Many pundits and apoplectic Lawfare leftists are noting a set of four recent Supreme Court rulings favorable to the Trump administration.
The most recent ruling [pdf here] said nonprofit groups lacked legal standing to bring lawsuits challenging the firings of probationary workers at the departments of Defense, Treasury, Energy, Interior, Agriculture and Veterans Affairs. As a consequence, the accompanying Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) is defeated.
Yesterday, the Supreme Court also ruled -generally favorable- to the Trump administration [pdf here] on the issue of Venezuelans in the United States labeled by President Donald Trump as “alien enemies.” The justices ruled (5-4) to vacate a lower judge’s order that imposed a block on all deportations under Trump’s invocation of the Alien Enemies Act.
However, the court ruled to remove the TRO under auspices of the wrong venue for challenge; saying the deportees must challenge their status in the district court where jurisdiction of detainment takes place.
That split court ruling follows on the heels of Chief Justice John Roberts issuing an administrative order indefinitely lifting a lower court injunction [pdf here] that demanded the return of previously deported Abrego Garcia set by U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis.
In short, the Supreme Court, at least a narrow majority therein, appears to be knocking down the process of federal judge shopping to issue nationwide restraining orders against the Trump administration. Twitter account Unseen1 has a solid and brief outline of what the court appears to be doing:
“The big win for Trump in the scotus today was not the resumption of deportations under the AEA (alien enemies act) (but that was big also). The major win was the court narrowing the federal district judges’ jurisdiction They once again narrowed the ability of the APA (administrative procedure act) which is the main law the vast majority of these unconditional judicial rulings have been made under.
The left is using the APA like Macgyver used bubble gum to get them out of sticky situations. Without the APA, they can’t judge shop as much. They can’t make class action lawsuits that have national injunctions attached.
In short, the scotus with this order, along with the one last week, is narrowing the use of the APA to reign in the lower federal district courts. There are already judicial remedies for almost all of these cases that do not involve a hand-picked federal district court needing to issue a national injunction or TRO.
Grants and contracts should be brought in federal claims court.
Immigration issues should be brought as habeas cases, and most can be held in front of immigration judges.
Government firings should be brought in front of the merit systems protection board.
The left doesn’t want to follow proper procedures for a host of reasons, like added costs, unfriendly judges could set precedent, extra work, time, etc. So, they invented the APA macgyver option. Hence, about 50 TROs/injunctions later, the scotus is smacking this practice down and telling them that this effort will not result in favorable opinions for them.
In short, the scotus is telling the federal district courts not to draw outside the lines regardless of the merits of the case because they will be denied on jurisdiction grounds if they reach the high court.” [link]
However, as noted by The American Thinker: {…} “The real problem is that the Supreme Court emphasized that every person named as an “alien enemy” under the AEA is entitled to judicial review. This is insane because it means that the judiciary will, once again, take unto itself the power to control foreign policy.
While this standard currently applies to the 18-20 million ordinary illegals that Biden let in (something no legislator or judge ever contemplated when immigration laws were passed or reviewed), it cannot possibly apply to the AEA, which is a question of foreign policy solely under the executive’s purview. (Sadly, though, Bondi’s DOJ actually gave the Supremes this opening, so part of the responsibility for this ludicrous holding is on her.) (more)
This SC with Roberts and ACB are not to be trusted. I sweat every ruling this ridiculous court rules on.
that makes at least two of us. I’m not comfortable with her either. I hope Kavanaugh doesn’t roll over.
Amy Coney Barrett mother of 7 thinks it’s fine to have criminal illegal alien gang members stick around to assault her kids? What an imbecile!!💁🏻♀️
I thinks she fears violent leftists more than violent gang member, not that there’s much of a difference.
If she feels fear, it’s time for her to resign.
She fears loss of money.
Simple. Divedeep
She won’t lose any money. She now has connections she never had before. I knew a brilliant lawyer who clerked for a federal judge. The big buck firm courting her coming on board with them waited two years to bring her on board and also gave her two years tenure toward partner along with the salary increases she would have earned over those two years. ACB won’t lose anything if she resigns except the 1/9 of power she currently holds.
OMG
BWAAAAHAHAHAHAHA
She supports the population replacement effort. That was clear before she was appointed.
Exactly! First thing that came to my mind. It is sickening. 🤨
Sorry, why didn’t Trump do his homework on her?
I mean who was responsible for picking her. Does anyone here know? Ivanka?
Reminds me of old man RINO Bush who picked David Souter who was buddy buddy with RINO John Sununu. At least Bush said he made a mistake.
of New Hampshire.
The Federalist Society
She does not see the damage with her own eyes so in her head it does not exist and if it does exist on some small level in her head it does not have a negative effect her or her family. That’s my take.
Probably more than two of you. I feel the same way, I’m sure many others do too, unfortunately.
Wait I thought if a justice kicked the bucket the president could appoint a new one?
Kavanaugh was another bad hire recommended by the now discredited Federalist Society. We should have left him on that wind swept cliff in the hearings.
Don’t trust Roberts or Barrett, but it seems that Roberts got the memo from Mike Davis that Congress will be jumping into this issue, and he will not like the results.
yup.
on a fully related chain, they are ruling against 2A repeatedly lately. IMO this is absolutely related to their other trains of thought, as the illegitimate diktats and authoritarianism become more obvious and unavoidable.
yep….The once court of final resort, now scares the bejezus out of me…we are a hair away from them ruling the President lacks the power to protect it’s citizens from raping and murdering thugs…where, then, shall we be as a republic?
back to deciding if we have the cajones to take 1A and 2A as our natural birthright and exercise them as we see fit.
We are near the “Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition” method of keeping our Republic.
I was looking to see if the fix was in, i.e. that SCOTUS was ‘on board’ with this Mueller 2.0 “Contempt trap” or not, and these rulings tend to say “Not”.
Which means these shenanigans by the district courts are just more lawfare, i.e. they know they will eventually be overruled, but in the meantime can push a narrative.
I am here.
We’ll Get back to “Get off my Lawn…Gran Torino Style”…street justice and de-evolution.
https://tenor.com/view/gran-torino-gran-torino-buddies-get-offa-my-lawn-son-gif-16683015
And Pam Bondi once again proves her incompetence by telling SCOTUS that every illegals alien, even those under the Alien and Sedition Act, should have due process rights to challenge deportations in court. She is a bad joke
she screwed this up royally. For dang sure. INEPT Blonde dingbat who should have NEVER been given this job. She is a total fool
Do you think Fox News would be a good retirement plan for Bondi’s future?
73 appearances in 2 months or so is a pretty good audition!
/sarcasm/
That’s why she’s “acting” AG!
It worked great for Lara Trump after doing nothing whatsoever at the RNC.
her ouster should be imminent, like yesterday
“Women don’t belong in some positions.”
Said by . . . my daughter.
And affirmed by a really old female !
Send her back to DeSantis.
The contitution and due process is only for citizens, not illegals.
Due process applies to anyone who (allegedly) commits a crime in this country. But due process shouldn’t exclude immediate deportation.
I just do not see The Donald putting up with Miss Bondi not doing the job proper.
the blackmail material is on both of them. The epstein stuff and illegal adoptions for Roberts and whatever the people wet worked Scalia, hold over ACB, my opinion of course
No, they just both agree with the agenda of the uniparty. They never were on the right side. No need for blackmail when they already favor the agenda.
I haven’t figured out ACB’s trigger points yet. She does seem to want to join the liberal women on the court in a lot of dissents. Maybe she knows that her vote doesn’t really matter in those cases and she is just trying to be chummy with the gals. But she also seems to give states rights a lot of weight in her deliberations, which could work in the Constitution’s favor in the long run.
Time will tell.
As my gut suggested from the get go, there was never a plan in place to trust.
All optics it would seem. Our MS Bondi.
Grammatically close to Bondo.
Pretending aside again, Its hard for me to ignore the significance of what most appear to be pretending not to notice. The installation of a fake President and by doing so a illegitimate Supreme Court Justice
I thought Lisa Page said that line?
The MSM will do the thinking for us if we do not think for ourselves.
Yes, that is correct.
She did, but Seth likes to use that quote for an ever growing list of people… despite it being fake, he persists. He’s been doing it for quite some time, and he usually gets called out on it.
But, oh well. We all know it is fake, so I guess that will have to do.
So much misplaced effort expended to avoid the point of the message in order to preserve the honor of our enemy, the MSM. I welcome the sunlight.
We all know the Media is fake, but oh well, I guess there will always be those who continue pretending not to notice and avoid accountability at all costs..
That is a Lisa Page quote
Please update your memes
We cannot allow Dismemeformation
😎
Two memes can be true at the same time..🥸
lol…. Dont let your arbiter of truth be the MSM..
Do you really need the Media to tell you the obvious? They wont.
Trump screwed up the one position again, that he can’t afford to screw up.
Sessions, Barr and now Bondi. She needs to go.
Caption: “I told you when we met at the bar last night. I only want a good time, not a relationship.”
Given Sundance’s well documented breakdown of Pamela Bondi, she was never qualified & that fact should have been crystal clear the moment someone in President Trump’s orbit.
Direct response should have been unequivocal no on Bondi & demotion of her supporter. I don’t know of another way to eliminate the influence of these fake R’s.
If you’re willing to knowingly support the slander & imprisonment of an innocent man or woman, you belong NO WHERE NEAR the levers of power in an organization with the word Justice in it.
The Zimmerman ordeal wasn’t a miscarriage of justice, it was a targeted character assassination as well as a deliberate attempt to build her career on the broken back of an innocent man.
Not just No. Hell No.
And you know that how? It’s possible Bondi is exactly where Trump wants her.
(paraphrased)
No plan ever survives contact with the enemy. -Helmuth von Moltke
Jurisdiction.
Standing.
Venue.
SCOTUS is finally remembering some 1st year law school Federal Civil Procedure.
I do not share your optimism, nor agree the Roberts’ Roulette Wheel has remembered anything. The Court knows darn well what they are doing.
The terms you cite are actually excuses being used to NOT issue a permanent ruling. Every one of those terms leaves the door open for lawfare lawyers to try again and force more time off the clock.
Those terms enable the creation of a TRO Do-Loop by actually directing the HOW and WHERE the lawfare need to try again.
100% They are doing as narrow and inconsequential as possible rulings. Just enough to provide an appearance of doing something and following the law and still only able to do that on 5-4 rulings.
Maybe Roberts is trying to walk a fine line? He seems to be doing exactly that.
Roberts has been called out for his very liberal unconstitutional votes, his membership in the secret invite only judges club with radical liberal judges and he has also been mentioned in relation to Epstein and his island. Justices read the news too. Roberts has reason to not stray to far from those that are a threat to his position on either side so appears to try to be staying in the middle. Either way Roberts is a compromised Chief Justice.
Especially after his latest trip to Ukraine with Norm Eisen…
And him being close personally friends with Norm Eisen is a Red Flag for sure!!
Roberts is desperate to preempt Congress passing new laws to restrict judicial power. His “per curiam” (but obviously written by Roberts’ clerks) opinion on the AEA are an attempt to make it look like the court is policing its own members… except it is clear they did not and are not.
Roberts cares about his power, his money and his esteem in the eyes of federal judges. He is not much concerned about protecting the Constitution.
btw – Kavanaugh’s concurring opinion emphasizes that the Judicial Due Process allowed under this decision is limited only to Habeas Corpus. That is significant. That should keep these cases OUT of federal district courts and keep them in immigration courts. Immigration courts are not “Article III” courts, they are basically administrative hearings held by “judges” appointed by the justice department.
very well written…I agree.
God Bless America
These fundamental requirements limit their options. Yes, they will re-file.
But I have been impressed by the appellate lawyers at the DOJ handling these matters.
I’m a retired lawyer, and know how tedious the appellate process is. But Trump’s lawyers have been fairly successful in expedited appeals.
Thanks for the note on the Government Lawyers. I agree they have been doing a solid and diligent job fighting vs the lawfare gangs.
The real disappointment is the “Republican” Congress who have decided to stay neutral regarding all of the President’s executive Orders, with a few of the more Uni-Party among them actually resisting. They could codify the President’s efforts to add the force of legislated law behind his efforts, thus having the force of the Congress as well as Executive Branch operating in sync …. forcing the courts to actually take up Constitutional Questions instead of issuing TRO’s without comment or vague rulings allowing another bite at the apple.
Maybe we the people need to let congress know more forcefully how we wish for them to proceed on these matters.
I think the Republicans are too busy trying to stop the tariffs before the negotiations can occur that will establish fair trade.
It is my opinion that congress will never codify anything President Trump is doing.
I believe everything we’re seeing today, with Doge and all, leads us back to the intentional crash of 08. That is when congress stopped proposing and passing budgets and replaced that with continuing resolutions. The whole thing has been carefully planned and implemented.
The budgets then massively funded all the NGOs for both sides of the aisle. Something for everyone. Both sides reaped massive profits, year after year, and enriched themselves at our expense. It has been an almost 20 year plan to impoverish us while enriching themelves.
When it implodes, as planned, we will be in the same position as the EU. We will lose all our last freedoms, our sovereignty, and will once again be subjects to be ruled.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2025/04/judge-boasberg-makes-his-next-move-after-supreme/
The high court said Boasberg lacked jurisdiction.
“In yesterday’s ruling vacating this Court’s TROs, the Supreme Court held that Plaintiffs cannot be deported under the Alien Enemies Act without an opportunity to challenge their removal in federal court. It also determined that the appropriate venue for such proceedings is the Southern District of Texas or wherever Plaintiffs are currently held,” Boasberg wrote.
Boasberg gave the plaintiffs until April 16 to file a notice if they wish to proceed on their motion for a preliminary injunction.
Can you explain this, I thought the Supreme court said Boasberg lacked juristidiction? He is still in DC not Texas. Won’t this just get struck down again?
Also many plaintiffs are now held in El Salvador, where there is no US district court.
Boasberg is doing what Democrats excel at doing: issuing the same garbage rulings, and daring anyone to tell him no.
Roberts does not have the gonads to publicly spank his good friend with a judicial cease and desist due to lack of jurisdiction, and he is beta enough to never stand up to his friend’s bully attitude.
Totally bizarre.
No TRO – but Idiot Federal Judge now invites a preliminary injunction??? Same facts; same jurisdiction.
Great idea! Establish a Federal District in El Salvador, about the size of an office.
Then appoint Boasberg as Judge for that district, and tell him to get his *ss down there.
The terms you cite are actually excuses being used to NOT issue a permanent ruling. Every one of those terms leaves the door open for lawfare lawyers to try again and force more time off the clock.
Exactly!
As to illegal aliens, can’t they be prosecuted and deported pursuant to US Code 18 Sect. 2? Why use the Bondi-set-up loophole of AEA?
disagree. they keep using this to weasel their way out of consequential rulings that might force them to TRULY take a stand for the republic. and it is mostly on Roberts, who has been very vocal about his desire for the court to be seen as “non-partisan.” he has even said he bases his decisions on enforcing that appearance.
To me it seems clear there are 3 possibilities;
1) like all of the Lawfare to date, from Impeachments 1+2, to Indictments 1-4, the objective was not to ultimatly prevail in Court, the goal was to fister a false nareative, and dominate the newscycle, it waa “for the Court of Public Opinion, and they fully expected to ultimately loose these cases.
2) The “fix” is in, this whole plan was hatched at that by invite only club, Roberts is “in” on it and the goal is a “contempt trap” they can use to pursue impeachment down the road.
3) Those filing these cases have no idea HOW SCOTUS would rule, one way or tge other .
I lean toward “2.”
So instead of using the Constitution as his basis for rulings, he’s using a tally sheet. Even tho the left are almost entirely wrong, it’s only an illusion the scales tip right.
Roberts can’t give out participation trophies when it comes to the law.
No plaintiff shopping.
No judge shopping.
No venue shopping.
Otherwise, the global citizen has rights and privileges equal to lawful citizens of this sovereign country.
BTW this ruling provides the answer to the question of who controls Roberts. The globalist.
(Does it matter which globalist body?)
i would also say that, other than SCOTUS itself, there should be NO federal level courts representing DC. its literally like a rogue court there to represent the interests of the government against itself and cut the people out of it.
One note to make is that today’s ruling by the Roberts’ Roulette Wheel is not permanent. It was listed as an “indefinite” lifting of the TRO and the defendants for the Venezuelan Gang members have been afforded to respond. In other words, the Roberts’ court recognizes that these enemies have rights under our justice system.
Don’t give the illegals anything, at all. Don’t allow them to get jobs, and punish employers that hire them. Don’t let them have healthcare, stop paying for their housing. Make their illegal presence pointless and useless. Bribe them with a hot meal and a plane ticket out of needed. They will find their way home.
Those remedies would take a congress that itself is both not corrupt and also is committed to the principles enshrined in our founding documents, especially the Constitution. We don’t a congress like that.
I prefer a trebuchet to fling them back across the line, but that’s me being impatient..
I read the AEA opinion yesterday. Unfortunately it is specifically limited to habeas proceedings. Those have to be brought in the district where the illegal alien is. This means all those other sorts of Lawfare cases seeking an order to pay money in foreign aid, etc., can presumably be still brought anywhere.
And indeed, as noted, the decision was at pains to make clear that each and every illegal alien can bring such a claim in court — millions and millions of cases. Which court is capable of handling that case load?
A good part of the decision was the calling out of (Leftist) district judges disguising what are preliminary injunctions as TROs, since TROs are unappealable. That kind of guidance from the SCOTUS can be used in any of these outrageous cases.
But really, Congress needs to act. Instead, the senate is passing resolutions on why the president’s tariffs should be lifted.
Sotomayor accused Trump of “forum shopping” by holding the enemy aliens in TX. I wonder why she was worried what TX federal judges might do….
He’s only playing by the “rules” Lawfare uses. Can’t say President Trump’s lawyers and close associates aren’t quick learners.
Sotomayor…two sandwiches short of a picnic.
She has never been shorted a sandwich.
I bet Shortnomayo-r “Yogi Bear’ed” a picnic basket or three from unsuspecting campers and day trippers alike over the years out hugging the trees suffering the munchies..
Ha!! Now I can’t get that picture out of my head…
She ate them
😂 😂 😂
“By holding the enemy aliens in Texas”…I recently read a news article that called them, ” PEOPLE who recently moved here.” 😞 Sorry I don’t remember where I read it. Made me so 😠 😡 mad my memory shut down…
You forgot the //sarc.
As you intimate, the state of TX is part of the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals and the 5th is more likely to act properly, focus on and give weight to the Constitutional Questions, due to it’s composition. One other note is the the 5th Circuit is supervised by Justice Alito.
Judge Issac Charles Parker. The hanging judge!
https://home.nps.gov/articles/000/the-words-of-judge-parker.htm
During his lifetime career as a politician and judge, Isaac Parker was a prolific speaker and writer. His charges to juries were known to last up to two hours in length. As a federal judge of the late 19th century, Judge Parker’s speeches reflect the social and legal thought at the time; certainly much of what Judge Parker said in his jury charges could be considered grounds for an appeal today.
The speeches contained here come from a variety of original sources, primarily historic newspapers, therefore they may not reflect exactly the words of the judge. However, only historic sources were used, in order to ensure the highest level of accuracy.
Explore the words of Judge Parker, and allow him to speak for himself….
She’s ridiculous. The things that come out of her mouth are just plain stupid.
They already do handle the case-load, so what’s different about this instance? Nothing. Support due process. Support our Constitution.
Which is likely why Trump is pushing the hard push to get people to leave.
I think the Administration should just proceed as planned under the Alien Enemies Act and remove people from the country without regard to the courts. DOJ can tell the Marshal Service not to enforce any ruling against the Government involving contempt or injunction/restraining order without DOJ approval. Just get the people out of the country and take the position that the only process “due” people falling under the statute is review and consideration by the executive branch, which has already been done and it has decided to remove them. Courts don’t have any role in these kind of decisions, and the public supports the President on this big time.
The faster ICE deports the illegals the smaller the window for illegals to file Habeas Corpus.
Once foreign nationals are out of US jurisdiction and back in their home country (or in any other country other than the USA) then we no longer Habeas their Corpus (we no longer have their body in custody.)
Split decisions on what should be unanimous, or nearly so, is no cause for rejoicing.
This doesn’t even rise to good, as in good the enemy of perfect.
This splitting the baby is the worst kind of compromise. The court is delinquent.
At least it’s nice to see that someone other than American citizen voters lack legal standing.
What a surprise! I never understood how we the people lacked “standing” in an election for OUR president.
Thats cause the explanation has never been made clear.
When the Fed. Gov. passed the “Help Anerica Vote” act (or whatever disengenous name they gave it) which was the ‘solution’ to the manufactured crises of Bush v. Gore, the State Legislatures had to totally re-write their election laws, which made no provisions for election machines.
And, lobbyists for the machine companies were right there, with “proposed” legislation already written.
Amongst other changes, was only giving challengers 10-14 days after an election, to file their case, but (justified as to prevent “sore loser suits”) requiring them to prove, AT THAT TIME, that if the allegations of improprieties they are alleging prove to be true, that such improprieties are sufficiently large as to effect the outcome.
In other words, even if it turns out they can prove 3 machines broke down, and so 1500 voters didn’t get a chance to vote, in a county where 250,000 people voted, and the margin of victory was 30,000 since it wouldn’t effect the outcome do we REALLY want to have a trial?
Since a decision against the petitioner would end the case at the outset, they inserted it into the statute as,…..
STANDING.
Hence, cases were thrown out due to “lack of standing” NOT because of the standard legal definition which applies to other legal cases, but due to this unique special definition and requirement.
A requirement which is almost impossible to meet, prior to any discovery, etc.
There are a whole bunch of things, put into this legislation to make it more difficult to challenge election results, that have nothing to do with machine voting.
For instance, the challenger can be held financially liable for ginormous fines, if the court detirmines they were engaging in a suit without merit, the Court, by legislation is instructed to give any benefit of the doubt to election officials, etc.
Anyway, thats why the “no standing” was used to kick so many election challenges, right at the outset.
Yesterday, the Supreme Court also ruled -generally favorable- to the Trump administration [pdf here] on the issue of Venezuelans in the United States labeled by President Donald Trump as “alien enemies.” The justices ruled (5-4) to vacate a lower judge’s order that imposed a block on all deportations under Trump’s invocation of the Alien Enemies Act.
But require due process for each and every removal which is SPECIFICALLY NOT a requirement of the Act, that in a court system that is already overwhelmed. If 1% of the 10-12 million illegals are criminals (other than from illegal entry), that means 100,000 to 120,000 cases.
The court needs to rule that district courts are out of their jurisdiction nationally and cannot overrule the POTUS! PERIOD.
Yes – and I’m sure the DOJ will be right on it!
I wonder how many “helpful” non-profits will spring up to help the poor criminal alien (all of them) achieve due process?
They just won’t get paid through USAID at least.
Like Boasberg’s daughter’s firm?
Yep.
Courts can and should be able to overrule a president when warranted, otherwise you are basically arguing for a king.
NOT anywhere BEYOND their realm of control which for district courts is their DISTRICT.
“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. [BUT they are carefully AVOIDING that ruling – W]
I think it is quite unlikely that the Supreme Court will affirm this. [i.e., that they do have nationwide authority since oversight of NATIONAL issues is THE SCOTUS’ realm of control – W]
– Eric S Raymond
Allow otherwise and it is chaos:
There are 94 United States district courts, and as of January 2025, there are 677 authorized permanent district judgeships
Not a limited jurisdiction court
No. Then you basically have the three independent and co-equal branches intended by the authors of the US Constitution. Each of the three branches should be their own judge of what is or is not Constitutional. Anything less and they are not co-equal.
Judicial review is not in the Constitution. The notion of judicial review was discussed and dismissed during the debates on the ratification of the Constitution. John Marshall conjured up the notion of judicial review based upon some English common-law precedents that were not included in our Constitution.
Illegal aliens are already criminals by virtue of unlawful residency status.
The better distinction is that of those among them that are committing further crimes against people and property, particularly violent and or heinous acts.
The worst of them should be expeditiously deported as a priority.
All the illegals need to go! Not just those convicted of rape and murder and taking over apartment complexes!
Illegal aliens are already criminals by virtue of unlawful residency status.
Here Hear!
Push em through in batches. Process them by class. There is no limit to size of class.
Applicant/plaintiff has xx number of days to state claim of due process. Number of days commence at date of recent Supreme decision. Therefore, the clock is already running.
No appeal is allowed, as in same manner of administrative law judge.
Quick, cover her leftist ass! Puke…
Opinion – Justice Barrett has set a new judicial ethics standard — and it’s about time
April 8, 2025
https://www.yahoo.com/news/opinion-justice-barrett-set-judicial-143000225.html
However, a recent decision by a member of the court’s conservative supermajority [BS – W] shows us that it doesn’t have to be this way.
[snip]
Justice Amy Coney Barrett bucked this trend with her recent recusal from Oklahoma Statewide Charter School Board v. Drummond. Although Barrett provided no public explanation, it’s plausible if not likely that her decision stemmed from her close ties to Notre Dame’s Religious Liberty Clinic and personal friendship with one of the case’s legal adviser, Notre Dame law Professor and Federalist Society Director Nicole Stelle Garnett.
This choice reflects the longstanding principle, mostly abandoned by the Roberts Supreme Court, that judges should step aside when personal relationships might bias them, or even create the appearance of impropriety.
Only one side of the uniparty does this. It’s a similar strategy used by our local Board of County Commissioners. What they do is count up the votes. If it’s a clear win that harms residents, the representing commissioner votes “no” and gives a nice speech. If it’s close, the representing commissioner recuses or ducks out of the vote, avoiding having to vote no on a measure that harms residents. This simultaneously lowers the number of votes needed to pass.
Our side “recuses” to make it easier for a liberal victory.
Conservative Inc employees can always be counted on to find their principles when it means advancing liberal agenda items.
My main point was their blowing out of proportion (“set a new judicial ethics standard”) what she did in an attempt to cover for her recent string of voting with the left on incredibly important issues.
Yep, I totally get your point.
Barrett is unfit for the judiciary. Listen to this clip where she personalizes George Floyd’s death, insinuates racism is the cause, and says she cried over it.
Judging women fit for his Administration seems to be a weak point in President Trump. ACB and Bondi, in particular.
I do not want a mommy judge,I want a Father.
Did you note that it was a five (men) to four (women) decision in the AEA case. Tough vs. soft could indicate a hormonal “soft heart” bias.
BARF!
Barrett’s a wealthy scumbag beyatch, devoid of common sense and practitioner of deception, machinations, and misdirection.
She’s using “Racism”, rather than good guy/bad guy based on their actions.
Not a good sign
.
she might have obtained her virtue kids illegally. s/
Kagen apparently isn’t part of the Roberts Supreme Court.
She didn’t do this because of good ethics. She did it to help the uniparty win. She can’t vote against it in a case like this, so she arranges it so she doesn’t have to vote.
The USSC knows it has to give Trump some favorable rulings to prevent him in being able to say they always rule against him but make no mistake they’re still determined to prevent him from being able to succeed in returning America to greatness.
the fact that this enters their mind is grounds enough to remove them all.
the ONLY jurisprudence that should inform them is the US Constitution.
Congress is also working to limit the jurisdiction of the lower courts. These rulling look a little like trying to get ahead of Congress.
Congress also is responsible for the procedural rules that the federal courts use. They could amend them if they chose to do so.
Damn that wo man
Just in!
Federal District Court Judge Boasberg releases ruling ordering the disbanding of the US Supreme Court.
😉
Congress controls the inferior courts and can fix everything in ten minutes. Never forget that.
We don’t need to supreme Court to try and fix our problems.
Congress writes the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, and the Judiciary Act.
Of course, the drafting is done by law professors and congressional staff lawyers, with input from the courts, but Congress still has to vote on them.
Congress still has to vote on them
And there’s the problem about getting anything done there about this.
But just a tiny bit less than half of CONgress loves what’s happening along with many in the RINO party who would prefer to obstruct Trump without having to be overt about it.
CONgress won’t fix this, ONLY SCOTUS can, but as thedoc00 correctly points out above, rather than ruling that district courts are out of their realm of control nationally and that an unelected court created by the legislative branch most definitely cannot be allowed to override the POTUS, the ELECTED head of the executive branch, they are NOT issuing that kind of an all inclusive, permanent ruling to END that overreach and are, instead, ruling in specific cases which leaves the door open for lawfare lawyers to try again and force more time off the clock!
I have a different take on these recent decisions by “The Robert’s Court” string of decisions partially upholding the Article II powers of the President. May I suggest that Chief Justice Roberts is just trying to play CYA on the corrupt judicial system.
These unconstitutionally, ridiculous so call national TRO’s issued by Marxist leaning activist “Judges” to thwart President Trump ‘s agenda has produced a growing anger from the people in this country. Even our useless, spineless, lazy Congress critters are starting to bluster about impeachment of these judges, defunding or doing away with Federal Districts, limiting injunctions only to the jurisdiction covers by the activist judge, etc.
Justice Roberts sees this and is only acting to quiet down the anger because he does not want the elitite judiciary as it is currently comprised (or compromised) to continue. In simple terms, Roberts is trying to protect the current system himself, instead of Congress being pressured to act by the ire of we the people. I don’t believe Roberts or Amy Phony Bare-it really want to stop this BS form of lawfare but rather to protect it from permanent change by Congress.
Agreed until this: protect it (the system) from permanent change by Congress. CONgress won’t change it. The UniParty likes it. Anything else is just smoke and mirrors.
Proof:
Dan Huff
@RealDanHuff
Feb 10 2025
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!
When I was in the White House, in Trump’s first term, I suggested this, but DOJ didn’t make it happen. Imagine if we had applied this to the travel ban – activists would think twice before blocking policies with potentially billions at stake.
For national injunctions, we’re talking bonds in the hundreds of millions or even billions. It will become prohibitive unless the activists have a slam dunk case.
Note that Karl Denninger is NOT a lawyer, but can still see the problem:
So Where Are The Filings?
Karl Denninger
8 Mar 2025
Trump’s Administration has finally taken notice of Rule 65(c) when it comes to Federal Courts:
(c) Security. The court may issue a preliminary injunction or a temporary restraining order only if the movant gives 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.
This is not discretionary and the court cannot assess a “de-minimus” security amount either; it must be defensible predicated on the costs and damages that the other party may or will suffer with the evidence of same in the order itself if the injunction or TRO issues until disposition of the case and the posting of said security has to be completed before the TRO or injunction is valid.
[snip]
Thus where is Pam Bondi with immediate emergency filings against all of the existing injunctions already issued demanding that security be posted up and computed in said public filing and, if there is any delay or refusal by the judges involved to do so taking an immediate emergency appeal as far as necessary including to the Supreme Court which, given the actual language in the Rules of Civil Procedure is a slam-dunk and immediate win? No, demanding this only on a forward basis for future filings is not enough — force the movants in all the existing injunctions to either post up security or dissolve the injunctions and TROs.
Answer, because they’re not being forced to:
Why are Judges Issuing Nationwide Injunctions Without Collecting the Bonds Required to Do So? (5:52)
Rep. Harriet Hageman
1 Apr 2025
That they aren’t doing that obvious thing led me to wonder if it’s because the GOP half of the UniParty doesn’t want to hamper its own ability to use national injunctions from district courts. So, I did some research:
Question to AI: Have republican district judges ever made a national injunction?
DDG Assist AI: Yes, Republican-appointed district judges have issued nationwide injunctions, particularly during the Trump administration, to block various federal policies. These injunctions have been controversial and have occurred in cases involving significant political issues.
So, then I searched further and found this. Of course, the GOP half of the UniParty used them far, FAR more sparingly.
GOP thinks the court orders they used against Biden should be outlawed — because they now target Trump
3 Apr 2025
https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2025-04-03/gop-thinks-the-courthouse-stunt-they-used-against-biden-should-be-outlawed-because-they-target-trump
So, DO NOT count on CONgress fixing this and any pol who says they can with a bill is your typical pol BS artist.
Didn’t one of the judges actually go ahead and grant a $100.00 bond requirement. This despite :
Quote “This is not discretionary and the court cannot assess a “de-minimus” security amount either; it must be defensible predicated on the costs and damages that the other party may or will suffer with the evidence of same in the order itself if the injunction or TRO issues until disposition of the case and the posting of said security has to be completed before the TRO or injunction is valid.”
Protecting the institution.
Exactly. Roberts is maneuvering to assert that the courts control immigration, not the president. It’s disingenuous to allow an illegal invasion and then demand the courts get to slow-walk its correction. They all get hearings paid for by the same taxpayers that Biden abused with his invasion while the courts pretended Mayorkas was good democrat, not a traitor.
That whoa man is bill bar 2.0
IMO, the SCOTUS is nuts. Judicial review? Due Process? What kind of due process does the Patriot Act provide for accused citizens? None.
The gubmint can throw any one of us into a black hole, never to be seen or heard from again. But illegal alien terrorists have due process rights?
They’re nuts.
Didn’t see the ACLU stand up for Jews who were being deprived of a high dollar education in universities and colleges across the country by terrorist supporters!
Winning in the Supreme Court is the task of Pam Bondi.
Instead of acting like juveniles and throwing verbal spitballs at her, the Bondi haters should acknowledge she is currently succeeding for Trump in the arena of the Supreme Court.
She is currently succeeding for Trump in the arena of the Supreme Court.
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/2025/04/08/u-s-supreme-court-begins-dismantling-federal-judge-temporary-restraining-orders-against-constitutional-executive-branch-action/#comment-11708308
Actually, winning in the Supreme Court is the job of the Solicitor General, NOT the Attorney General.
I wonder how much it costs the taxpayers to provide “due process” to illegal alien border jumpers!
I wonder how much it’s costing the taxpayers to defend the hundred or so lawfare cases being brought against the Trump Administration. This hits on Rep. Harriet Hageman point about bond security.
I thought the same thing regarding the AEA and allowing illegals to “have their day in court”. It shouldn’t matter if Bondi actually gave the SC an opening for this, the SC should uphold the actual wording/intent of the Act. Hopefully President Trump will continue to do things in accordance with the Act and not some extra judicial wording. This needs to be corrected and acting according to the intent of the Act may be the only way to get that to happen. I’ve noticed in some of the DOJ’s appeals they come on strong but then also try to soft sell what it is they want, which is always a bad idea.
AEA was signed into law by President John Adams, signer of the Declaration of Independence. Neither James Madison nor Thomas Jefferson had any issue with the law.
It’s been that way for 227 years until Skull and Bones Boasberg.
How many Secret Societies does he belong to?
Who doesn’t believe there are more still hidden in his darkness?
Pray for PDJT!
When things get weird the left gets uglier.
.
“The real problem is that the Supreme Court emphasized that every person named as an “alien enemy” under the AEA is entitled to judicial review…”
I’m not as worried as Ms. Widburg. Habeas can be brought only individually, not via class action. The review isn’t “automatic” but requires the filing of a petition tailored to the individual. The petition has to be sworn to, and lawyers who allow lies are subject to sanctions for suborning perjury.
As I commented when Boasberg first erupted, habeas still is a valid remedy for, e.g. mistaken identity et al., where someone truly should not be subject to deportation under the AEA. Under ordinary circumstances, this would not seem to be particularly useful or feasible as a lawfare operation.
.
Correct.
Completely correct.
Also, there are a limited number of judges available to hear the habeas petitions. If you are number 100,000 on the habeas docket, you are going to be sitting in the detainment facility a looong, looong time before the court gets around to you. Could be ten years. It is habeas => no right to a speedy trial.
In fact, the main constraint will be the holding facilities.
The Administration should take the position that they can be deported in due course unless a habeas petition is granted while they are still in the country. Most will be long gone by the time the court rules on anything.
The main real world impact is that in a martial law situation, and one in which DIA or Homeland Security have already done the legwork to pin down the locations of paramilitary nests of invaders, it will be possible to swoop down on perhaps 10,000 of the most dangerous soldiers, give them the required notice on the flight to Texas or Gitmo, and then pen them up in one location until the end of hostilities.
If Venezuela, or China, suddenly has to face a situation where 10,000 of its citizens are in Camp Justice, or wherever, awaiting lawyers and the filing of habeas petitions, that’s not a legal system issue, that’s a diplomatic negotiations moment.
What really sticks out like a sore thumb is Boasberg’s willingness to ignore the basic Rules of Civil and Criminal Procedure.
Every complaint has to allege why venue is proper – and you don’t get beyond a Motion to Dismiss if you screw that up. The blatant disregard for the Rules, which should have been a slam dunk dismissal for improper venue, even if it needed to be on the court’s own motion, is just mind boggling.
LEFT judges NEVER waiver. NOT 1x, NEVER.
Yet, EVERY judge appointed by republicans STRAY, BEND, BREAK…..ALWAYS!!!
ACB was highly touted and recommended…..YET, the red flags were there and MANY TRUE CONSEVATIVES said she was a McConnell, RINO, Establishment PLANT and, how correct were they???????
She’s worthless….
Worse than worthless because she votes with the left.
So true. She’s joined the woman’s rank at SCOTUS.
Trump is being set up just as he was the 1st 4Y term.
He will be watered down and rendered slow walk to no where. Waiting for 2Y midterms and House turnover.
First off, the House turn over is not guaranteed, even with Republicant leadership doing everything they can to encourage it,..
Past performance is no guarantee. Normally Presidents enjoy a short honeymoon period, that ends as soo as they start actually governing, because (the calculation goes) that for every vote he wins, he loses at least one.
Thing is, he is nor looking like a “lame duck” more like a soaring eagle.
Secondly, the impeachment move WILL take up time, but will end up the same place as before; the R’s in the Senate will not vote to convict.
I think they should pressure her to resign and start smearing her in the press by leaking personal things about her that make her look bad.
Her claim to fame was because she was a clerk for Justice Scalia.
So much for Separation of Powers. On second thought, how would the Supremes actually “enforce” the orders. Contempt hearing of POTUS?
Read the entire American Thinker article. Agree that this decision, although on the surface seems to be favorable, is a turd. As far as I’m concerned, no illegal alien is entitled to due process, especially tren de aragua or MS-13 members. If my understanding is correct, the lefty lawyers could tie deportations up in the courts for a very long time.
Absolutely, proof that a turd CAN be polished, kinda’ like the former “President.”
The Alien Enemies Act allows the president to detain or deport individuals from enemy nations with little to no due process, meaning that these actions can be taken without a court hearing.
If just 1% of the 10 to 12 million invaders are criminals, beyond entering the country illegally, that’s 100,000 to 120,000 cases in an already massively overloaded court system.
They cannot. The procedure for deportation is well established, there are no surprises here. Trying to take shortcuts is what truly results in a drawn out process. Support our Constitution.
Your comment above about district courts:
“Courts can and should be able to overrule a president when warranted, otherwise you are basically arguing for a king.”
along with that comment leads me to think that you don’t know what you’re talking about, just throwing in words like “kings” and “constitution” when it seems appropriate when it isn’t.
I challenge you to explain why.
District courts absolutely should not override a president’s article II powers. The only court that constitutionally could override that would be the USSC, but even then, I have my doubts if a president’s actions were within the constitution. We have unfortunately as a nation have come to believe that judges are the “kings” as in the case of judge bloasberg. He has an immense ego along with some others.
You ignore the Constitution, which recognises you can not fight a war by committee or judicial rulings, hence they bestow one individual, the POTUS, with the plenary authority of CiC.
HE, and he alone, along with such cabinet members as he may appoint to carry out his directives, is charged with the awsome responsibility of securing our Nation.
National Security; SECURING our Nation.
NOT as a King, but as the only representative elected by a constituency of all of the people of the nation, to represent them.
The AEA should be used judiciously and I believe is. The rest need to be deported as illegal immigrants.
None of the above are citizens and the judicial system should only be used by and for the citizens.
I disagree with American Thinker in one regard. The Aliens act is largely for the 2 gangs. As many as there are, it’s still a narrower sample. The bulk are going to simply be taken out – as many have – because they’ve already had their due-process and are under a current removal order. So… remove them.
This is actually pretty good on the legal aspects:
Supreme Court ruling on Alien Enemies Act raises new due process concerns for migrants
April 8, 2025
https://www.cnn.com/2025/04/08/politics/due-process-supreme-court-alien-enemies-act/index.html
“It is the lawyers who run our civilization for us — our governments, our business, our private lives. Most legislators are lawyers; they make our laws. Most presidents, governors, commissioners, along with their advisers and brain-trusters are lawyers; they administer our laws. All the judges are lawyers; they interpret and enforce our laws. There is no separation of powers where the lawyers are concerned. There is only a concentration of all government power — in the lawyers. As the schoolboy put it, ours is “a government of lawyers, not of men.”
– From Book – “Woe Unto You, Lawyers” 1939, By Proffessor of Law – Fred Rodell
What worries me is how this court bends to public opinion. They know Roberts has angered the public so they toss us these lesser, more ambiguous rulings. But this court has a history of doing that just before they deliver a catastrophic ruling against the people.
the pressure remains on Congress to fix this and not after 12 months of hearings and grandstanding either. I don’t trust the courts and I don’t trust the DOJ.
Congress can fix this quickly if they want to. I don’t think they do. Part of the run-out-the-clock strategy.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but SCOTUS decided on the requirement for habeas review during the GWB War on Terror.
Correct.
Hamdi v Rumsfeld.
SCOTUS says they can be detained and held until their judicial review. I would propose they are held at GITMO until their tele-judicial review is completed on Ipads. Then deport them to their home countries.
The Administrative Procedure Act needs to be amended or voided.
The President is not an agency.
I’m pretty sure SC has already ruled on that.
Either John Roberts and Norm Eisen are close friends OR their professional lives have crossed now and then but Eisen is simply bragging and lying about his closeness to Scotus Chief Justice.
https://x.com/MikeBenzCyber/status/1907733996743930152
Check out the seditionist Eisen’s X.
Eisen is leading a color revolution against our duly elected president.
Talk about not accepting election results.
Under Trump’s DOJ, Norm Eisen certainly seems to be resting easy every night.
Getting paid $400 or $500 to show up and protest for a few hours is not a bad gig. It has already been reported that these are pretty much “rent-a-mobs”. This clown eisen is just another puke lawyer that knows how to work the system with leftist judges. I wouldn’t hire him to defend me. Oh, “hundreds of thousands”, bull squeeze, typical msdnc propaganda.
So, now an “alien enemy” under the AEA has more rights than a J6er. Ridiculous!
That was also a violation of due process. Which trump remedied.
Long way to go. The only answer is to hold hearings that subpoena specific judges. This would be done to craft legislation to shrink both the size and jurisdiction of the inferior courts.
It would also serve the very important purpose of reminding the judges that they are part of the THIRD branch of government. And that they answer to We The People. They are not dictators in robes.
DOGE the judiciary, and knock their egos down a few pegs.
All SCOTUS is doing is mildly removing a legal tactic. They will fight tooth and nail to maintain judicial supremacy over the US government. In doing so they risk collapsing the institution.
Did Venezuela Invade America In Secret?
A leaked security briefing details the dangers of a transnational criminal cartel operating inside the USA.
EMERALD ROBINSON
APR 08, 2025
“…According to the briefing, the TdA members move from Venezuela through several foreign nations before entering the USA illegally and being spread out in safe houses in 20 different cities. For what reason? TdA members have come to the USA in large numbers to undermine our public safety and support “the Maduro regime’s goal of destabilizing democratic nations in the Americas, including the USA.”
How do you know it’s a hostile foreign army? Because TdA terrorists are supported by 300 military intelligence officers who train them to engage in “riots, sabotage, disinformation, espionage, social conflict, and armed aggression” inside the USA.
This is 21st century hybrid warfare…”
https://www.emerald.tv/p/did-venezuela-invade-america-in-secret
The administration has also obtained data from law enforcement agencies from Latin American nations where Tren de Aragua members set up criminal operations before attempting to extend their reach into the United States.
Miami Herald – https://archive.is/a36TL
I think rounding them takes priority.
I seem to be in the minority here, IMO due to an epidemic of “Battered Conservative Syndrome”.
Maybe PDJT47 can take a personal day and go to Boasburgs Court and sit in the gallery and watch him, and gloat.
What’s sauce for the Goose is Sauce for the Gander.
I hear the groans over Bondi, but the circuitous argument always comes back to the same place: WHO PLUGGED HER IN THERE?
Every one of these people were appointed by Trump
I have to laugh
They cloned Dire Wolves
Maybe Trump will clone himself
…HAVE AT IT
I hope Trump get’s over Bondi soon before she does more damage.
Roberts is no fool. He is political, as any CJ should be, concerned about the interplay between the three branches. That said, there is no way Roberts is going to start a consitutional dog fight with the Executive branch, and waste S Ct credibility and political capital on it, just to create out of whole cloth an entirely new protected class of people who are not citizens, have no right to be here in the first place, and who can’t vote in ANY elections, federal, state, or local. There is NO overriding moral principle involved here. They can all be sent packing.
I remember Roberts’ words, or close to it, on Obamacare: “elections have consequences.” The American people spoke very decisively that they want illegal aliens gone when we elected President Trump.
He’s already shredded credibility.
Roberts always gives an “out” to his leftist buddies…never a clear straight forward decision. So , now they can sue for habeous corpus hearings…here we go again..the other one, the woman who Trump appointed, is totally leftist and was a huge mistake. I can see Roberts going one way and then another but she goes one way…what a wasted opportunity.
Relying on Blondi’s DOJ is pipe dream I think. The DOJ immigration attorney doofus she put in front of Boasberg blamed the DOJ for the wrong DOJ response to Boasberg. Yeah, that’s the DOJ attorney who got “suspended”. She couldn’t even fire the useless doofus.
Tom Fitton appeared on Bannon last night and he made some great points. He outright said that neither the current DOJ or FBI would do anything about prosecuting the people committing the crimes of the last 8 years. He said that was like having the fox investigate the fox. He said that Trump had to appoint a special prosecutor.
I don’t know if the special prosecutor is the right avenue but Blondi’s DOJ nor Patel’s FBI for sure aren’t going to be the answer. The can’t even handle the current onslaught of judicial lawfare.
I don’t think she put him there…he was already there.
But what troubles me is that in such a high profile case, tne guy wasn’t called in beforehand to discuss the legal strategy and Administration objectives. It’s as if Bondi and/or her top subordinates just “assumed” tne guy would do exactly what they wanted.
And THAT is a terrible thing to do with ANYONE left over from the Biden regime.
Even if the Supreme Court wants to insert itself into exercise of the AEA, the President is entirely within his Constitutional rights to declare that no action which he takes under the Act is subject to judicial review – unless Congress sees fit to amend it. As written, the Act makes no mention of the Courts. And this is logical, because a non-citizen has no standing in the Courts.
The black robes are worried it’s obvious
Notice this
POTUS has already declared MS-13 and Tren de Araugua members to be foreign enemies. Foreign gang members deained in the US should be declared non-uniformed enemy combatants and thus subject to military court not the US justice system. They can stay at Gitmo until their trial is over. Nothing SCOTUS can do about that.
Also it seems to me that SCOTUS is bending over backwards to avoid actually having to rule on any of the major issues that President Trump is bringing to the forefront. Can they run out the clock for 4 years?
Trump should not submit himself to the SCOTUS.
Neither the Congress or the SCOTUS can override Article II of the Constitution. The Executive is charged with a duty to preserve the Constitution just as are the Congress and the SCOTUS. If the Congress and the SCOTUS violate the Constitution it is the DUTY of the Executive to ignore them and follow the Constitution. If the Congress wants to amend Article II they have the power to pass an amendment and submit it to the states for ratification. If they so choose, the House can impeach the Executive, and have him/her tried in the Senate, and if convicted, removed from office. The SCOTUS has no power over the Executive, whatsoever. The SCOTUS is charged with preserving the Constitution within the Judicial Branch, i.e. overturning lower court decisions. Beyond that, they are out of their lane and must get off of the road. This is how the system was constructed by the Founders.
We must stop letting the SCOTUS act as the final arbiter of everything. That is rule by a cabal, not by the People through their elected representatives. The only ways to do that are for the Congress to impeach Justices, or for the Congress AND the Executive to declare, and defy, as unconstitutional, such decisions by the SCOTUS.
Ultimately, underlying all of this is the imperative of having lawful and secure elections. That is the only way for the People to speak, and ENFORCE, their will.
As parent I learned from my mom’s treatment of me a firm NO was the best way to stop misbehavior.