Trump DOJ COLLAPSES and CITES FAKE CASES for DONALD!!!

[00:00:00]Donald Trump's Department of Justice continues to collapse and now they are citing fake cases. Yeah, I guess when the law isn't on your side, just have AI generate fake cases and cite them. The real serious issue here though, these are cases that involve matters of life or death. I mean, the detention of human beings, these immigration cases where you have people filing habius corpus petitions for being unlawfully detained, other very serious cases. This idea that the Department of Justice is using AI, at least in this one case where a Trump appointed judge called them out. Now, we've seen a lot of this with maybe prosay uh people who represent themselves uh in cases and there have been law firms that have gotten very serious sanctions for using AI and citing fake cases. the fact that the DOJ is doing it, the once exalted DOJ with all these resources that prided itself on legal research and that has, you know, a lot of the president is president that it deals with every damn day. I mean, let's face it, a lot of these cases, you know, I guess until Donald Trump destroyed the entire legal system, you know, when the the DOJ case is a little bit of a rhythm with it because if you're doing immigration cases, there's kind of the seinal cases that you cite over and over again. If you're doing civil rights cases, you have the seminal cases you say. If you're doing criminal cases, you know, there's a series of cases that are in your repertoire and sometimes there are novel issues that require deeper research. But the idea that they had to resort to site AI fake cases in a very serious immigration case and Judge Jarbau, a Trump boy in Michigan, calls them out for it. And by the way, this judge should have sanctioned the hell out of him. The judge mocked him and said that it's a real serious violation.

[00:01:52]But any other lawyer I've seen in situations where this has happened has gotten serious serious referrals to the bar. Let me show you what happens in this case. Uh the order talks about how um petitioner a United States Immigrations and Customs Enforcement detainee initiated an action for a petition for rid of habius corpus. And it goes on to talk about um you know what uh what went down. And uh it says over here that the government cites a case versus hot which is not located at the identified page of the federal appendix. Page 387 is contained with a different opinion. Atkins versus CGI which is about commercial arbitration not immigration bond determinations. In its research the court was unable to identify a six circuit case with the caption Taylor v. halt or any federal case containing the quoted language. And uh it goes on to say, "It's no secret that generative AI programs are known to hallucinate non-existent cases. And with the advent of AI, courts have seen a rash of cases in which both council and prosay litigants have cited fake hallucinated cases in their briefs. It should be obvious that any attorney who uses AI must scrupulously review its work product to ensure that the cases cited exist. You think although the court will not presently impose sanctions for this conduct, it goes without saying that the government must ensure its future filings with this court do not include nonexistent case law and cases. Let's bring in Harry Litman from the Talking Feds YouTube channel, podcast, and Substack. the government in this case serious case citing AI hallucinated cases that don't exist they were called out for it now Harry obviously it's a humiliating but these are cases that involve human beings lives writing I mean there's never a time where you should be citing AI cases but like you know if there was a discovery a discovery dispute in some monetary litigation case you know when you cite something that stands for the proposition of requests for production of documents should be propounded da da da da da still very bad there still should be sanctions but when you're doing an immigration case and Harry you know I mean this this is specialty stuff where you should know the cases like why would you even need to go AI and so if they're doing this Harry there's a broader pattern in practice that you and I have been covering at play because this seems to be systemic in what's going on here at this completely uh without any uh credibility DOJ >> dumbfounding you know it's out there AI you see certain rag tag folks or prosay lawyers caught the idea that DOJ is using AI and and submitting things to the court now we've watched the systematic degradation of the department. All these people, professionals have been hollowed out.

[00:05:17]They've had to beat the bushes and give bonuses and I ice cream, who knows what to get new people in, very inexperienced. I'm betting dollars to donuts. It's It was one of these folks because it's not Look, obviously complete incompetence and the like, but it's more than that. Here's how you file a brief, any brief. I'm, you know, including continuence when you are uh at the DOJ and at a big law firm. You write it up. And yes, you will be putting in some sites that uh you're finding in others of your research when you first do a draft. This couldn't have even been that, right? Somehow they just said, "Oh, hey, um, Tach GPT, can you give me a good case that says blah blah blah, but it doesn't matter. At the end, you have a draft." And then there are these big carols at DOJ and usually a support person or maybe you yourself will take the book. All of these are in books for every single case. Put them right next to you. Page two, Marber. Take out the volume. Look and confirm. That seems kind of like uber conscientious. It's not. This is the DOJ talking to the federal courts. The disrespect. And by the way, yeah, he really did. He could have totally totally lacerated this um stumble bomb instead. It should really be uh understood that cases cited to the courts should be real cases. You think so? You know, this is this is uh example 10,422 of things that are now being done as a result of which the presumption of regularity is out the window. And you know, you've made this point and you're making it again when you point out accurately we're talking cases with on both sides, the defendants too, uh h you have these um real live important human stakes. And when you're this big a screw-up, the uh the damage goes to the public safety or potentially the constitutional rights of the defendants that you are dutybound to safeguard. And God knows, have there been other um cases in which a district court hasn't punctiliously flyed everything that the DOJ uh says, but just takes it for granted. It's after all the DOJ except it ain't the it ain't uh your brother's or or parents DOJ anymore. It's just it's the sort of thing that you know somebody would take a sixmon sabbatical or whatever. After doing this it would be so you know completely humiliating.

[00:08:22]that place doesn't seem to have a lot of shame or humiliation left over that you could even get to that spot even if you're a lazy guy whatever that somehow in your mind you can think I know I'll just ask chat GPT and and I won't double check it thereafter you're a complete lunatic if you do that but I think it goes to show that that's the you know the newest recruits at DOJ the ones who are after in a sense the dregs and you know I I'm thinking if I were you as attorney or back in main justice and you you you do this and it shows up it you would be completely completely godsmacked and uh personally affronted and go to that per how the hell could this happen? It's not like um it's such an elementary error and it's such an act of dishonesty, right? I mean, it's it's on top of everything else, you're making up. Meaning, you know, you're making representation and you don't even care if it's true. It could be straight up fiction. No wonder the presumption of regularity is just completely down the drain in so many offices around the country. This is so beyond the pale. And all I can say is maybe at you know in in some terrible concatenation of errors something like that happens but if and when it does all the way to main justice there are there's immediate kind of falling on your sword and remediation and all that kind of stuff. And this I think is just oh that was a bad thing that happened Tuesday. It it's it speaks so much of the lowered or maybe eviscerated professional standards at what once was not long ago the um strongest law firm in the country or maybe world.

[00:10:29]>> Harry, you were a federal prosecutor for many years. You were the top federal prosecutor in the Western District of Pennsylvania. You could probably write a book of war stories about unprepared litigants on the other side who came in and made all of the mistakes. Now, it seems the current DOJ is going through a humiliation check the box ritual of every one of those mistakes that the prosay litigants would make, that the, you know, that unprepared law firms would make. And the DOJ is doing it worse than ever. In many ways, it's like the revenge of the criminal defense lawyer who now gets to look at the unprepared DOJ and say, "Look what fools, you know, you know, the DOJ looks like." I mean, someone like you, Harry, you'd be upset if you were reading the brief and the parenthetical, you know, had the parentheses, you know, that wasn't in the right place or had a semicolon that looked off.

[00:11:26]>> All right. All right. I'm a little anal, but that as a as a lawyer, but it would be much more than that. Ben, if I'm US attorney and somebody files this, I gu almost any judge in the court would have my head on a platter. I want to see Mr. Litman in open court right now. What the hell is going on in your office? How could I'm sorry, your honor, you know, it would be a it would be a a a crisis.

[00:11:55]And uh here it's a kind of uh Tuesday as I say, but it's it's so beyond the pale.

[00:12:03]And yeah, it would immediately uh and I'm thinking of judges on both sides of the aisle. It's like, are you kidding me? What kind of clown show are you running down there, Mr. Litman? And uh you know, it would it would be work to try to win back the credibility.

[00:12:24]That's all gone now. And they seem h, you know, nonchalant about it. Todd Blanch says, "Oh, we're still the good old DOJ getting up and doing the right thing." They are not the good old DOJ getting up and doing the right thing.

[00:12:37]And the assistants who are left are are being downgraded for it. And the ultimate cost is being paid by the public for not having the best and the brightest or anything close to it out there enforcing federal law. You know, it's like uh Todd Blanch is hearing is kind of like Admiral Cooper of Sencom saying [laughter] the straight of Hormuz is open. Everything is good. Ships, come on through ships. You're free to go. Todd Blanch, nothing to see here. Everything is great. And you know, that's to me, Harry, where this isn't um you know, I find myself on this network very rarely anymore even talking about like the Democrat said this and the Republican said that. I'm talking about like uh the basic facts here. You know, the straight of Hormuz is closed. The DOJ is collapsing. This isn't a Democrat or Republican or independent. Although, let's be clear, this is what the Republican party has become under Donald Trump. They are okay with this, you know, uh, apparently. And I just got to call it out. This, you know, this is this is the behavior here is just unprofessional and sickening and malicious and reckless. Anyway, subscribe to Harry Litman's YouTube channel. It's called Talking Feds.

[00:13:57]Search Talking Feds on YouTube. Tell Harry that I said hello. And then you want to do something really we could have we could speak in a coded language to Harry. Tell Harry in the comments if you bought WTF America the new book by the Midas Touch Network that comes out October. Say Harry Ben told me to tell you that I got a copy of WTF America because WTF Harry. That's why I wake up and I say WTF >> WTF. And I just want to repeat what which is that si severe and elementary and screw up that means something's really wrong systemically. It's not just one crazy lawyer. That would be why judges wouldn't address him that lawyer down. They'd want the US attorney. What is go what WTF? Mr. US attorney.

[00:14:48]We'll never end this because I'll just keep going back to you because on a on a motion like this. There's the case law is the case law. Like you become an expert in it if you're on this topic.

[00:14:57]Like you don't need to go, "Hey, Chad GPT, what's the habius case? You know your district. You're in the sixth circuit. You do this case all day. You should know what the case is regarding these types of petitions without asking Chad GP. This isn't a this isn't a new novel issue of law that nobody's unc."

[00:15:15]And I could do this forever. Subscribe to Harry Litman's channel, Talking Feds.

[00:15:19]And Harry, we we get it. I hate subscribe.

[00:15:22]>> Going to Talking Feds.

[00:15:24]>> Okay. [laughter] >> Breaking news right now. My brothers and I wrote a book. It's called WTF America.

[00:15:30]And well, doesn't that just say it all?

[00:15:32]It comes out officially this October, but you can pre-order your copy today.

[00:15:36]Just scan the QR code or click the link in the description below.

[00:15:43]>> [music]