elektra
Diamond Member
That is a lawsuit filed in the Supreme Court. Thst is much different than what is happening here
Ousted From Power By Voters, Dems Turn To Activist Judges To Defy Trump
- Thread starter Doc7505
- Start date
elektra
Diamond Member
I get em all right, try to keep up
- Moderator
- #63
And they will get bitch slapped by higher courts, the commiecrats know that. Their point is to drag things out as long as possible. They think they can run things out for years like they did in Trump's first term.
.
- Moderator
- #64
AZrailwhale
Diamond Member
Presidents are supposed to be activists, judges are supposed to be neutral arbiters of fact according to the law and constitution.
elektra
Diamond Member
I did not read much on that case. I am just looking at it, as to how it is not right. So, I need to read the case and the decent. It is decent?
Sometimes I learn as I go
No surprise. They have been using the courts to legislate for them for at least the last eight years. No reason to think they'll stop now.
Ousted From Power By Voters, Dems Turn To Activist Judges To Defy TrumpLower federal court judges have no constitutional authority to govern by injunction and undermine the executive branch.11 Feb 2025 ~~ By John Daniel Davidson
Dems Turn To Activist Judges To Defy Trump
Lower federal court judges have no constitutional authority to govern by injunction and undermine the executive branch.thefederalist.com
What’s happening right now is that Democrats, having been thrown out of power by American voters in a landslide victory for Trump, have decided they’re going to deploy a widely-used tactic from Trump’s first term to thwart the president’s agenda: use the federal judiciary. Under the false pretext that the lower federal courts are part of a “coequal branch of government” with the executive, they’re aiming to shut down Trump’s reform efforts with a fusillade of preliminary injunctions.
In recent days dozens of lawsuits have been filed against the Trump administration by Democrat attorneys general and various left-wing groups. These groups have carefully selected their venues, ensuring the lawsuits come before rabidly anti-Trump activist judges. So far, the tactic seems to be working. As of this past weekend, eight different rulings from the federal bench have temporarily halted the president’s executive orders.
Federal judges in Democrat-majority districts have issued preliminary injunctions blocking Trump’s executive actions to end birthright citizenship, reform and downsize the United States Agency for International Development, and offer buyouts to federal bureaucrats. A federal judge this past weekend blocked Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency and all other political appointees in the Trump administration — including the Treasury secretary and his deputies — from accessing payment data at the Treasury Department.
~Snip~
The problem is, as my colleague Sean Davis noted recently on X, federal judges have no actual authority to do this. They can’t decide on their own who the president can talk to or what data he can access. They can’t bind the president at all. According to the U.S. Constitution they’re “inferior” courts and therefore don’t have any authority over the executive branch. Yes, the three branches of the federal government are coequal, but the only part of the federal judiciary that’s equal to the presidency is the Supreme Court, not all the federal district courts scattered across the country.
~Snip~
It’s long past time to settle this. The American people overwhelmingly elected Trump precisely because they wanted to see his agenda for America enacted. Lower court federal judges, whom no one voted for, have no right to assert their will over and against the will of the American people. The sooner the Supreme Court takes this up and settles the obvious question, the sooner Democrat lawfare against Trump’s agenda will come to an end. Instead of relying on activist judges, Democrats might then have to figure out how to compete at the ballot box — something they are obviously loath to do.
Commentary:
Since Neo-Marxist Democrats have muddied our judicial system with activist judges more than willing to do the Democrat's bidding.
Since we no longer have a legal justice system, red state AG’s should make this a complete clown show. Texas is very much in line with what Trump has done, and Paxton should be filing lawsuits over every one of these “decisions.” I have read he is investigating a couple schools in the Dallas area who are hiding their transvestite athletes.
A solution to deter Democrats shopping for politicized district court judges to get injunctions against their political opposition is to require an application for Temporary Restraining Order against the government or federal legislation be heard by 5 district judges nationally chosen by blind pool. Such legal arguments can be made in one 'Zoom' presentation to the 5 judges. That would stymie forum shopping and we would see less apps for TROs if the Democrat legal, operatives could not stack the deck with one of their judges
- Apr 11, 2023
- 46,208
- 22,214
- 2,488
Wrong definition. Try again.
Independent thinker
Diamond Member
- Oct 15, 2015
- 32,096
- 27,971
- 2,788
Funny how not too long ago democrats were attacking judges on the Supreme Court for being activists and yet now they are sucking up to all of the activist judges they can get their hands on.
Ousted From Power By Voters, Dems Turn To Activist Judges To Defy TrumpLower federal court judges have no constitutional authority to govern by injunction and undermine the executive branch.11 Feb 2025 ~~ By John Daniel DavidsonDems Turn To Activist Judges To Defy Trump
Lower federal court judges have no constitutional authority to govern by injunction and undermine the executive branch.
What’s happening right now is that Democrats, having been thrown out of power by American voters in a landslide victory for Trump, have decided they’re going to deploy a widely-used tactic from Trump’s first term to thwart the president’s agenda: use the federal judiciary. Under the false pretext that the lower federal courts are part of a “coequal branch of government” with the executive, they’re aiming to shut down Trump’s reform efforts with a fusillade of preliminary injunctions.
In recent days dozens of lawsuits have been filed against the Trump administration by Democrat attorneys general and various left-wing groups. These groups have carefully selected their venues, ensuring the lawsuits come before rabidly anti-Trump activist judges. So far, the tactic seems to be working. As of this past weekend, eight different rulings from the federal bench have temporarily halted the president’s executive orders.
Federal judges in Democrat-majority districts have issued preliminary injunctions blocking Trump’s executive actions to end birthright citizenship, reform and downsize the United States Agency for International Development, and offer buyouts to federal bureaucrats. A federal judge this past weekend blocked Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency and all other political appointees in the Trump administration — including the Treasury secretary and his deputies — from accessing payment data at the Treasury Department.
~Snip~
The problem is, as my colleague Sean Davis noted recently on X, federal judges have no actual authority to do this. They can’t decide on their own who the president can talk to or what data he can access. They can’t bind the president at all. According to the U.S. Constitution they’re “inferior” courts and therefore don’t have any authority over the executive branch. Yes, the three branches of the federal government are coequal, but the only part of the federal judiciary that’s equal to the presidency is the Supreme Court, not all the federal district courts scattered across the country.
~Snip~
It’s long past time to settle this. The American people overwhelmingly elected Trump precisely because they wanted to see his agenda for America enacted. Lower court federal judges, whom no one voted for, have no right to assert their will over and against the will of the American people. The sooner the Supreme Court takes this up and settles the obvious question, the sooner Democrat lawfare against Trump’s agenda will come to an end. Instead of relying on activist judges, Democrats might then have to figure out how to compete at the ballot box — something they are obviously loath to do.
Commentary:
Since Neo-Marxist Democrats have muddied our judicial system with activist judges more than willing to do the Democrat's bidding.
Since we no longer have a legal justice system, red state AG’s should make this a complete clown show. Texas is very much in line with what Trump has done, and Paxton should be filing lawsuits over every one of these “decisions.” I have read he is investigating a couple schools in the Dallas area who are hiding their transvestite athletes.
A solution to deter Democrats shopping for politicized district court judges to get injunctions against their political opposition is to require an application for Temporary Restraining Order against the government or federal legislation be heard by 5 district judges nationally chosen by blind pool. Such legal arguments can be made in one 'Zoom' presentation to the 5 judges. That would stymie forum shopping and we would see less apps for TROs if the Democrat legal, operatives could not stack the deck with one of their judges
- Apr 11, 2023
- 46,208
- 22,214
- 2,488
Yeah, whatever works, yhes.
toobfreak
Tungsten/Glass Member
Hey Jackass, how can I show you a court ruling on Biden when you know that Biden hasn't been to court yet? But thanks for the loaded bullshit question! But you CAN look up how many times both Biden and Obumma have been slapped down by the Supreme Court for exceeding their authority, jackass. Proof once again that you a-holes know exactly how wrong you are.
toobfreak
Tungsten/Glass Member
Oh really? Who changed it and how.
Kruska
Diamond Member
Hey Tranny, - as usual you lie, also when you stated that Biden is a criminal.
Now a pervert like you is whining and bitching - about not being able to show a court-ruling.
You display all the known symptoms of a Tranny (a psychological impaired person) or in your vocabulary: a mental fuckup.
toobfreak
Tungsten/Glass Member
Hey Bozo, are you having a cerebral aneurysm, you whiny little bitch?
Facts are facts, jackass, take your arguments to Time Magazine and Molly Ball. All those people listed are ON RECORD having admitted and bragged about how they corrupted the system to steal the 2020 election, now get back on topic or STFU.
- Moderator
- #75
Just like always, courts started ignoring precedent and they were allowed to get away with it.
.
Kruska
Diamond Member
Hey Tranny - YOU LIED, then YOU whine&bitch, then you try to change the topic - so STFU YOU pervert.
Go and let a physiologist examine your mental disorder. USMB is not the right place.
toobfreak
Tungsten/Glass Member
Well, then, they have no actual judicial authority. A district judge is just that, a judge for that district, and an federal inferior court was created to handle minor federal issues to save the SCOTUS from dealing with them, but the matter has, like everything else, been allowed to snowball. So now, we will be forced to take this to the SCOTUS to slap these minor judges back into line, otherwise, we will be subject to endless judicial tyranny and government will not function at all.
- Apr 11, 2023
- 46,208
- 22,214
- 2,488
You are a liar. No one has admitted to any such psycho thing. Are you psycho?
Doc7505
Diamond Member
- Feb 16, 2016
- 20,082
- 36,368
- 2,430
- Thread starter
- #79
~~~~~~
Wasn't it Biden that defied a SCOTUS decision on debt forgiveness and went right ahead and continued with wiping out College debt for the rich?
Trump is not causing a Constitutional Crisis. But Biden certainly did.
Until Democrats are able can justify Biden's actions, there is no "Constitutional Crisis. If anything Neo-Marxist Democrats are causing the "Crisis" by using lower court activist judges to obstruct Trump.
Last edited:
toobfreak
Tungsten/Glass Member
Democrats don't follow rules or care about laws except when they favor democrats.
Biden’s legal losses: Seven times courts have struck against administration - Washington Examiner
President Joe Biden suffered a setback in court this week when a federal judge in Georgia halted his vaccine mandate for federal contractors, delivering the latest legal blow to the Biden administration’s agenda.Beyond its pandemic-related measures, the Biden administration has endured a number...
www.washingtonexaminer.com
Similar threads
New Topics
-
-
-
-
Harvard’s unofficial copy of Magna Carta is actually an original- Started by egp320i
- Replies: 3
