Mechanism to compel a government official ...

[pat_k]

... to perform a duty as legally required or cease a legally prohibited action: Writ of Mandamus.

Lawyers? Any thoughts?

Civil Resource Manual
215. Mandamus

McCune v. United States, 374 F. Supp. 946 (S.D.N.Y. 1974). 28 U.S.C. § 1361, giving the United States district court jurisdiction of "an action in the nature of mandamus to compel an officer or employee of the United States or any agency thereof to perform a duty owed to the plaintiff," speaks only of compelling an officer or employee. The committee reports accompanying this enactment make clear that the legislation did not create new liabilities or new causes of action against the United States.

The writ must be issued in all cases where there is not a plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law. It must be issued upon affidavit on the application of the party beneficially interested.

Lawyers please weigh in. There is lot on the use of writs of mandamus by a superior court to compel inferior court action, compliance with a court order, or as a "back door" appeal, but what about petitions for a writ of mandamus on behalf of citizens as parties with a beneficial interest in compelling an employee or head of an executive branch department to stop an abuse of law or to act to enforce laws being ignored? Or are the duties of such employees too vague to enforce? Seems at a minimum, those who take the oath to uphold the Constitution could be compelled to cease actions (or inactions) that violate it.

I have no doubt we will have a host of people in the administration commiting such abuses and failures. The question is, could mandamus be used to, at a minimum, highlight the depth and breadth of the lawlessness and incompetence?

[bucolic_frolic]

1. I doubt it will help unless they can pull Mandamus Class Action

because they'll all be doing it and all US Citizens are impacted.

[pat_k]

2. I would think a single citizen has a "beneficial interest"...

... in the lawful execution of our laws through the executive branch. It is a petition that could prompt courts like the DC circuit that are actually interested in the rule of law to act. And in fact, from reading as a lay person, courts can issue such writs sua sponte (court takes action without a request from the parties involved).

[bucolic_frolic]

3. you're right. I was being a wise-cracker. /nt

[pat_k]

7. I think the shell shock is making me obtuse (nt)

[Irish_Dem]

4. Ha ha

The American judicial system doing the right thing and standing up to Trump?

Won't happen.

[pat_k]

5. Not all circuits are corrupt: DC, 4th, 9th, 10th

A lawyer would have to weigh in but from what I can gather a petition for writ of mandamus could be filed with any federal circuit.

[Irish_Dem]

6. The judges who are not corrupt are afraid and timid.

They cannot apply justice to someone rich and powerful.

[pat_k]

8. I live in hope

Or do my best to.

"Every optimist moves along with progress and hastens it, while every pessimist would keep the worlds at a standstill. The consequence of pessimism in the life of a nation is the same as in the life of the individual. Pessimism kills the instinct that urges men to struggle against poverty, ignorance and crime, and dries up all the fountains of joy in the world."
— Helen Keller

"They tried to t know we were seeds."
— Dinos Christianopoulos

[Irish_Dem]

9. Hope and optimism are good traits.

I myself am cursed with being a realist.

[pat_k]

10. The realist sees reality as concrete. The optimist

...sees reality as clay.
-- Robert Brault

On edit: "on concrete" to "as concert"... At least the error gave me a chuckle.