Do Democrats understand that Lawfare 2.0 - Low-level Federal Judges "Ruling Against" Executive Actions - can and WILL Backfire on Them?

Seymour Flops

Seymour Flops

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2021
Messages
26,928
Reaction score
23,467
Points
2,288
Location
Texas
Since Trump returned to power in January, at least 60 judges or appeals courts have slowed or blocked some of his administration’s initiatives.


Sixty, out of nearly 900.

Here is a breakdown of federal judges and by whom they were appointed:

Following are the number of Article III federal judges serving in the federal judiciary as of May 24, 2025, organized by the president who appointed them.

Current federal judges by appointing president and circuit

Ballotpedia: The Encyclopedia of American Politics
ballotpedia.org ballotpedia.org

Appointed by Democrat presidents:

Appointed by Republican presidents:

So a little more than twice as many Biden and Obama appointees as Trump appointees. But that "score" is not that relevant. If there were only a dozen federal judges appointed by Biden, the Democrat activists would have simply judge shopped to their courts and get the actions they have gotten from the sixty.

I get that Democrats are giddy that they have a chance to stop Trump's agenda after losing the election. But, what will they say when Trump appointed judges do the same if Democrats win the White House in 2028? What will they say if those Trump appointees also stop congressional actions when Dems have the majority?

Will they be satisfied with the answer: "Marbury v Madison, bitches!"

The Beauty of these "rulings" is that most of them do not "rule" on anything. Nearly all of them are judicial orders, not rulings. No one can run the executive and try to respond to nine hundred judges issuing orders and the opposition party claiming those orders are now "the law."
 
if G-d forbid democrats ever regain the WH in my lifetime, I doubt any Republican judge will stop a Progressive POTUS from shipping his political enemies to the gulags
 
CrusaderFrank said:
if G-d forbid democrats ever regain the WH in my lifetime, I doubt any Republican judge will stop a Progressive POTUS from shipping his political enemies to the gulags
Click to expand...
Not a typical Republican judge, no.

Trump would have to carefully select judges willing to use rulings from the bench to reverse policy decisions of the next president. Just as Obama did, and just as whoever controled Biden's Autopen did.
 
Seymour Flops said:
Since Trump returned to power in January, at least 60 judges or appeals courts have slowed or blocked some of his administration’s initiatives.


Sixty, out of nearly 900.

Here is a breakdown of federal judges and by whom they were appointed:

Following are the number of Article III federal judges serving in the federal judiciary as of May 24, 2025, organized by the president who appointed them.

Current federal judges by appointing president and circuit

Ballotpedia: The Encyclopedia of American Politics
ballotpedia.org ballotpedia.org

Appointed by Democrat presidents:

Appointed by Republican presidents:

So a little more than twice as many Biden and Obama appointees as Trump appointees. But that "score" is not that relevant. If there were only a dozen federal judges appointed by Biden, the Democrat activists would have simply judge shopped to their courts and get the actions they have gotten from the sixty.

I get that Democrats are giddy that they have a chance to stop Trump's agenda after losing the election. But, what will they say when Trump appointed judges do the same if Democrats win the White House in 2028? What will they say if those Trump appointees also stop congressional actions when Dems have the majority?

Will they be satisfied with the answer: "Marbury v Madison, bitches!"

The Beauty of these "rulings" is that most of them do not "rule" on anything. Nearly all of them are judicial orders, not rulings. No one can run the executive and try to respond to nine hundred judges issuing orders and the opposition party claiming those orders are now "the law."
Click to expand...
It's not "lawfare" when crimes are being prosecuted.

Grow the **** up and stop letting them brainwash you with cute little catch-phrases.
 
Seymour Flops said:
Since Trump returned to power in January, at least 60 judges or appeals courts have slowed or blocked some of his administration’s initiatives.


Sixty, out of nearly 900.

Here is a breakdown of federal judges and by whom they were appointed:

Following are the number of Article III federal judges serving in the federal judiciary as of May 24, 2025, organized by the president who appointed them.

Current federal judges by appointing president and circuit

Ballotpedia: The Encyclopedia of American Politics
ballotpedia.org ballotpedia.org

Appointed by Democrat presidents:

Appointed by Republican presidents:

So a little more than twice as many Biden and Obama appointees as Trump appointees. But that "score" is not that relevant. If there were only a dozen federal judges appointed by Biden, the Democrat activists would have simply judge shopped to their courts and get the actions they have gotten from the sixty.

I get that Democrats are giddy that they have a chance to stop Trump's agenda after losing the election. But, what will they say when Trump appointed judges do the same if Democrats win the White House in 2028? What will they say if those Trump appointees also stop congressional actions when Dems have the majority?

Will they be satisfied with the answer: "Marbury v Madison, bitches!"

The Beauty of these "rulings" is that most of them do not "rule" on anything. Nearly all of them are judicial orders, not rulings. No one can run the executive and try to respond to nine hundred judges issuing orders and the opposition party claiming those orders are now "the law."
Click to expand...
To delay is to deny....That's the outcome.
 
Seymour Flops said:
Since Trump returned to power in January, at least 60 judges or appeals courts have slowed or blocked some of his administration’s initiatives.


Sixty, out of nearly 900.

Here is a breakdown of federal judges and by whom they were appointed:

Following are the number of Article III federal judges serving in the federal judiciary as of May 24, 2025, organized by the president who appointed them.

Current federal judges by appointing president and circuit

Ballotpedia: The Encyclopedia of American Politics
ballotpedia.org ballotpedia.org

Appointed by Democrat presidents:

Appointed by Republican presidents:

So a little more than twice as many Biden and Obama appointees as Trump appointees. But that "score" is not that relevant. If there were only a dozen federal judges appointed by Biden, the Democrat activists would have simply judge shopped to their courts and get the actions they have gotten from the sixty.

I get that Democrats are giddy that they have a chance to stop Trump's agenda after losing the election. But, what will they say when Trump appointed judges do the same if Democrats win the White House in 2028? What will they say if those Trump appointees also stop congressional actions when Dems have the majority?

Will they be satisfied with the answer: "Marbury v Madison, bitches!"

The Beauty of these "rulings" is that most of them do not "rule" on anything. Nearly all of them are judicial orders, not rulings. No one can run the executive and try to respond to nine hundred judges issuing orders and the opposition party claiming those orders are now "the law."
Click to expand...
They don’t care if it backfires. They have no choice.

They need their un-American agenda pushed at all cost.
 
Seymour Flops said:
Since Trump returned to power in January, at least 60 judges or appeals courts have slowed or blocked some of his administration’s initiatives.


Sixty, out of nearly 900.

Here is a breakdown of federal judges and by whom they were appointed:

Following are the number of Article III federal judges serving in the federal judiciary as of May 24, 2025, organized by the president who appointed them.

Current federal judges by appointing president and circuit

Ballotpedia: The Encyclopedia of American Politics
ballotpedia.org ballotpedia.org

Appointed by Democrat presidents:

Appointed by Republican presidents:

So a little more than twice as many Biden and Obama appointees as Trump appointees. But that "score" is not that relevant. If there were only a dozen federal judges appointed by Biden, the Democrat activists would have simply judge shopped to their courts and get the actions they have gotten from the sixty.

I get that Democrats are giddy that they have a chance to stop Trump's agenda after losing the election. But, what will they say when Trump appointed judges do the same if Democrats win the White House in 2028? What will they say if those Trump appointees also stop congressional actions when Dems have the majority?

Will they be satisfied with the answer: "Marbury v Madison, bitches!"

The Beauty of these "rulings" is that most of them do not "rule" on anything. Nearly all of them are judicial orders, not rulings. No one can run the executive and try to respond to nine hundred judges issuing orders and the opposition party claiming those orders are now "the law."
Click to expand...
The problem as I see it is that there are far more rogue partisan democrat judges than repubs

Dems have more outs to play with than we do
 
Seymour Flops said:
Since Trump returned to power in January, at least 60 judges or appeals courts have slowed or blocked some of his administration’s initiatives.


Sixty, out of nearly 900.

Here is a breakdown of federal judges and by whom they were appointed:

Following are the number of Article III federal judges serving in the federal judiciary as of May 24, 2025, organized by the president who appointed them.

Current federal judges by appointing president and circuit

Ballotpedia: The Encyclopedia of American Politics
ballotpedia.org ballotpedia.org

Appointed by Democrat presidents:

Appointed by Republican presidents:

So a little more than twice as many Biden and Obama appointees as Trump appointees. But that "score" is not that relevant. If there were only a dozen federal judges appointed by Biden, the Democrat activists would have simply judge shopped to their courts and get the actions they have gotten from the sixty.

I get that Democrats are giddy that they have a chance to stop Trump's agenda after losing the election. But, what will they say when Trump appointed judges do the same if Democrats win the White House in 2028? What will they say if those Trump appointees also stop congressional actions when Dems have the majority?

Will they be satisfied with the answer: "Marbury v Madison, bitches!"

The Beauty of these "rulings" is that most of them do not "rule" on anything. Nearly all of them are judicial orders, not rulings. No one can run the executive and try to respond to nine hundred judges issuing orders and the opposition party claiming those orders are now "the law."
Click to expand...
They use the government to destroy their political opponent.
Then they got away with it.
 
Crepitus said:
It's not "lawfare" when crimes are being prosecuted.

Grow the **** up and stop letting them brainwash you with cute little catch-phrases.
Click to expand...
And now the same will be done to Democrats. Whether it's called "lawfare" or not.

You're fine with that?
 
Crepitus said:
You have to have actual crimes, not nebulous, whacky, made up accusations.
Click to expand...
Like being federally investigated and charged for making a political speech while being an elected official?

Or calling payments to a lawyer, "Legal Fees?"

Those kind of "actual crimes?"

Or will Democrats actually have to assault federal agents?



Or obstruct federal law enforcement?

 
Seymour Flops said:
Like being federally investigated and charged for making a political speech while being an elected official?

Or calling payments to a lawyer, "Legal Fees?"

Those kind of "actual crimes?"

Or will Democrats actually have to assault federal agents?



Or obstruct federal law enforcement?

Click to expand...

Dude, no one was charged by Democrats for political speech.

The lawyer himself admitted those were not legal fees.

Stop letting RWNJ "media" brainwash you.
 
15th post
Crepitus said:
Dude, no one was charged by Democrats for political speech.
Click to expand...
Don't try to rewrite history, dude.

Trump was charged for the political speech he made on Jan 6th.
Crepitus said:
The lawyer himself admitted those were not legal fees.

Stop letting RWNJ "media" brainwash you.
Click to expand...
Let me guess: The lawyer avoided charges by testifying against Trump, or profited in some other way?

Oh, wait, do you mean Michael Cohen? He's your proof?

:auiqs.jpg: :laughing0301:
 
Seymour Flops said:
Don't try to rewrite history, dude.

Trump was charged for the political speech he made on Jan 6th.

Let me guess: The lawyer avoided charges by testifying against Trump, or profited in some other way?

Oh, wait, do you mean Michael Cohen? He's your proof?

:auiqs.jpg: :laughing0301:
Click to expand...
No, he was not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Why is it the same people do not want to know: Who killed Seth Rich, who planted DNC...

< Previous Thread

Track Meet Turns Tragic: karmelo Anthony Texas Teen Charged as Adult

Next Thread >

Similar threads

C_Clayton_Jones
Judges are regularly threatening contempt charges against the DOJ in immigration cases
2
Replies
31
Views
453
Fort Fun Indiana
Fort Fun Indiana
C_Clayton_Jones
Judge blasts Trump admin for ignoring court rulings and demands release for immigrant whose detention was 'blatantly unlawful'
Replies
6
Views
145
Harry Dresden
Harry Dresden
EvilEyeFleegle
DOJ tried to wipe away major loss in lawsuit against 15 federal judges, but a court wasn't having it
Replies
3
Views
114
0311
0
EvilEyeFleegle
ICE suffers triple legal blow within hours
3 4 5
Replies
92
Views
1K
HikerGuy83
HikerGuy83
C_Clayton_Jones
Federal judge rules DOJ can ‘no longer’ be trusted in voter roll crusade
Replies
6
Views
179
westwall
westwall

New Topics

Latest Discussions

Back
Top Bottom