In July, U.S. District Judge Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong (Biden Appointee) ruled that ICE agents were conducting “roving patrols” within Los Angels and making arrests without “reasonable suspicion” that their targets were in the country illegally. Frimpong then prohibited immigration officials in the Los Angeles area from using race, location targeting, language, affiliations and other commonsense measures to stop and question suspected illegal aliens.
Today, in a 6-3 ruling the Supreme Court put a stay on the lower court order and essentially unrestricted the ICE and CBP officials so they can carry out their immigration enforcement efforts. Judge Bret Kavanaugh wrote the concurring opinion of the majority. [COURT RULING HERE] The DEI Justices Kagan, Sotomayor and Brown (gay, latina, black) once again dissented.
[SOURCE]
Border Czar Tom Homan along with ICE and CBP are free to start using all prior factors in their immigration enforcement actions.
WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court has lifted restrictions that barred the Trump administration from carrying out immigration-related raids in the Los Angeles area based on broad criteria such as speaking Spanish or gathering at locations day laborers often congregate.
The justices, who apparently divided 6-3 along ideological lines, put on hold a federal district judge’s order that reined in what critics called “roving” raids by Immigration and Customs Enforcement. That judge had found the tactics were likely unconstitutional because agents were detaining people without probable cause at car washes, bus stops and Home Depot parking lots based on stereotypes. (read more)
Thanks for my daily dose of winnemins! Common sense wins again!
Things are measurably better since Trump was elected. Questionable roadside fruit stands and unregulated food trucks have just about disappeared. Fewer people and children in Dr’s offices and emergency rooms. Smaller lines at DMV. Just the actual possibility of enforcing the law has helped make everyday life for American citizens better, even if the elitists wont admit it. We are about 90 minutes East of Los Angeles. God Bless President Donald J. Trump.
AllKinds: In the City of LA, roadside stands and food trucks are everywhere.
Your statements are questionable in themselves… are you doing physical surveys?
I’m about 2 hours east of LA and I agree with AllKinds. The change is impossible to miss. No more loud blaring mexican music coming from cars. Almost no more hispanic folks filling Wamart or downtown Porterville. DMV not brimming with south of the border folks. English is the language most heard now. It’s WONDERFUL.
Not to mention the costs. Nearly 60% of illegal households are using welfare, that they’re NOT entitled to.
https://cis.org/Report/Welfare-Use-Immigrants-and-USBorn
It’s the commie way: What’s yours is mine.
Failure of parents to teach the Ten Commandments; in this case, Thou shalt not steal.
In a related and anecdotal instance: I quit going to Disney movies when I took a daughter to see the 1992 Aladdin.
I felt like throwing up. The lead male character was being glorified as he danced, pranced, and careened through scene after scene showing him STEALING from one vendor after another: trinkets, bananas, hats, and such. All of it was one big laugh.
The Clinton era, don’t you know, when American morality was put to the test and failed miserably.
One of our two major political parties has as a fundamental principle coveting thy neighbor’s wife, house, ox, ass, manservant, maidservant, and everything else that is thy neighbor’s.
“The Clinton era, don’t you know, when American morality was put to the test and failed miserably.”
Clinton may have been the one who tested America’s morality, but we, as Americans, are the ones who failed that test. We are solely responsible for our own behavior. We are the ones who must correct our own behavior.
All the roadside fruit stands and unregulated food trucks moved from your area to my area. 🙂
There has been an explosion of these in Jacksonville Florida over the last few years. They are everywhere.
Don’t eat the ice cones. Especially the yellow ones. All the food on them is questionable.
You ain’t kiddin’..
More traffic on Chicagoland expressways and I think more significant wrecks.
The 3 Syygian witches, also known as the Grey Sisters, had one eye and one tooth between them. Their names were Deino (Dread), Pemphredo (Alarm), and Enyo (Horror).
They have been reincarnated in Sotomayor, Kagan, and “I can’t define what a woman is” Brown. Instead of one eye and tooth, they share one brain between them, a damaged one at that.
Abby Normal.
That was a fun movie.
Young Frankenstein or Clash of the Titans? I feel we are close to mixing as like our metaphors.
Lol loved that!
Not even one brain, more like one brain cell.
Yes, a single cell organism split 3 ways 😅
All three are DEI hires and check multiple boxes. Not one of them could pass a real constitution test and all three make decisions based on their personal belief systems. All should be removed and replaced with true constitutional judges.
Totally agree
none of them are qualified to make any judgements that affect our lives in any way and we should not have to suffer their offenses in any way shape or form.
Was KJB appointed by Joe, or by Autopen?!?
I think Kagan could.
I thought they were Whitmer, Nessel & Benson…..
Could be, they fit the MO 😉
My wonderful mom had lots of one liners. In this case she would’ve said “if they had a brain they would play with it”
another win for us.
Lol, Mom’s a hoot! And absolutely spot on!
When the good Lord said brains, they thought he said trains and they’d catch the next one!
‘Scuse my ethnic slur, but Frimpong sounds like the name of the fourth witch.
Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong . . .
🤣🤣🤣 we shall make it so! And her name shall mean “Disastrous”
The justices, who apparently divided 6-3 along ideological lines,
And that is why we no longer have a Constitution that is protected by the judiciary. Ideology is not principle. Sticking to the Constitution is never wrong. And even if it is, there is a proper remedy for it. But no one wants to do the hard work. The prefer to let unelected judges make the corrections, much as CJ Roberts did in his disgusting Obamacare opinion that made an unconstitutional mandate into a tax.
Frankly, our nation cannot survive if every freaking question leads to a decision by robed ideologues.
Wasn’t Pam supposed to demand Surety Bonds from these “judges” for these stupid ass roadblock injunctions or orders?
Is President Trump ignorant of this? Or perfectly fine with the impediments?
Help me understand..
Based on what I now now, I’m convinced Pam is doing exactly what the President wants her to do. Evidenced by how much he goes out of his way to disproportionately praise her and some other things I’m not going to talk about because I’m not fully converted by the sources.
If we are gracious enough to “trust the plan”, the big hits will start occurring in the three months prior to the next election but I’m not convinced it will happen. The problem may well be again the information that is getting to the President is wrongly curated or there is some compromise that is being exploited.
Just look at the John Rich interview on “Just Try That In A Small Town”, to see how little “Aware” PJDT (was, I hope) about the ‘jabs’ and their horrific damage.
I realize that he cannot cover everything, but this ‘knowledge’ of the harm done, has been “out there” for years. Who is preventing him from seeing it?
I’m surprised he hasn’t discovered it on his own. I know he’s unbelievably busy, but surely he doesn’t have to be “told” everything.
Bioweapon has to be addressed. U don’t do it with hcq.
You create a weak pathogen to coat our bodies so nothing can seat in you
We don’t know if he was an idiot or not.
We know nano is showing it has bad with it.
We know COVID was highly contagious ( fits pathogen versus pathogen)
The issue was mandating , only possible after a stolen election, only possible with COVID for mail in.
Political raping of a real event
He recently requested results of the trials and studies.
Now you are informed. Can drop anger towards him
Yes. I believe that PDJT’s eyes have been fully opened to how much was kept from him. At the pressers, there are conservative reporters that ask him, “Have you hear about XYZ?” When he says no then they explain to him what is going on.
In the past week, he has learned about some tent near the WH that was meant for some purpose 30 years ago and it has morphed into a lefty area. I believe that it was Peter Doocy who told PDJT about it. It is also unsightly. PDJT immediately turned to someone in the oval office and said, “Get rid of it.”
Then he was asked about the murder of the young lady in Charlotte by a right wing journalist which he had not heard about. He immediately said that he would look into it.
He is becoming aware that information is not getting to his desk and ears. My guess, is that he will start pursuing other voices who can also keep him informed.
Well, the buck stops somewhere…who is the last one in line of the gatekeepers? Asking for a friend.
He could start by reading CTH, and firing Suzie Wiles and her staff.
I don’t know if the phrase from Jackson Browne’s song “Redneck Friend” infected me for life.
But I do sit in the den several times a week and shoot up the evening (MS) news to keep abreast of the enemy.
Tonight was particularly aggregious as they opened with the “Donald Trump birthday card to you know who replete with drawing”!
I hung on until they FINALLY covered the stabbing death of the Ukrainian woman which they should have covered when it happened.
10-15 seconds.
You can’t despise them enough.
Agree my exact take on it
While the doj under Barbie Biondi is still playing pattycake with everything that matters, the US Marshals should accompany the ICE agents to arrest every leftist uppity politician who gets in the way
“Along ideological lines” in this case means those who follow the law (Constitution) and those who break the law.
Or: Rs versus Ds
More like idiotlogical lines…
100 upvotes for you. 👍
The near unanimity of leftist lawfare judges’ initial and appellate rulings being clearly contrary to the Constitution makes a sham of the federal judiciary and contradicts the apolitical premise supporting a lifetime appointment.
Rogue, hateful judges are now the leftists’ last and most effective tools for dismantling America.
Kagan is arguably intelligent enough for her post compared to some previous Supreme Court justices, but she has a hard left world view; Sotomayor I believe was criticized by her former colleague on the Harvard Law faculty Alan Dershowitz as [paraphrasing] “not nearly as smart as she thinks she is,” and Jackson can’t even figure out what a woman is. Quite the trio.
Attention: Judge Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong…move your car…your license plate is blocking the road.
I always pronounce the hyphens in names as “commie”. I believe I am right 97% of the time.
Hey Judge Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong, we can’t fit all of that on your reserved parking space sign. OK if we just write “The Commie Judge”?
Judge Nana Nana Boo boo Weezie Weezie – Low IQ Ping pong.
WHERE do they dig these people up? Somebody needs to steal their shovel.
Hey ping pong is my beloved sport – please do not contaminate it with the nana nana boo boo weezie weezie people all of whom should be deported.
Born in LA 1976. Full disclosure, I was shocked.
Yes, to parents from Ghana where the usual IQ is 56.
Well said.
Cute.. thanks for the laugh.
All the time wasted in fighting the government could be far better spent in trials for real criminals.
And the foreign-borne so-called judge gets shutdown. Finally! Damage was done but so much better. Only about another 100 decisions the USSC must make as the inferior courts have been allowed to run amok. Bueller?
She was born in Los Angeles to immigrant Ghanaian parents.
Then DEI-ed her way through to Hahvahd and Yale.
And finally to her current position as part of Biden’s promise to DEI the judiciary.
Still say they should give out Harvard diplomas with a place in a police line up.
At the very least, draw up some unsigned indictments, for future use.
“In every disaster throughout American history, there always seems to be a man [or these days a woman] from Harvard in the middle of it.”
~Dr Thomas Sowell~
Absolutely. Harvard only exists because of donations from the Opium and slave trades. https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2017/3/30/opium-at-harvard
Read Katherine Austin Fitt’s writings about what has gone wrong. The list of perpetrators she
outlines is spectacularly filled up with Harvard ( and Yale) attendees. Also, lock your doors if
anyone that has a Rhodes Scholarship is in your neighborhood.
She is a huge favourite of mine.
Her interview with Tucker is well worth a listen, wherein she discusses Hahvahd at length. 👍🏻
Clinton and Buttigieg are both Rhodes “scholars”…
Say no more.
I try to forget Bill Cosby
👍🏻 😎
Lots of IC people were Rhodes scholars or Oxford grads. Oxford was a huge grooming ground for spy making.
Indeed it was and still is, Mims.
MI6 and to a lesser extent MI5.
I was replying to Mims before I saw your post, sis.
I often find myself doing the same, my brother 👍🏻💕
Lol, I do it constantly
Yes’m, just as evil as their American cousins.
A nest of vipers.
Chatham House may actually be a Harvard dormitory.
My Mom had a full ride scholarship to Oxford to study the languages of the Picts and Celts in the late 70s to attain her Doctorate. Then she met Pops and had me. I’m glad I weren’t born into MI6.
You wouldn’t be in your hranch if she hadn’t…
MI6’s loss is our gain 😊
Yall are too kind.
😘
Still, Mom must be quite the intellectual, more so since she decided to have a wonderful family! 😍
☺️
That would include former Rhodes Scholar Bill Clinton.
Lock up your women and girls although he may be harmless now. All he can do is leer and drool.
Goshdarnit! I left another one off the “guilty/complicit list!!
Jake Sullivan: “Former Rhodes Scholar”.
3 for 3 so far. Stepping on an elevator with any Rhodes scholar is
basically preparing yourself for the inevitable fart.
Susan, Rice, Ben Sherwood, Corey Booker….. All “former Rhodes Scholars”.
It’s a small club, and we ain’t in it. Because we’re honest, and actually possess
a soul.
Obviously there’s criteria for selection that doesn’t include intelligence. More like ability to compromise and then control.
Clinton was accused of raping a 19yo woman, Eileen Wellstone, at Oxford in 1969, his first known rape. But he was protected, not because he was a Rhodes scholar, but because he was being groomed as an IC asset, imho.
Mysteriously, Clinton returned to the States after his first year at Oxford. The rest is history, of rape and other sexual deviation.
https://capitolhillblue.com/node/64569
Named Pritzker?
Or a “Report to ICE” date
Ok thx.. what about dual citizenship? She and other judges can not be an anchor baby as it likely seems in actual even if the parents were said to be naturalized 5 years prior to her or others births.
Don’t know about that…
But reference your original comment here is the first Muslim and Arab-“American” to sit on the DC court.
Amir Ali.
Interestingly he is also described, often first in anything I have read about him as a “Candian-American”…
???????? !!!
I assume he holds dual citizenship, which just NO!!
But I have more problems with the fact that he is Muslim and all that means.
I assume he took his “oath” on the Koran…
Judicial taqiyya???
In any event he has just ruled against the Trump administration on an issue (no surprise) which will, like this one, be adjudicated by the SC.
Don’t quote me, but I seem to recall it has to do with deporting Venezuelans and Haitians. After today’s ruling, I fully expect Ali’s brief moment as “President of the US” to be shortened as well.
Totally believe muslims practice taqiyya. And muslims are supposed to hide their “brothers'” crimes. How does that work for any of them employed in the justice system?
They do not assimilate. Dearborn MI is an excellent example.
Biden didn’t do any of this. He is simply the propped-up target for our dismay and outrage.
As we focus our narrative and attention on him we unconsciously shift our focus away from the question of who made these decisions, and then acted upon them through Biden?
Which puppeteers pulled which strings attached to the meat puppet in the spotlight?
The theater needs to be torn down, and the spotlight taken off the bungling marionette and shifted to the larger more ominous figures behind the stage.
In this instance, who, exactly, recruited, groomed, and then installed this judge? And how, exactly, did the same thing with Justice Brown?
Blaming Biden halts the inquiry there. And that’s what the dark puppeteers want.
And a “not propped up Senate” approved these morons.
So you’re saying Jill, Ashley, Hunter, grandkids Biden ALL knew nothing of the mental capacity of the installed puppet Bidan? Really?
Sorry…
Let me correct myself…
President Autopen.
(Betcha.)
And if you will note I didn’t say Biden did it…
What I said was that he “promised” 😎
Can someone explain to me how “Immigrant Ghanian parents” can afford tuition to Harvard and Yale?
1) They immigrated legally and were well-off.
2) They immigrated legally and the daughter was bright enough to get a scholarship.
3) They immigrated however and she was one of the DEI students the Supreme Court rapped Harvard’s knuckles about.
“bright enough to get a scholarship”
Yeah, sure. /s
Investigative Detentions do not require Probable Cause, but only the level of Reasonable Suspicion. Stopping in the street and questioning is permitted under Reasonable Suspicion. The term “Investigative Detention” is what the Supreme Court used to identify such “stop and question” detentions that can even include frisking for the protection of the officers and citizens in the immediate vicinity of the detention. If it is determined the individual stopped is a violator of immigration law they can be taken into custody because their illegal presence is enough for Probable Cause.,
And here I thought treepers supported the 4th Amendment. I guess not so much after all. I guess no Dem would ever use your reasoning to stop, say, persons leaving a church?
Nice strawman you got there.
False equivalency, anyone?
/s
There is a long train of roving patrol case law in the 9th circuit. Ultimately the legality of each individual stop will stand or fall on the articulable facts pertaining to the individual.
Any stop deemed unreasonable, not supported by facts, officer experience, relevant observations is liable to criminal of civil penalty. Each individual stop may be challenged and many will be. This is nothing new, relax.
That’s the way it works.
Still being a douche canoe, I see.
It is up to judicial review to determine if the investigative detention was properly predicated on reasonable suspicion. In the event it is not, even evidence secured in the frisking of the individual would not be admissible in court. For example, “black skin” would not be enough to bring “reasonable suspicion,” for example, like leaving some kind of church would also not be reasonable suspicion.
This has all been established by Supreme Court decisions and is covered in training by federal law enforcement agencies.
Reasonable suspicion of WHAT, re: churchgoers? What is your point? Can you cite any statute or law that prohibits the right to worship? As opposed to the myriad statutes and laws that explicitly prohibit illegal entry and residency?
Thank you. More ‘larnin’ at the TH.
This is exactly what we voted for. Seriously frustrated that at every turn, common sense and THE LAW is slowed down by some activist judge from the bench. A pox on all of these crappy judges.
Candidate Trump told us, and them, what he planned to do. They had lots of time to prepare…
Would that be ‘a crappy pox’? Sounds good to me.
“U.S. District Judge Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong (Biden Appointee) ruled that ICE agents were…” would be curious to see her background.
You’re on the trail.
Like hounds, we need to do what you are doing. Keep asking the right questions. Keep sniffing, following the trail relentlessly, then baying loudly once the varmint is on the run until it is treed and dispatched.
its a wasting of money and time. If they had to pay they might think twice, but the tax payers pay, and they keep spending the money.
Seriously. There should be some recompence with these frivolous TRO’s. If they lose – they should have to reimburse for the time and aggravation. This is what happens when you SPEND OTHER PEOPLE’S MONEY.
There are no Democrat or Republican judges, my ass.
We are definitely reaping the destruction of the Obama /Biden years of allowing Eleanor Holmes Norton to be the judicial pipeline.
Maybe before Biden York’s Bork
Our Republic hangs by a thread.
Pray the Little Chaplet of the Holy Face. It’s for communists!
I wonder if the 2 wishy washy ones are starting to get perturbed.
Being overturned by the Supreme Court should carry some punishment or consequence to the judges who are overturned.
Traditionally, professional embarrassment (and the fear of embarrassment) was sufficient to stem the type of irrational rulings we’ve been seeing. But instead of acting rationally, these activists are reacting, driven by emotion, not principled precedent. All bad picks, but deliberate picks for this very purpose.
Wait a minute……..
Why can’t SCOTUS issue penalties or contempt of court fines on lower court judges?? Judges are officers of the court too.
Agree 1,000 per cent.
Another black robe bites the dust – until the next excuse to become “President for a Day” presents itself.
J
I do love the smell of winning against the America haters amongst us.
If you don’t do this, you don’t have a country.
Tells you that the 3 incompetent Marxist dissenting justices lied when they swore to uphold the Constitution.
Excellent point! Spread the word.
They never read it, much less understood it.
Just as my big brother used to say to me when I do or say something stupid. He’d say “Hey, I’d give you one of my brain cells but what good would two do you?” That message should be relayed to the three sisters.
There shouldn’t be ideological lines for judges to divide along.
Wars are fought one battle at a time….
Seems to me we are winning the most important ones…
Slowly, the opposition is running out of ammo…
NO MERCY!
They are destroying from within one of the core federal institutions in doing so.
The federal Judiciary.
These continuing activist district court stunts, even going so far to disregard increasingly direct SCOTUS rulings, is quickly eroding the lower judiciary’s remaining integrity and public credibility.
Because they are a Legislative creation, there is not much more SCOTUS can do than continue to slap down with increasing vigor this district court riot.
Could it be that this chaos in the Courts is designed to so anger and frustrate us that many citizens will become utterly disillusioned and “leave the field” altogether?
But we’re on to them.
Oh … GOOD!
I am truly and unexpectedly shocked that common sense has visited the supremes.
also noting: 6-3 is not a divided decision. 5-4 is a divided decision if we are going to stop pretending the media will narrative fiction every single time when anything they do not believe in does not work in their favor.
6-3 is about as reflective as our society is on these matters to be specific. While I do not and cannot know precisely the mind of THE PEOPLE about arresting and deporting illegal aliens, I would expect it to be about a 6:3 ratio., or explained the more simple and direct way 3:1…
3 times MORE people would be okay with arresting and deporting illegal aliens.
and that is what 6:3 also means. it doesn’t mean divided…it literally means that out of 9, 6 agreed, and 3 did not. The majority has an overwhelming basis that establishes this ruling was no where close to being “divided”.
also noting: progressives and even some outspoken so called republicans have advocated the supreme be composed of a larger number, like 12 or even 20. While the constitution would have to be changed in order for that to happen..unlikely..lets just play that out and understand how the media and the dementos might consider a ruling in a future 12 membership. they might say the ruling was “divided” …but the ruling was 9 to 3. again, it’s the same ratio…3:1….same result, just with a larger number. but what actually happens in statistics when applying it to actual real world “problems” is that you want a larger sample size, because larger sample sizes will generally level out strange rogue outliers…it will smooth them out. in politics and in society, we tend to forget this because the media has a habit of forging for ONLY outliers to make a claim. It’s not only disingenuous, but it’s stupid. this is one part of the reason why I do not trust leftie Jack wagons…they are basically liars as much as they are simply stupid people. anyway, so in a supreme court, as the membership grows does not necessarily mean the rulings will actually change. All things being equal. What will likely change is that the supreme court will be composed of complete lunatics like brown, satomayor, kagan (and I will throw in Roberts as a reminder that he is not to be trusted on the most important matters, namely his involvement with fisc and various rulings with regard to President Trump, including “no standing” refusals over election interference/influence/irregularities). Think of it this way….how many players are permitted to be on the field in football.? 11 is the number. that is the rule. you have 12 and you get a penalty. But lets say they changed the rule and allowed 22 for each team? would this actually change the outcome of the games? probably not. But what it would do is that it would create more controversies, simply because more people are involved. so you trade a smaller minority of the supremes to a larger number to reflect supposedly a larger more diverse set of views and interests of society…so goes the argument. it becomes more responsive to different interests so goes the argument.
but already what have we seen even when confined to just 9? 3 our of the 9 actually believe that their rulings out to be how the country operates. and not a single one of them has any constitutional basis upon which to claim those arguments. quite differently, they look upon the constitution as something invalid and threatening and should be ignored in their decisions.
so if you think by growing the number of the supremes will help solve problems, think again. this is the acid trip progressive want…they want the courts to define the constitution and warp it out of shape to suit how they believe you should operate…
this stupidity never stops to wonder how that might actually impact their own lives.
God Bless America
regitiger: Thank You. Always read your posts here. Always learning.
“leftie Jack wagons” – I am so using that from now on. You described them to a “T”.
And thank you regitiger. I always look forward to your comments.
Agree with your point, but not your math. 6:3 is 2:1. Put 6 pennies and 3 nickels on the table. Take 3 pennies off and a nickel. Then take 3 pennies off and a nickel. You’ve taken off 8 coins and you have one left. Now try it with 2 pennies for every nickel.
Rhetorical question: How is it possible that three justices could be so clueless/wrong on every issue presented to them and still remain on the court? I know that the system was designed to prevent arbitrary/capricious actions against the justices, but these three are beyond stupid. Beyond incompetent. Beyond the realm of common-sense law application. It’s sickening to contemplate how they happened.
It doesn’t take a law degree to know how they will vote on almost any case that is considered.
No knowledge of the law, the Constitution, precedents or jurisprudence is required, for an average person to predict how three of the justices will vote on a particular case.
It stands to reason that the justices themselves may not use any legal reasoning or analysis to make their decisions. They may not need to consider the details of any particular case, because they already know how they will rule before they hear the case.
Rhetorical answer:
They are filthy Democrat Communist scum…
In the raw…
Amen, brother Marine!
In another SCOTUS decision today, the Court ruled to allow PDJT to fire a Biden-appointed FTC commissioner pending the lawfare disposition. The decision portends the Administration’s eventual success on the merits.
Slowly, but surely, the malicious lawfare campaign is losing, case by annoying case.
The big lawfare events are coming: the tariffs, and Lisa Cook’s firing.
Only when these political litigants, their politically-bankrolled attorneys, and the activist district judges and the weaponized court clerks assigning them are all sanctioned and disciplined, it will stop. That requires a Congress with a backbone.
That ruling is even more important, as it concerns the constitutionally flawed argument that there are “independent” agencies. It goes back to the case of Humphrey’s Executor (1935). FDR fired an FTC commissioner, even though the enabling statute passed by Congress only allowed firings “for cause.” (Humphrey’s back pay was an asset of his estate, so that’s why the executor was substituted as plaintiff.)
Today’s ruling was just on the injunction, not a fully briefed opinion, but if you read the signs, it is a shot at the continued viability of Humphrey’s Executor.
And we all know what the most independent agency of all is: the Federal Reserve.
The case that will likely make it to SCOTUS for a full briefing on the independent agency issue is SpaceX v. NLRB, in which the Fifth Circuit ruled that Trump could fire members of the NLRB despite a “for cause” limitation. The NLRB is no doubt petitioning for cert. (And yes, that IS Elon’s Space X company. )
https://redstate.com/streiff/2025/08/20/appeals-court-declares-structure-of-national-labor-relations-board-unconstitutional-n2193024
“That ruling is even more important, as it concerns the constitutionally flawed argument that there are “independent” agencies. It goes back to the case of Humphrey’s Executor (1935).”
That’s why I mentioned it.
Lawfare should be hoping for a fast indictment of Cook, which would moot a judicial disposition on the underlying merits, which could be even worse for them generally.
How does somebody with a name like Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong get to make a decision on ANYTHING in America. I am sick and tired of all these foreigners coming to our country and landing in a position enabling them to make a decision contrary to what REAL Americans want. This has got to stop.
<How does somebody with a name like Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong get to.>
Play the Name Game? 🙂
The name game
Shirley!
Shirley, Shirley Bo-ber-ley
Bo-na-na fanna Fo-fer-ley
Fee-fi-mo-mer-ley
Shirley!
All these justices and judges got where they are because Republicans voted for them. Democrats are not the problem, Democrats parading as Republicans are the problem. Again, until conservatives start electing MAGA candidates across the board, nothing really changes.
Yep! Both Collins and Murkowski voted for her!
I’m sure Californians (real Californians) are relieved that some sanity will be brought back to the State.
I have noticed though, amongst generally white Liberal women that they are becoming more strident, hateful, and aggressive. One would hope they come to their senses and embrace the reasons behind Law and Order that protects them too.
Born Free: Come to their senses? What senses?
Although the past criticisms of Bondi from Sundance and others here are certainly justified, in one area where the DOJ is doing stellar work: the attorneys appealing all the Lawfare judges’ rulings.
Their track record is pretty high, about 75% wins in SCOTUS, I think. As a retired litigator, I can tell you that is a phenomenal record in appellate cases. (Of course, the fact the the Left and the Lefty judges rarely have a legal leg to stand on does help with the wins.)
Gorsuch’s concurrence made some good points, especially the one about the legal immigrants who do it right and patiently wait for legal permission to reside in the US, while the illegals seem to think they can just sneak in and stay – and clog up the immigration system in the process:
To be sure, I recognize and fully appreciate that many (not all, but many) illegal immigrants come to the United States to escape poverty and the lack of freedom and opportunities in their home countries, and to make better lives for themselves and their families. And I understand that they may feel somewhat misled by the varying U.S. approaches to immigration enforcement over the last few decades. But the fact remains that, under the laws passed by Congress and the President, they are acting illegally by remaining in the United States—at least unless Congress and the President choose some other legislative approach to legalize some or all of those individuals now illegally present in the country. And by illegally immigrating into and remaining in the country, they are not only violating the immigration laws, but also jumping in front of those noncitizens who follow the rules and wait in line to immigrate into the United States through the legal immigration process. For those reasons, the interests of illegal immigrants in evading questioning (and thus evading detection of their illegal presence) are not particularly substantial as a legal matter.
…
Especially in an immigration case like this one, it is also important to stress the proper role of the Judiciary. The Judiciary does not set immigration policy or decide enforcement priorities. It should come as no surprise that some Administrations may be more laissez-faire in enforcing immigration law, and other Administrations more strict. Article III judges may have views on which policy approach is better or fairer. But judges are not appointed to make those policy calls. We merely ensure, in justiciable cases, that the Executive Branch acts within the confines of the Constitution and federal statutes
Thank you.
Something tells me this so-called judge would be fine if they only stopped Caucasians. Not many illegal Caucasians crossing the Mexican border but hey, you never know…
If her parents are immigrants from Ghana that makes her a non citizen which should disqualify her especially from any position in law.
If they were residing in the US when she was born, she’s a citizen. If they were diplomats, she wouldn’t be. Diplomats are not subject to the jurisdiction of the US laws due to diplomatic immunity. (Diplomats can and have been promptly expelled when they commit crimes.)
Of course, this is what Trump is trying to have reviews by SCOTUS: does mere physical presence of the parents in the US make their children US citizens?
By the way, that describes Kamala Harris too. Neither of her parents was a citizen when she was born here.
Does every single case that these politically biased judges rule on have to go up to the Supreme Court before they are legally overturned? What is the solution to getting judges rule on the actual law, rather than their personal political beliefs?
Does every single case that these politically biased judges rule on have to go up to the Supreme Court before they are legally overturned?
Yes. Lawfare’s all the Left has right now. If they manage to take the House and Senate in 2026, impeachment #3 will be their next step to stop MAGA.
Congress regulates them. Pass regulations of the Article Three courts that if they do not follow the content of the Constitution and the elements of the statutes and go off trying to make law out of their preferred ideology, they will be terminated from their positions upon being warned ONCE to cease and desist, but continue to make rules of that kind.
Go home you criminal cowards and fight for your countries sovereignty.
In dissent, Sotomayor: “…can seize anyone who looks Latino, speaks Spanish, and appears to work a low wage job.”
I’ll bet those 300 South Koreans detained at a Hyundai plant all look Latino, only spoke Spanish, and were all janitors. /s
John: She’s a dullard.
“We should not have to live in a country where the Government can seize anyone who looks Latino, speaks Spanish, and appears to work a low wage job,” Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson. “Rather than stand idly by while our constitutional freedoms are lost, I dissent.”
Actually, you don’t HAVE to live in this country. You are MORE than welcome to leave now. Please do, morons.
Another SC ruling for a lower judge to try and maneuver around. Delay, Delay, Delay! That’s the motto of the activist judiciary which is the left’s last line of defense. I really have no clue as to how to stop that crap legally without creating a situation where it could be used as a political weapon. The Republican’s aren’t going to start impeaching them so what is the remedy?
No district judges were punished in making this decision, to paraphrase the “no animal harm” disclaimer from films.
I hope it is crystal clear to the republicans why the socialists in Congress were approving President Potato nominations as fast as they could. It’s called “preparing the battlespace.”
A victory, yes, but dissenters in black robes still remain and the scent of communism is in the air. Where would we be without President Trump? Will the constitution endure beyond him?
Did Enjoy it! Thanks.
What we now need is a law stating that any/all injunctions or judicial orders to the government must be processed through the Supreme Court and cannot be adjudicated by any lower court.
Does that mean they can round up Newcum and that mayor? Or are they not collecting the trash along with the crooks?
Perhaps Judge Maame Hyphen Pingpong should also be removed …
Adios, Muchachos!!!
The only thing that can be said about all of the unconstitutional judicial overreach is that every time that the SCOTUS has to overrule it cements that ruling into law.
Why CONgress sits on their thumbs instead of impeaching these judicial clowns or specifically narrowing their roles via legislation is another matter altogether…
Thank you, Soldiers Mom! I’m always looking for silver linings when things look bad.
France has beaten the number of prime minsters in chaotic Italy since WW2.
Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong, where oh where did these fools find all these third world sounding folks to be made judges?
Democrats are rubbing your nose in it now!
A tactic-the more outrageous and potentially demoralizing the better: foreigner, foreign sounding, dualie; pervert; DEI unqualified incompetent; everyday moron. Whatever they can dream up that strikes at heritage America and ensures nominee political loyalty.
An astute observation
It’s ALWAYS the theee demon infested women.
So blatantly obvious they care nothing for the rule of law and constitution.
wonder if they know there is such a thing as a constitution.
Everytime one of these saving grace decisions from SCOTUS comes down I can’t help but be deeply grateful for Trump’s 2016 victory.
If Hillary had won in 2016 there would be three more Kagan, Sotomayor and Brown type justices at SCOTUS blessing these outrageous lower court activist decisions.
We are that close to losing our constitutional republic.
And thank God that Bolshevik Garland was blocked