Federal judges anonymously criticize Supreme Court over Trump cases

Doc7505

Diamond Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2016
Messages
23,414
Reaction score
41,649
Points
2,430

Federal judges anonymously criticize Supreme Court over Trump cases

5 Sep 2025 ~~ By Elizabeth Crisp

(Excerpt)
Federal judges who spoke to NBC News said the Supreme Court should better explain its emergency rulings.
They told NBC News they fear that the Supreme Court’s handling of cases involving Trump has validated the president’s criticism of lower court judges.
“It is inexcusable,” one judge told NBC News. “They don’t have our backs.”
The Supreme Court’s press office didn’t immediately respond to The Hill’s request for comment.
Chief Justice John Roberts last year condemned elected officials who have tried to intimidate judges and have defied court rulings.
“Attempts to intimidate judges for their rulings in cases are inappropriate and should be vigorously opposed,” Roberts wrote in his 2024 year-end summary. “Public officials certainly have a right to criticize the work of the judiciary, but they should be mindful that intemperance in their statements when it comes to judges may prompt dangerous reactions by others.”
Roberts did not name any specific officials to whom he was referring.
Roberts also issued a rare public rebuke in 2018 of officials who have accused judges of political bias, arguing that the courts are not helmed by “Obama judges or Trump judges, Bush judges or Clinton judges.”
~Snip~
Federal judges presiding over some of the high-profile cases involving the Trump administration have spoken out against threats they’ve faced as tensions between the White House and judiciary continue to mount.
“We need a call to action in this country from our lawyers and from our judges to say, ‘Not in this country, not on our watch,'” U.S. District Judge John Coughenour of the Western District of Washington said during a virtual event in July.
Coughenour, who blocked Trump’s executive order to restrict birthright citizenship, recounted that law enforcement came to his home with weapons drawn in February after the local sheriff’s office received a fake call alleging that he had murdered his wife.
“It’s just been stunning to me how much damage has been done to the reputation of our judiciary because some political actors think that they can gain some advantage by attacking the independence of the judiciary and threatening the rule of law,” he said.

Commentary:
Indeed, SCOTUS should provide a ruling akin to something like the following:
The President as the chief executive has enormous power given by the Constitution, lower courts are not likewise empowered. As such great care must be taken by the courts to overrule the actions of the Chief Executive.
It would be better for lower courts provide their opinion and then petition the higher courts without stopping the Presidential actions.
While I sympathize with Judge Coughenour for being SWATTED. I'm sure he now knows how conservatives feel when that happens...
Its almost as if the Supreme Court does not recognize the sacred office of the 670 “Super Executive Legislative Judges” who are there to veto anything the other branches do that they personally don’t like. SCOTUS seems to think the judges are supposed to busy themselves with actually applying the law rather than dictating it—as if judges were part of the Judiciary and not supreme rulers over all.
If the judges are anonymous how do we know the Quisling Media such as NBC or the "Hill" did not just make up the story? They often have done this in the past.
Meanwhile, turn these judges over and you’ll see “Democrat” tattooed on their backsides
Trump is outing the federal judiciary for exactly who and what they are, and it's of their own biased conduct.
 
Find out who they are and impeach them....
 
2/3rds vote......read only 51 needed to defund them.
Good let's do that... these district courts are too political... I think Obama and Biden got them passed the republicans in the senate because they were just district judges... big mistake...
 
To the judges hiding behind anonymity:

 

Federal judges anonymously criticize Supreme Court over Trump cases

The 12 judges spoke to NBC News on condition that they not be identified out of fear of retaliation, so it’s unclear who they are or where they located.

I'M NOT BUYING IT, Doc.

Retaliation by who? Is Congress going to order their decapitation? Maybe order their SNAP cards don't process any Coke or deserts? Maybe they think Trump will be by their house by midnight letting the air out of their tires?

If their position is valid, what reason have they to hide? If you can't win a logical legal argument with the USSC, who can you win with?

I agree, Doc--- by NBC agreeing to do this entirely anonymously, it has the stink of being just another leftist political stunt and loses all credibility. Worse, after enduring four years (eight?) of continual political retaliation by the Bidenistas, their complaints and fears now over their getting retaliated against becomes LAUGHABLE. :laughing0301:
 
no one is surprised with the number of activist judges, nor surprised that they are cowards and say it anonymously.


It's NBC News, so who knows if there really are 12 of them, or even 1.

But, if there are any, they are the ones that besmirched the Federal judiciary, and any lawyers practicing in front of them have a right to know about their biases.
 
Last edited:
It's NBC News, so who knows if there really are 12 of them, or even 1.
By Leftist NBC standards, if they claim there are 12 judges, I expect the actual number is 2. Tards tend to see every issue they endorse as six times bigger than it really is.

But, if there are any, they are the ones that besmirched the Federal judiciary, and any lawyers practicing in front of them have a right to know about their biases.
Good point. And by definition, it makes these judges activist and political. I mean, if there really were TWELVE federal judges with a bone to pick, that had sound legal footing, don't you think they would just get together and write a legal draft or whatever they do and send it to the USSC as an /official/ complaint rather than going on NBC TV?

The very act of choosing NBC (was that NBC's choice or theirs?) makes it a political stunt.
 
First of all: "anonymous" = fake news.

Second, if these low-level judges don't like the speed with which their bizarre counter-constitutonal rulings are overturned, they should give more thought to their rulings than imagining with glee that Trump will be angered by them.

NPR was whining about this earlier this afternoon, how it is unprecedented for so many lower court stays and injuctions to be lifted by the USSC in so short a time. Well, duh. It is also unprecedented for so many stays and injunctions against a sitting president for executive branch decisions to be blocked by entry-level federal judges.

The USSC is the gold standard of what is and is not constitutional. That has never been disputed by anyone on the left, as far as I know. So when a lower court judge is over-turned, it is because that judge got it wrong, not because the USSC got it wrong.
 
Look at the cultists openly calling for the fat rapist felon charity thief to be their Daddy King.

Buncha ankle grabbers

Of course, it's all the judges that are crazy, not the fat rapist charity thief felon.
 
Look at the cultists openly calling for the fat rapist felon charity thief to be their Daddy King.

Buncha ankle grabbers

Of course, it's all the judges that are crazy, not the fat rapist charity thief felon.
Dude, that's one of your finest posts......😍
 
15th post
AI Overview

In March 2020, then-Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer made comments directed at Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh at a pro-choice rally, stating they had "released the whirlwind" and "would pay the price" for potential decisions on abortion rights. While Schumer stated he meant political consequences and not physical harm, Chief Justice John Roberts issued a rare public rebuke, calling the remarks "inappropriate" and "dangerous". The incident sparked backlash, with some Republicans attempting to censure Schumer and others expressing concern about rising threats against the judiciary.


Who is retaliating against judges?
 
Back
Top Bottom