to tell me that you won’t tell me whether or not his name check was cleared, and I have no proof that it was either rejected or cleared at this stage.
MS. WEISHAUPL: I understand, Your Honor. To just explain a little further, Your Honor, I do not receive the results of the name check. I do not receive a copy of that. That is something that goes from the FBI to the Department of Homeland Security, so therefore I cannot tell you that–whether or not Mr. Mahd passed his name check. And I apologize for that, but to clarify your order, if I understand correctly, you wish me to submit something in writing–
THE COURT: No, I wish you to submit a certified copy of a document approving or rejecting this plaintiff in their name check review.
MS. WEISHAUPL: I understand, Your Honor.
THE COURT: And you can submit it in camera if you want to.
—Reporter’s Transcript, Show Cause Hearing, August 31, 2007
Sounds to me like the court has already “ordered them to do so.” But just in case anyone is confused, let’s look at the actual order filed on September 5:
Accordingly, to determine whether Defendants have complied with my Order of Remand, I order that Defendants file, on or before September 14, 2007, documentation, appropriately authenticated pursuant to Fed. R. Evid. 902 or otherwise, demonstrating that the name check process for the Plaintiff has been completed, the date it was completed, and the result of that process.
DATED at Denver, Colorado, on September 4, 2007.
BY THE COURT:
s/ Walker D. Miller
United States District Judge
“If the court orders them to do so.” That’s not really in question, is it?
Red. Seeing it. In plenitude.
[to be continued, as usual]
September 15th, 2007 at 9:13 pm
Thanks for blogging on this interesting saga Niki. One day I will read it as a spectator, until then, I am the plaintiff!
September 22nd, 2007 at 8:04 am
[…] as I’ve hammered on before, they were already ordered to do as of August 31, so don’t think too highly of this […]