Judges in random districts all over the United States keep issuing orders telling the President of the United States what he can and cannot do. I just don’t see how a district court judge can issue an order that binds the entire nation. If the 9th DCA issues an opinion, it is effective only in the 9th district.
The basis of judicial power is laid out in Article III of the US Constitution. The case of Marbury v. Madison also did a good job of laying this out.
I just can’t see how the lowest court in the land can issue an order that outweighs the head of the executive branch. That makes the entire executive subordinate to even the most junior member of the judiciary. That is certainly not a coequal branch.
24 Comments
Miles · February 11, 2025 at 10:22 pm
It’s political Kabuki Theater that I think they actually believe has the power to make Trump do what they say.
While Federal courts do have the power to enjoin the Fed.Gov from some actions, and dismiss charges made by U.S. Attorneys or Grand Juries, there’s no way a Judge & maybe even a SCOTUS Justice has the constitutional power to tell POTUS or a department secretary how to run an executive department unless a directive actually contradicts or violates federal statute law.
Divemedic · February 12, 2025 at 7:21 am
I would say that perhaps a district court has the ability to stay an action in one particular case. That stay would need to be narrowly tailored to the case and jurisdiction at hand. “In this case, you can’t enforce X with respect to this particular guy in this district.”
Not a nationwide stop at the whim of any one of the 1,457 Federal judges.
Miles · February 15, 2025 at 6:00 pm
I agree. We see ‘as applied’ (to a particular person in a particular instance) cases on court dockets all the time.
Bluey · February 12, 2025 at 3:07 am
Judiciary is common problem it seems. Australia’s high court just ruled judges can’t be held accountable for making mistakes or abusing their power. This is after a bloke sued after being jailed by a judge blatantly abusing contempt of court.
Boneman · February 12, 2025 at 6:07 am
It’s bluff and bluster and absolutely MUST be nullified because as you described… IF this is allowable then what’s the point of BEING or HAVING… a PRESIDENT?
Divemedic · February 12, 2025 at 7:18 am
Exactly. If this is to be the case, then the President can only take any action on any subject if every single one of the 1,457 Federal judges agree with it. If any one of them doesn’t like it, they simply issue a nationwide order.
Out West · February 13, 2025 at 7:32 am
Perfectly stated.
oldvet50 · February 12, 2025 at 7:09 am
For the answer to that, reread your previous post concerning double standards. You are correct, though, that they should not have that power. The conservative pundits will say that it needs to play out in court and surely the Supreme Court will make everything OK. But I still believe in the old addage, “Justice delayed is justice denied”. These lower courts are giving them time to destroy evidence, make trips to countries with no extradition, hide their money more effectively and further raid the US treasury.
Modern Day Jeremiah · February 12, 2025 at 7:39 am
Trump needs to just ignore these blatant power grabs by activist leftist black-robed tyrants. When and if SCOTUS rules on the constitutionality of his actions, that is a different story.
Gerry · February 12, 2025 at 8:37 am
+1 Jeremiah.
Just keep pushing it up the chain until SCOTUS rules.
Nones · February 13, 2025 at 6:43 am
President Trump should do exactly what bidum did, just ignore these pissant judges and go about the business if running the country.
Robert · February 12, 2025 at 9:19 am
These judges are giving orders which have no basis in any laws at all. They are completely illegitimate pretensions of law, and the judges should be removed from office. That is a complicated and lengthy process if done under present laws.
Meanwhile, there should be zero compliance with these rulings.
The executive branch should keep on doing what they are doing. That is why President Trump was elected in the first place.
@HomeInSC · February 12, 2025 at 9:29 am
I like the idea of a federal judge’s decision only applying in their jurisdiction. Then, if enough lower level judges cause conflicts the issue can work its way up the levels to SCOTUS.
There also something called an injunction bond. It’s a rarely used federal rule requiring the party suing for sn injunction to put up a bond in case of damages. Might slow them down
Jonathan · February 12, 2025 at 10:18 am
I’ve looked into it before and been told that lawsuits against the federal government MUST be brought in DC Circuit Court – so how do these guys claim jurisdiction?
In recent years the Supreme Court has commented negatively about low level national injunctions. I’m surprised I haven’t heard of Trump appealing these order to them yet.
Note that the NYC judge received a request at 930 pm Friday night and ruled at 1 am Saturday morning – that sounds oddly specifically planned.
The Rhode Island judge said appointees aren’t allowed to see data, only career people – I would have responded that if appointees can’t supervise, then nobody works and shut everything down.
Chris · February 12, 2025 at 12:33 pm
Denninger recently pointed out (https://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=252811) “Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 65. Injunctions and Restraining Orders”.
Per the rules (Section C, specifically), injunctions like these judges are doing, can only be issued if the plaintiff(s) post “security in an amount that the court considers proper to pay the costs and damages sustained by any party found to have been wrongfully enjoined or restrained. The United States, its officers, and its agencies are not required to give security.”
So the states bringing these suits and asking for injunctions have to post security for them. And in the case of illegal migrations and anchor babies, the potential costs and damages are in the BILLIONS.
If Trump simply enforces the law and forces the courts to demand security for all of these suits, then the injunctions will disappear like farts in a hurricane.
SoCoRuss · February 12, 2025 at 12:52 pm
Yes, BUT. You are thinking like we live under Rule of Law still. We haven’t been under that system for what 20+ years.
We have operated for a LOOONNGGG time under Without Rule of Law and it’s companion, Rules only apply to Certain People just NOT US Law.
Until these people are held accountable nothing will change.
I MAY just MAY think the MAGA Messiah is serious after and ONLY AFTER he has DOJ do a SWAT raid at their office or homes and then prep walks these fuckers to jail in cuffs and leg irons.
If he wont do that you will then know the truth, the matrix continues…
Danny · February 12, 2025 at 5:00 pm
It’s getting more interesting every day. The $36 trillion+ debt? Now we know for sure.
Danny · February 12, 2025 at 6:52 pm
Just saw a clip on FOX – Trump in the Oval Office with Tulsi and Pamela Jo at his side. Got to give him credit for that 😀
lynn · February 12, 2025 at 8:02 pm
https://bayourenaissanceman.blogspot.com/2025/02/theres-lot-going-on.html
“If you haven’t already read it, click over to Coffee & Covid and read today’s essay. It’s a bit mind-blowing in its implications. I won’t try to excerpt it here – just go read it there. It’s worth your time.”
https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/p/swamp-apocalypse-wednesday-february
Pace Picante Sauce · February 12, 2025 at 10:17 pm
Reading about Pam Bondi filing charges against NY governor Hochul, Letitia James, and the head of BMV for favoring illegals.
This is the way with commie RAT POS and we’ll see who blinks first.
Aesop · February 13, 2025 at 8:12 am
The 47 Administration has already dropped three divisions of Shock and Awe paratroops beyond those courts, leaving the TROs stranded in the rear awaiting mop-up forces.
The Democommunists are playing checkers, and this time, Trum is actually playing 4D chess.
https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/p/swamp-apocalypse-wednesday-february
Jay Dee · February 13, 2025 at 12:21 pm
The key that invalidates these decisions is that the courts are not requiring the proper injunction bonds. If the defendant wins, an injunction bond pays the defendant for losses incurred during the injunction. As defendants, you & I are suffering losses of 143 megadollars a day while these courts dither.
McChuck · February 13, 2025 at 4:56 pm
Federal judges are appointed for a term, pending “good behavior”. This is not good behavior.
JimmyPx · February 14, 2025 at 8:52 pm
It is often alleged that President Andrew Jackson responded to the Marshall US Supreme Court’s 1832 opinion in Worcester v. Georgia by the quip that “John Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it!”
Ditto on these politicians in black robes, tell them to stick their illegal rulings up their asses.
Comments are closed.