Lawyers representing President Trump and the office of the presidency have filed an urgent response motion to remove a court order by U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer that blocked the Treasury Secretary and “political appointees” from accessing Treasury Department systems. [SEE ADMINISTRATION FILING HERE]
The filing is in response to District Judge Engelmayer’s blatant effort to engage in judicial activism and violate the Article II separation of power. The Chief executive cannot be limited in scope or activity by the judicial branch, let alone a single circuit court judge within the regional judicial branch who is attempting to block the executive branch nationally.
“Basic democratic accountability requires that every executive agency’s work be supervised by politically accountable leadership, who ultimately answer to the president,” Justice Department attorneys wrote in the 11-page filing, calling the order “impermissible” and “anti-constitutional.”
WASHINGTON DC – […] The attorneys are asking Manhattan-based U.S. District Judge Jeannette Vargas to quickly end or modify the order to ensure Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and his top leadership can be briefed on the payment system and perform their legally required roles. (more)
From The Twitter – “Donald Trump’s actions since his inauguration have caused public discussion of some questions in Constitutional law.
I’m not a lawyer. But I have more than a passing acquaintance with Constitutional law – I’ve been studying it ever since I was an individual amicus in the Supreme Court case that struck down the Communications Decency Act back in the 1990s.
After 30 years of studying issues around the First and Second amendment and the doctrine of judicial review, I have some thoughts.
There are several intermingled issues here.
First: when JD Vance says that the courts do not have the authority to intervene in the administration of the executive branch, he is probably correct.
The judicial review power is generally considered to extend modifying or striking down laws, not to allowing any judge to interfere in the president’s administrative authority over the executive branch.
Second, any judge that rules that the Treasury of the Secretary may not have unlimited access to Treasury department data is setting himself up for reversal. This has never been litigated because it’s a ridiculous overreach that has never been attempted before.
Third, there are serious questions about the authority of federal judges below the level of the Supreme Court (what the Constitution explicitly calls “inferior” courts) that may now be forced to a resolution.
For purposes of separation of powers, only the Supreme Court itself is considered co-equal to the executive and legislative branches. Inferior judges are not.
One question, therefore, is whether the President may assert separation of powers as a defense against rulings of an inferior judge. Certainly, invoking separation of powers against a ruling of the Supreme Court itself would trigger a constitutional crisis, but that’s not the situation we’re talking about here.
This has not been litigated, but I think the President is likely to prevail on the question.
The fourth question is about the authority of federal circuit court judges to issue injunctions with nationwide effects outside the circuit where they have formal authority.
Until very recently, federal judges were so reluctant to raise this Constitutional issue that they almost never issued such injunctions. They issued injunctions only for their own circuits and left it to the Supreme Court to resolve questions about nationwide application.
But nationwide injunctions in contentious cases have become more common recently, and it is likely that the Supreme Court will be forced to address whether inferior-court federal judges do in fact have nationwide authority.
I think it is quite unlikely that the Supreme Court will affirm this.
I am not addressing here the question of whether I think Trump and DOGE’s authority to block Treasury payments should prevail. I am predicting that it almost certainly will prevail.” ~Eric S Raymond
Have the pagers been dropped into the Potomac yet?
It’s about damn time that PJDT can now take on Lawfare & this ludicrus Judge Dinglemayer, Oscarmayer, or whatever other mayer this Leftist Judge chooses to go by.
On the positive side, these Leftist Loony Judges are now exposing themselves by injecting themselves where they shouldn’t.
Dewey, Cheatem, and Howe.
…with offices spread far & wide across the fruited plains!
Spot n Steel Pat n Turner!!
If the SC does not rule 9-0 that the President is, well, the President, and can act as the president, then it’s a really sad statement on the knowledge and judgment of our highest court.
It will most certainly not be 9-0. That ship has sailed.
The best that we can get will be 6-3, with the squishies in the middle (Kavanaugh and Barrett) both voting our way.
But often it will be 5-4 or even 4-5 if both side with the leftists.
If this Constitutional issue goes anything other 9-0, we have a true Constitutional crisis on our hands, but with PTrump holding the upper hand.
The problematic judges are Katanji, Kegel and Sotomayer, where their fealty is with the Left. That said, I’m of the current understanding that even the “Wise Latina” would not step into that trap.
BUT – these inferior court judges are intruding on SCOTUS turf. Left unchecked, the inferior courts would eventually bleed the SCOTUS of all its relevance, as CC judges are embolden to make nation-wide policy rulings with increasing frequency.
I’m thinking it would be a 9-0 sweep to squash the inferior courts from intruding on SCOTUS turf.
That’s Kagan, not Kegel…..oopsies.
Perfectly understandable! Kagan probably does do a few kegels every day. LOL….
EXACTLY the same thing I told someone earlier as we discussed this post!
Legitimizing these actions by “inferior” courts, would DEMEAN AND DIMINISH the Supreme Court itself. And thus, the SC Justices themselves!
statement
“Our judges… have with others the same passions for party, for power, and the privilege of their corps.”
–Thomas Jefferson to William C. Jarvis, 1820
UNIPARTY FEDERAL JUDGES UNLAWFULLY & DANGEROUSLY CURTAILING PRESIDENT TRUMP
https://rumble.com/v6j6u2d-uni-party-federal-judges-unlawfully-and-dangerously-curtailing-president-tr.html
I would argue that we are in a Constitutional crisis right now. This needs to addressed immediately by The Supremes.
You mean the same Supreme Court that previously ruled a President has no standing in a Presidential election?
The Supremes will do nothing and use their standard “let it play out in the lower courts” excuse while the Constitution burns. Here, a lower court district judge has usurped power from the standing President of the United States, but the Supremes will not see this as sufficient justification to hear the case immediately.
If the Judicial Branch is allowed to usurp power from the Executive Branch, then maybe the Executive Branch needs to usurp some power from the Judicial Branch. We are heading down that path if this is not resolved quickly.
Cut the federal judiciary budget by 25% and then let them howl!
I’m afraid you are likely correct but it would be good to know where they stand sooner vs than later.
The game seems pretty obvious to me. Tie him up in court for 2 years. Flip a couple of seats in House. Then two years of impeachment theater.
Haven’t we seen that play before? With help from spineless Rinocrats.
obvious
Disgraced ex-FBI official Peter Strzok’s wife Melissa Hodgman has left her top enforcement job at the SEC
“Hodgman, a Hillary supporter, never recused herself from SEC probes of Trump Media & Technology. Strzok ran FBI’s Russiagate op against Trump”
https://x.com/paulsperry_/status/1887900108886356350
impeachment
“I become AG, first I get debanked by four different banks, then I get indicted.. I get sued by the SEC.
“They tried to take away my law license, which they’re still trying to do. The FBI investigates me for four years into the Biden Administration and then I get impeached by supposed Republicans.”
Enjoy the fun, folks. This judge is going to get humiliated. And, his order does nothing to stop the Treasury Secretary from ordering the bureaucrats to shut down fraudulent payments.
It’s quite possibly the most stupid and ill considered ruling by a court in decades.
And it is going to make future lawsuits more difficult to file because it opens the door for SCOTUS to pancake ALL of these lawsuits.
Yeah but we are burning daylight. How long will this humiliation take?
As long as there are activists.
Why aren’t judges like this guy, and there are far too many like him, being impeached and removed from the bench for their obvious partisan, political “Lawfare” decisions that are clearly unconstitutional?
Most Republican Senators like clapping seals voted to confirm these Marxist judges!
If memory serves, I remember reading that Biden appointed 235 judges, which was noted to be the most ever for a president within a single term.
UNCONSTITUTIONAL is the DEMOCRAT PARTY’S official slogan!
Why
Scarecrow.
“Having found from experience that impeachment is an impracticable thing, a mere scarecrow, [the Judiciary] consider themselves secure for life.”
–Thomas Jefferson, 1820
Great explanation of how Barack Obama is actually responsible for the creation of DOGE at The Gateway Pundit:
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2025/02/barack-obama-inadvertently-created-doge-dept-when-covering/
Make Code Maga Again
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1888314848477376744
Engelmayer’s ruling tries to restrict access to Treasury Dept systems only to “civil service” employees and prevent politically appointed officers from getting access.
The entire notion of a protected civil service is an open Constitutional question. In Trump v United States https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-939_e2pg.pdf SCOTUS found that “At least with respect to the President’s exercise of his core constitutional powers, this immunity must be absolute” and affirms that The President is the executive branch.
The Civil Service Act limits the President’s (the Executive Branch’s) power to fire protected employees.
There has been rumbling for some time that SCOTUS might strike down portions or even the entirety of the Civil Service act and/or the ability of federal employees to unionize. Both create restrictions on the President’s powers that appear not to be permissible under Article II.
I would LOVE to see Engelmayer’s gross overreach be the reason for declaring the Civil Service Act and/or federal employee unions to be Unconstitutional.
Wouldn’t that be sweet? What a legacy he would have.
Oh wait til you see THIS story! https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2025/02/corrupt-obama-judge-amy-berman-jackson-rules-favor/
So will crooked(1) Chief Justice Roberts rule that President Trump does not have standing?
Or will that compromised(1) Chief Justice rule that President Trump has other remedies through lower courts.
That crooked corrupt compromised(1) Chief Justice needs to do some reason on the Trump Prophecies, of which there are more than one about Donald Trump. In researching them he will learn about the it being prophesied that President Trump will be a Two-Term President. He will also come across an interesting one that prophesies that President Trump will appoint five (5) Supreme Court Justices; some due to death, some due to retirement, and One Due To Corruption; I am looking at you John Roberts.
Laugh and poke fun at me all you want, I just find it very interesting that the prophecies about Donald Trump date back to the 1980s. And like the sign above my desk in the garage says; “That is what I do. I drink coffee, I read things, I research things, I learn things, and I know things. If I learn anymore things, I will be a threat to national security.”.
Personal Footnote Number 1:
It is my personal opinion that Chief Justice John Roberts is; crooked, corrupt, and compromised. I could be totally wrong about the man, but I highly doubt it.
The views expressed by me are mine personally and not those of The Conservative Treehouse, nor Sundance, Just Mine.
Roberts is a putz. I’ve commented numerous times that Roberts cannot be trusted, is a fence-sitter, and spend more time worrying about his reputation/legacy than anything else (like this Republic!).
opinion
“This member of the Government was at first considered as the most harmless and helpless of all its organs.
“But it has proved that the power of declaring what the law is, ad libitum, by sapping and mining slyly and without alarm the foundations of the Constitution, can do what open force would not dare to attempt.”
–Thomas Jefferson to Edward Livingston, 1825
Judges found by higher courts to have acted in violation of the Constitution should be demoted.
There should be direct consequences for (malicious and patently partisan) overreach.
“Judges found by higher courts to have acted in violation of the Constitution should be demoted.
There should be direct consequences for (malicious and patently partisan) overreach.”
You have a weird way of spelling impeached, removed, and disbarred.
Well, one female Democrat-appointed SC Justice was recently speaking somewhere and was picked up by the news. She had written the minority opinion on a very important recent case, that the Supreme Court needed to be more aware and in tune to how the people of this country were FEELING!
Never mind that pesky Constitution…
Demoted to emptying honey buckets should suffice – since all they care about is s**t anyway we’d be doing them a favor
fwiw
https://headlineusa.com/judge-merchan-faces-ethics-complaint-over-harris-re-hiring-daughter/
It’s becoming ridiculous. Need to have SCOTUS intervene.
DO SOMETHING, BONDI!
Apply the same legal argument to the case out of Hawaii where a black robed tyrant asserted that CBP could not prevent entry into the United States by any person that an Imam wants to bring into the country – even any person on a terrorist watch list!
Eric Raymond’s analysis was really outstanding. Epic clarity.
This judge should be removed from the judiciary by the judiciary for bad behavior. A form of censure for breach of the judicial code of conduct.
Article 3, Section 1 :
… The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour…
Force the Courts to police their own.
Sean Davis does not mince words:
https://x.com/seanmdav/status/1889025266644873621
“Random federal judges in blue state backwaters have no authority to unilaterally dictate who the President may talk to or what data he can access. John Roberts and SCOTUS have two options here: they can bring these inferior malcontents to heel, or they can get used to the President simply ignoring these inferior courts or Congress eliminating them entirely.
Congress created these inferior courts so the Supreme Court wouldn’t have to deal with every federal case by itself. But if these rogue inferior judges are going to routinely issue lawless decisions that the Supreme Court has to deal with anyway, Congress would be well within its rights to just eliminate them.
Roberts and SCOTUS can immediately put these lawless judges in their place, or Roberts can watch his caseload go up 1000x and his court’s precious perceived legitimacy crater overnight.
The age of tolerating this nonsense is over.”
It is key to watch what the congress-critters do about this.
It’s highly likely many of them are getting kickbacks by voting for all the graft to go out without transparency. How do you think so many congress-critters got to be so rich on congressional salaries.
So now that someone (DOGE et al) is actually peeking into the money trail, THEY ARE TERRIFIED. I’d bet we’re talking about 90% of the D and at least 10 or 20% of the R congress-critters.
So watch for the terrified cockroaches to find any means they can to advocate Trump’s team get stopped from following the money trails to their pockets, or their election campaigns.
All 535 are corrupt and on the take. This is the least-kept secret in D.C.
F John Roberts. That’s his new name. “F John Roberts”
Good job one and all. This is an excellent example of answer to prayer, not so much as to stop the corruption itself but to expose the personality and wickedness of the ” judge”. Which is most significant in the fact that this fool can no longer hide behind his black robe, and has opened himself up to scrutiny. As is the case with many depraved members of the judicial college.
Proverbs 25:26
Injunction Bonds might be the answer to a SINGLE JUDGE gumming up the works. By requiring a bond to be posted before a judge orders an injunction, this forces skin in the game. If it turns out to be wrong (frivolous) then there is a financial consequence. “Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(c), judges can issue injunctions “ONLY IF” the suing party posts a bond to cover potential damages if they’re wrong. But guess what? This rule is hardly used!”
https://revolver.news/2025/02/x-user-reveals-how-doge-can-beat-left-wing-activist-judges-at-their-own-game/
Revolutionaries? Not the brightest bulbs. I say go ahead Libtards. FAFO
$50 billion of fraud per year at US Treasury alone:
https://eko.substack.com/p/the-machine-fights-back
Where did the money go? Who received it? Now that they traced the fraudulent payments, they must trace the recipient bank accounts and who actually received the fraudulent money.
FOLLOW.THE.MONEY