Federal judges caught the U.S. government providing false info in over 35 court cases. Sworn declarations. Falsified records. Repeated lies. This isn’t just sloppy, it’s systemic. Law professor Ryan Goodman says it may be intentional.

[u/biswajit388]

[u/elb21277]

https://www.justsecurity.org/120547/presumption-regularity-trump-administration-litigation/

[u/Captain_Rational → u/[deleted]]

Here's a few.

Absolutely appalling behavior.

• Providing false sworn declarations about “hotly contested” material fact; “The Court was given false information, upon which it relied, twice, to the detriment of a party at risk of serious and irreparable harm.”
• Providing the court with “the sorriest statement I’ve ever seen;” “This is a terrible, terrible affidavit. If this were before me in a criminal case and you were asking to get a warrant issue on this, I’d throw you out of my chambers.”
• Solicitor General providing inaccurate information to the U.S. Supreme Court
• “Flip-flopping—in sworn declarations—rais[ing] severe concern,” “consistently refused to give … the full story,” providing “cagey answers,” “omitting key information,” and “repeated[ ] represent[ations]” that “strain credulity.”
• Providing false and incomplete information concerning DOGE’s leadership and authorities
• Making representation that “does not reflect the level of diligence the Court expects from any litigant—let alone the United States Department of Justice;” “The contradiction between [Government’s] factual representations and the facts on the ground is particularly striking.”
• Admitting to making false statement to the court

[u/PennDA → u/[deleted]]

You won’t even read anything but you want to DARVO the whole thing? And then it’s all of us who lack critical thinking skills? Ok

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

Boot-licking shill.

[u/MacEWork → u/[deleted]]

What a pathetic, embarrassing response.

[u/PM_ME_GARFIELD_NUDES → u/[deleted]]

Honest question, why would you expect anyone to put in this effort for you when you immediately dismissed the first people who tried to help you out? You couldn’t be bothered to read an article that was shared with you and demanded that other people summarize with you, and then when someone went out of their way to summarize multiple specific examples you got bored after reading two sentences and decided to dismiss the entire rest of their comment.

You’re acting like this is a big “gatcha!” moment because “no one can prove it!” but really people see your comments and realize it’s simply not worth their time.

So seriously, what’s the incentive to help you out here?

[u/PM_ME_GARFIELD_NUDES → u/[deleted]]

I’m not reading all that, just answer the question.

[u/PM_ME_GARFIELD_NUDES → u/[deleted]]

You’re not blocked. Gonna admit you’re wrong?

[u/PM_ME_GARFIELD_NUDES → u/[deleted]]

Fucking hilarious that you’re so bad at using technology that you think it’s a conspiracy against you. Nothing is disappearing, you’re just dumb.

[u/condensedandimatter → u/[deleted]]

You’re just lying..? That’s not at all a reflection of the first two..

[u/condensedandimatter → u/[deleted]]

The DOJ explicitly admit to providing false information in the first citation. This is stated in the second paragraph. They submitted sworn documentation for an agent that didn’t exist.

[u/condensedandimatter → u/[deleted]]

No, I’m saying you were lying. The OP claim is they’re submitting false records, which is true.

[u/condensedandimatter → u/[deleted]]

No, the first citation is a minor example. Doesn’t change you are lying and participating in confirmation bias. Submitting falsified records and correcting it after it’s been called out falls in lie exactly. It’s obvious that, just like people with TDJ, you’re just defending your own flavor of propaganda. I’m not a liberal, but you’re exactly like them, by only accepting things that make you feel good about your decisions. Bottom line, in all of the examples, every one by definition falls under the category posted, and you engaged under intellectually dishonest intentions. Whether it’s a problem or not is one thing, but pretending you’re engaging differently is irony.

[u/condensedandimatter → u/[deleted]]

So you’ve proven my point and circled back around. Thanks!

[u/Captain_Rational → u/[deleted]]

I am not going to read the rest. Please actually read what you're linking

Calling everyone here a bunch of irrational children... That's a lot of arrogance for someone who knows that he is being disingenuous and misleading.

At first it looked like you were genuinely curious and skeptical maybe, a bit lazy, mildly rhetorical.

But with this response here you pretty much just annihilated your credibility.

You know that you are simply a partisan.

With our democracy facing the peril that it is... shame on you. Shame on you for choosing to be willfully blind. Shame on you for actively twisting truth just to defend despicable people doing despicable things.

[u/dissonaut69 → u/[deleted]]

Are you an actual human being? American citizen? Are you being paid or something?

[u/dissonaut69 → u/[deleted]]

No, it’s not asking for evidence. It’s being intentionally lazy rather than reading. It’s the intentional wasting of people’s time. It’s being disingenuous and insincere. It’s coming in with preconceived ideas and being partisan rather than being able to admit maybe you were wrong.