Diddy Granted Fast-Track Appeal So He Actually Could Get Out Of Cushy Prison Well Before His Sentence Is Up
#Legal #News #Diddy #DonaldTrump #MaureneComey #NBA #SeanCombs #SeanDiddyCombs

https://deadline.com/2025/11/sean-combs-appeal-fast-track-approved-1236606062/

Sean “Diddy” Combs Looking At 6-Years Behind Bars, Judge Indicates As Sentencing Hearing In Sex-Trafficking Trial Continues
#Legal #News #CassieVentura #DepartmentOfJustice #Diddy #DonaldTrump #MaureneComey #SeanCombs #SeanDiddyCombs

https://deadline.com/2025/10/sean-combs-sentence-six-years-likely-judge-hints-1236569201/

Sean Combs Gets Personal In One Last Pitch For Freedom Before Sentencing: “The Old Me Died In Jail & A New Version Of Me Was Reborn”
#Legal #News #CassieVentura #Diddy #DonaldTrump #MaureneComey #SeanCombs #SeanDiddyCombs

https://deadline.com/2025/10/sean-combs-letter-sentencing-jail-release-1236568906/

11 Years: That’s What Sean Combs Should Serve In Prison, Feds Recommend; Sentencing On Prostitution Guilty Verdicts Likely This Week
#Legal #News #DepartmentOfJustice #Diddy #DonaldTrump #MaureneComey #SeanCombs #SeanDiddyCombs #SexualAssault

https://deadline.com/2025/09/diddy-sentencing-prosecution-recommendation-1236565804/

A Prosecutor Sues – Civil Discourse with Joyce Vance

Civil Discourse with Joyce Vance

There is a lot of factual and legal detail in the case, but it’s important because it will have an impact on Trump’s ability to fire at will in the federal bureaucracy, ignoring existing civil service protections for government employees, not just at DOJ, but likely closer to government wide.

The 38-page complaint alleges the following violations of law when Comey was fired:

• Violation of the United States Constitution (Article II and Separation of Powers) (Against All Defendants): Article II gives the president the ability to appoint and fire “principal officers” (like U.S. Attorneys), but as an Assistant U.S. Attorney, Comey is an “inferior officer”, subject to governance by Congress, which created civil service provisions that prevent firing without due process or without cause and rendering the way Comey was fired a violation of the law.
• Violation of the Administrative Procedure Act 5 U.S.C. §§ 706(1) and 706(2) (Against All Defendants): Comey’s firing violated the Administrative Procedure Act by withholding the due process she was entitled to and firing her in an arbitrary, capricious fashion that is contrary to the Constitution and goes beyond what the law permits.
• Violation of the Administrative Procedure Act (Ultra Vires in Violation of Statutory Authority) (Against All Defendants): Ultra vires means acting beyond one’s legal power or authority. Comey claims that because her firing violated the law, it is ultra vires, so it has no legal force or effect, and it’s as if she was never fired.
• Violation of the First Amendment (Freedom of Speech and Association) (Against All Defendants): None of the powers granted to a president in Article II trump every person’s right to freedom of speech and association, granted in the First Amendment. So, it was illegal to fire Comey because of her father, in retaliation for any of his speech, or due to what they assumed about her political affiliation and beliefs.
• Violation of the Fifth Amendment (Procedural Due Process) (Against All Defendants): The Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment guarantees that “no person shall … be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.” Comey had property and liberty interests in her continued employment with DOJ. The administration can’t circumvent her Fifth Amendment rights by claiming Article II trumps them.
• Violation of the Fifth Amendment (Property Interest) (Against All Defendants): Another due process claim, focusing on Comey’s property interest in her continued employment with DOJ under the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution.
• Violation of the Fifth Amendment (Liberty Interest) (Against All Defendants): The Fifth Amendment’s protection against deprivation of liberty without due process of law protects against reputational harm caused by government actors when that harm is accompanied by other harm. Here, the Defendants’ actions harmed Comey’s reputation by terminating her without cause and implicitly confirming “stigmatizing allegations” made by Loomer and others. There is additional harm, because Comey’s loss of her job under these circumstances damages her future employment prospects.
• Violation of the Fifth Amendment (Reputational Harm) (Against All Defendants): This is a substantive due process claim, with Comey arguing that the Defendants’ actions violate those rights by damaging the reputation she had worked for years to establish. The Fifth Amendment protects “reputation plus” harms like the ones here where Comey’s reputation was damaged and she lost her job.

Editor’s Note: Read the rest of the story, at the below link.

Continue/Read Original Article Here: A Prosecutor Sues – Civil Discourse with Joyce Vance

#2025 #America #DepartmentOfJustice #DonaldTrump #FiringAttorney #Health #History #Justice #Libraries #LibraryOfCongress #MaureneComey #Opinion #Politics #Resistance #RuleOfLaw #Science #Substack #Trump #TrumpAdministration #UnitedStates