Sen. John Kennedy Destroys Nationwide Injunctions

A. I don’t know that that’s true

B. I don’t know that that hasn’t happened.
Google is an excellent place to learn about the courts.

OMG.............Lesh admits he don't know..............should us it as a disclaimer on every post.
 
You think thats bad? Do the Dems get their money from a pro Hamas lobby?
No. Don’t fall for the uniparty nonsense. Ds are exactly like Rs. If you think Ds support Hamas or any Arab/Muslim faction, you’re not paying attention.
 
If you think Ds support Hamas or any Arab/Muslim faction, you’re not paying attention.
Really? Looks like some do.

Twenty-two Democratic members of the House of Representatives and one Republican voted against a resolution on Wednesday which condemned those supporting Hamas in American universities, following a rise in campus tensions over the conflict in the Middle East.
 

Sen. John Kennedy Destroys Nationwide Injunctions​

1 Apr 2025 ~~ By Matt Margolis

By now, you know that I’m a big fan of Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) and his unmatched ability to dismantle weak arguments with his signature Southern wit. On Monday, during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, he was at the top of his game, systematically exposing the complete lack of legal authority for district judges to issue universal injunctions — a favorite tactic of the left to block President Trump’s agenda.
~Snip~

Kennedy’s questioning explained that universal injunctions lack any basis in statutory law, Supreme Court precedent, or historical common law and exposed their use as a judicial overreach that disproportionately targets President Trump’s policies.
The left's weaponization of universal injunctions against Trump continues unchecked, but Senator Kennedy just exposed their game.


Commentary:
Another great oral argument expressed. However these improperly imposed "Universal Injunctions remain active and Trump’s and our agenda remain hobbled.
Sen. Kennedy had the full agreement from Brett Shumate the entire time. Kennedy used a rhetorical way of questioning Shumate to make his point that the judiciary is a group of activist pseudo-judges dressed in black robes pretending to be real judges.
This is the core issue! Trump needs to get this to SCOTUS where it will be reviewed and stopped.
Is it time to show this judge, the judicial branch, and CJ Roberts, who endorsed Judge Boasberg... the respect they have shown the Executive branch of the Government, by ignoring them just as Obama and Biden did?

View at how this illegal used "Universal Injunction" weapon is used against President Trump!
  • 20th Century: 0.3 per year
  • Trump 45: 22 per year
  • Trump 47: 154 per year.

What is it with Trump attracting all the weird Kennedys?!
 
Really? Looks like some do.

Twenty-two Democratic members of the House of Representatives and one Republican voted against a resolution on Wednesday which condemned those supporting Hamas in American universities, following a rise in campus tensions over the conflict in the Middle East.
Means nothing and you should know it. Both parties are owned by Israel and do its bidding. This should be obvious. Genocide Joe fully supported Israel just as Don does.

When the war criminal Bibi spoke to congress not long ago, he received numerous standing ovations from both parties.

It’s time to man up and realize it’s a uniparty.
 
Since W, we've turned a blind eye to the Israelies appropriating land. But IS THAT BECAUSE OF POLITICS?

The Israelis don't do Jews a favor, but when was the last time the Palestinians made a peace offer? There's a reason the supermaj turned on the dems over the pro-Hamas protests at elite colleges and universities. And Hamas starved old hostages, and now we're supposed to buy them food.
 
God that’s dumb. There is no such thing and you thinking there is makes you insane.
Since the Palestinians overwhelming favor Hamas, you are in effect backing them when you back the Palestinians.
 
15th post
Nope. He got the answer he wanted to get from a trump appointee who is either ignorant of the law or lying.

AI Overview
Yes, a federal district court judge can issue a nationwide injunction, meaning an order that prohibits the government from enforcing a policy or action across the entire country, though this practice has faced increasing scrutiny and debate.

Here's a more detailed explanation:
  • What is a nationwide injunction?
    A nationwide injunction, also known as a universal or nonparty injunction, is a court order that prohibits the government from enforcing a specific policy or action against anyone, regardless of whether they are a party to the lawsuit.

  • Why are they controversial?
    Critics argue that nationwide injunctions allow a single district court judge to effectively make policy decisions that affect the entire nation, potentially undermining the separation of powers and the role of Congress.

  • What are the arguments in favor?
    Proponents argue that nationwide injunctions are necessary to prevent the government from enforcing unconstitutional or unlawful policies, and that they provide a necessary check on executive power.

  • How are they used?
    Nationwide injunctions have been used to block various executive actions, including those related to immigration, healthcare, and environmental regulations.

  • What is the legal basis?
    Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65 permits federal district courts to issue injunctions, and the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) authorizes courts to "hold unlawful and set aside" agency actions found to be invalid, which some interpret as allowing nationwide injunctions in certain cases.
Inevitably it would have led to the dismantling of the districts and a consolidation of power upward.
Which is really where it belongs. They still have plenty of authority they just don't have the authority of the supreme Court.
 
I thought I heard Judge Boasberg just put an injunction on the Scotus' ruling.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom