Rein in politicized judges
and their injunctions
Washington Examiner,
by
Editorial
Original Article
Posted By: MissMolly,
5/25/2019 4:49:30 AM
Federal district judges aren't emperors for the whole United States. Congress and the Supreme Court should both remind them of that reality.
By issuing putatively national injunctions, Attorney General William Barr said in a May 21 speech to the American Law Institute: “One judge can, in effect, cancel the policy with the stroke of the pen. No official in the United States government [rightly] can exercise that kind of nationwide power, with the sole exception of the president. And the Constitution subjects him to nationwide election, among other constitutional checks, as a prerequisite to wielding that power.”
The subject arises because, on issue after issue, liberal district judges
Reply 1 - Posted by:
jeffkinnh 5/25/2019 6:25:38 AM (No. 83829)
Yes, this DEFINITELY needs to happen. Probably not until Trump's second term however. Hopefully Congress will be back in Republican hands and RBG will have been replaced with a justice who respects law as written.
13 people like this.
Reply 2 - Posted by:
millstream 5/25/2019 6:34:45 AM (No. 83830)
unlikely congress will step in and legislate this problem away...perhaps an immediate mandatory review by a higher court with the that judge having to appear and justify his or her actions before that panel. If a single judge has been called upon in this way several times his or her scope of jurisdiction will require mandatory review by the AG's office prior to all future hearings.
9 people like this.
Reply 3 - Posted by:
WhamDBambam 5/25/2019 6:43:19 AM (No. 83832)
Simply fire all of the Obama and Clinton judges, and about half of the Bush judges.
10 people like this.
Reply 4 - Posted by:
Rinktum 5/25/2019 7:20:19 AM (No. 83845)
Everyone should be appalled by these decisions. Clearly, this an usurpation of power. What has happened is that democrats, once again, believe they are above the law. Because of their arrogance in believing that the end justifies the means, anything goes with these radicals. One unelected man making a decision that affects us all, is of course, abhorrent to most of us. Time after time we just shake our heads because we know whatever Executive Order President Trump signs will, most likely, be overturned by a black robed leftist in order to thwart the President because of his raw hatred of him and his own personal political dogma he wants enforced. It really is outrageous. Where is the oversight? Does not the Supreme Court oversee these Courts? The rogue judges are doing great harm to the judiciary and it is very telling that SCOTUS does not step in to protect the integrity of the Judiciary.
20 people like this.
Reply 5 - Posted by:
Rumblehog 5/25/2019 8:24:23 AM (No. 83895)
Thank you, AG Barr!! This has needed to be said for a long, long time.
8 people like this.
Reply 6 - Posted by:
bpl40 5/25/2019 8:41:17 AM (No. 83914)
What if the Administration simply declines to obey the injunction except in the specific case that comes in front of the lower court? Will it trigger a "constitutional crisis?"
2 people like this.
Reply 7 - Posted by:
dman 5/25/2019 8:44:32 AM (No. 83918)
The roots of this Constitutional confrontation (it is not a crisis, as the Constitution itself provides remedy) are the 1803 Marbury v Madison judicial review and all the decisions and rulings that followed, the Seventeenth Amendment (ratified in 1913), and the rise of the never-Trump neo-Pharisees (who seized the House in 2018) and their Deep State co-conspirators.
It is high time that the three (or four if you count the bureaucracy, or five if you also count the media) separate - but not "co-equal" branches (per Hamilton's Federalist Papers) "have it out" and a proper balance of powers be restored. WTP will also have a chance to weigh in on this in 2020 ..
.. and it may be our last.
4 people like this.
Reply 8 - Posted by:
iraengneer 5/25/2019 8:51:43 AM (No. 83924)
This did not begin during Ovomit's reign. Nor Bush's (either) nor Clinton or Carter. (By the way, the worthless Earl Warren came courtesy of Eisenhower ).
No, this reaches back 200 years to Marbury v. Madison, the first (probably) of an ever-worsening paytern of nitwits-in-black-robes, pursuing the aggrandizement of what was intended to be the WEAKEST branch of government into what it has become. Even "co-equal" was not intended.
The trappings of royalty have not helped, all the deference, etc. "Your Honor" is durn close to "your Worship" or "Your Majesty", reinforcing the presumptions of superiority. And nodding like battery powered marionettes as judges presume the power to "make law" via unchallenged precedent and stare decisis worship has rendered pretensions of "self government" and "consent of the governed" as forgotten terms.
This is a cancer eating at the nation and at this point demands drastic remedies. Start, perhaps, by barring lawyers (a loathsome clutch of sleazes) from EVER being judges. And short, nonrenewable lifetime term limits.
8 people like this.
Reply 9 - Posted by:
RobbyDeal 5/25/2019 9:54:00 AM (No. 83979)
Let's fix this with a three strikes law against Federal Judges. The US Constitution gives Congress power to set up and regulate federal courts. Let federal Judges be subject to a three strikes-type law: if a judge is over ruled or over turned by a higher court three times, they are immediately removed from office by order of the CJ of the Supreme Court. Rationale: federal judges are appointed to interpret laws, not create them. Being over turned three times indicates a lack of understanding of federal law. If such a restriction existed, judges would be very reluctant to burn their rulings on what they know are frivolous decisions, e.g. injunctions against Trump travel ban.
2 people like this.
Reply 10 - Posted by:
Chuzzles 5/25/2019 10:50:25 AM (No. 84025)
I saw an article last week about a Utah judge who has been suspended for his out of legal bounds judicial behavior. I suspect it is time to start doing that, especially since congress refuses to rein these judges in. It serves the agenda of congress, so they are letting these judges run amok. These judges need the harshest possible smackdown, especially since they admit is is all based on their own political beliefs and their hatred of Trump, not anything that is illegal. Suspend or disbar them, but punish them.
2 people like this.
Reply 11 - Posted by:
anniebc 5/25/2019 12:27:57 PM (No. 84083)
It Is About TIME!! Thank you, AG Barr for having the guts to say it.
1 person likes this.
Reply 12 - Posted by:
bighambone 5/25/2019 10:12:53 PM (No. 84318)
Clearly the federal courts at the district level have become completely politicized, especially the activist liberal judges who were nominated by Clinton and Obama who have been issuing nationwide injunctions against President Trump concerning national security manners. You have to figure that the Supreme Court will straighten that out but first the Trump Administration must send up the appropriate case.
0 people like this.
Below, you will find ...
Most Recent Articles posted by "MissMolly"
and
Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)