Trump v. Cook · ¶64

Of course, that is not to say that a response from Cook necessarily would have changed the President’s mind. But as the Government rightly acknowledges, “the right to a hearing does not depend on demonstration of certain success.” Application 18–19 (internal quotation marks omitted). It at least remains an open question what precisely happened here, and indeed whether Cook committed “gross negligence,” let alone “deceitful and potentially criminal conduct,” as the President’s letter alleges. ECF Doc. 1–4, p. 2. Those are factual issues that we cannot determine in the first instance, and certainly not on the sparse record here (which does not even include the mortgage documents at issue nor any other evidence that the Government or Cook may consider relevant). Only after Cook has had the opportunity to respond to the charges made against her “by argument however brief, and, if need be,…

slip opinion
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.