Here <https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/5342077-judge-blocks-doge-access-opm/>is The Hill's summary of the preliminary injunction.
Here <https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.636793/gov.uscourts.nysd.636793.121.0.pdf>is the preliminary injunction itself. It's heavy reading, full of blatant transgressions of the law and common sense. For example, the defendants (the administration) claim: There is generally no public interest in the perpetuation of unlawful agency action. This is beyond belief. The Judge immediately refutes this absurd notion: To the contrary, there is a substantial public interest in having governmental agencies abide by the federal laws that govern their existence and operations.” League of Women Voters v. Newby, 838 F.3d 1, 12 (D.C. Cir. 2016). The public interest strongly favors injunctive relief. Edward -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "leo-editor" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/leo-editor/c88ea440-5d05-4775-8a9f-71415d797bd0n%40googlegroups.com.
