French continues:
As Miller put it in a press briefing last month, “The whole will of democracy is imbued into the elected president.” He is the only elected official who represents the whole of the American people, and he embodies the people’s general will....
Trump and his team are furious at the federal judiciary, but they’re to blame for their own legal struggles. Trump has issued a host of poorly drafted executive orders. Trump’s administration has snatched people off the streets without adequate due process. The so-called Department of Government Efficiency is unilaterally wrecking agencies that were established by Congress, usurping Congress’s primacy in America’s constitutional structure.
It is not the judiciary’s fault that Trump has chosen to attack the constitutional order, and it is hardly the case that he’s losing only to liberal judges....
Posts
69 comments:
The Trump gambit (as fully planned by a knowledgeable back room legal team), is that he'll see how far he can go in undoing every judicial activism practice and related bench-driven laws. This dates back to FDR's efforts to pack the court and then bully the court during the New Deal, circa 1936.
Trump has indeed stretched the Overton window.
This court effort does not include Trump's return to ancient conservative attacks on personal income tax (1913; Woodrow Wilson), nor his return to the Monroe Doctrine (Canada as the 51st state, acquiring Greenland, taking back the Panama Canal).
It used to rely on convention, but overturning convention was the Democrat version of progress. The courts had better find a replacement convention very fast or they won't exist.
Using the IRS to locate illegal aliens is first of all a way to get them to stop paying income taxes, and second of all a violation of self-incrimination which was explicitly part of the original income tax - the IRS shares data with nobody - to avoid it.
French is being dishonest to help his side…
Miller's straightforward simple question will never garner a straightforward simple answer.
and it is hardly the case that he’s losing only to liberal judges
Here French exposes the game, first that there are liberal judges and second they got one Trump appointed judge to go along with their game because xe wasn’t vetted and slipped through or likes bribes or daughter said she’d disown xim if xe didn’t get Trump.
…but since you’re so confident French let’s see you bet your house your sides corrupt judges win their cases on appeal…
Anyone else want to argue Miller is wrong and sign their name to it? Anyone?
Trump’s administration has snatched people off the streets without adequate due process.
This is a lie. Local police have arrested people for violent crime only to learn that the arrested shouldn't even be in the country. Many of these people were already tried and in US jails when they should have been in their original country, but Biden let them in because supposedly they needed asylum from their home country. What Trump's EO did was revert the US back to guarding our borders and deporting those who cross them illegally. Then deport those that are here illegally and willing to commit other crimes. They are picked up when they commit the second crime.
usurping Congress’s primacy in America’s constitutional structure.
My understanding is that the three branches are co-equal, and each have their own powers. Is there nothing Congress can do to impact the Presidency?
French lost his bet a long time ago.
So... who you got in the big Supreme Court race next week, ann? This one for all the marbles.
... for you lovely ladies there in Wisconsin, I mean.
Best let your husband pull the lever whilst you wait it out at home. April 1. The men are coming to rescue you, hang in there, annie! Hang in there.
David French is a Harvard Law alum, but he apparently wasn’t taught about the Aliens Enemy Act. No due process needed. And SCOTUS has ruled that the President’s actions under that law are not subject to judicial review.
He should have gone to Wisconsin instead of Harvard.
Is there nothing Congress can do to impact the Presidency?
-----------
"Superman, where are you??" lol.
I don’t know why more people aren’t talking about Boasberg’s failure to recuse himself for conflicts of interests based upon what his daughter and wife due for a living. A real disgrace. CJ Roberts should call this guy up on the phone and read him the Riot Act,
"Trump has issued a host of poorly drafted executive orders."
Who's he trying to kid? Does French delve into the sound legal reasoning behind any of the district courts rulings? The courts were going to gum up the works as much as possible regardless of how the EO's issued.
The same French who used to struggle with spelling and pronouncing "Weltanschauung" are now struggling (their Kampf) with the word "Gleichschaltung."
One Folk, One (Robert) Reich, One Furor
I’d love to see a debate between David French and JD Vance.
I must have avoided reading French's hyperventilated prose the first time:
Trump has issued a host of poorly drafted executive orders. Trump’s administration has snatched people off the streets without adequate due process. The so-called Department of Government Efficiency is unilaterally wrecking agencies that were established by Congress, usurping Congress’s primacy in America’s constitutional structure.
I'll just add French's publication's favorite appendage: "He said without evidence." It applies to every one of his feverish exclamations above. By the way, I'm cool with a mistake or two here and there. After all, a majority of voters purposely cast a ballot for the guy promising "mass deportations." If you are worried about being swept out to El Salvador with Tren d' Aragua gangsters then (1) don't be an illegal alien, (2) don't hang out with Td'A gangsters and above all (3) don't stay here if you are doing either 1 or 2: self-deport and keep your options open.
Canon 2: A Judge Should Avoid Impropriety and the Appearance of Impropriety in All Activities
A. Respect for Law. A judge should respect and comply with the law and should act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.
B. Outside Influence. A judge should not allow family, social, political, financial, or other relationships to influence judicial conduct or judgment
Trump is coming for every pillar of the deep state, fify…
They tried to get Justice Thomas based on his wife's activities. Going down that road only legitimizes that argument.
I have very limited trial experience. But the District Court Judges that I have dealt with should not have the ability to issue nation wide TROs or preliminary injunctions on Executive actions. The level of open biases they possess is terrifying.
@Tom T, nice job of concern trolling but it's never been a practice to require a judge to recuse themselves due to their political views or activities even when they are known to hold them strongly, let alone due to their family's views. On the other hand, having family members or even friends with financial interests in the outcome of a case has always been an indication that a judge should recuse.
Each and every one of these unelected judges has veto power over the President’s Executive Orders. That’s way more power than any elected Congressmember has. The system is obviously flawed. If this isn’t corrected, it’s a fatal flaw. We’ll be ruled by judges.
People need to ask why do we have District court Judges. The only judges mentioned in the Constitution are the Supreme court ones. And Congress is given the power to create Lesser courts at its whim.
what is the point of giving District court judges unlimited power to block and cancel Presidental actions. Its not in the constitution. There's no law that gives them that power. And until 1952, it was never used. Judges are supposed to be non-partisan referees, not Leftwing "agents of change".
People need to examine their basic assumptions. There's no reason to worship lawyers in black robes. There's no reason for them to be given unlimited power. There's no reason for any of this. If Righwingers really loved the Constitution, they'd be telling the D/C to go to hell, not ditherirng and mewling about "why are the Judges abusing their power, wah wah".
When the D's were afraid that a Republican SCOTUS might derail their agenda (aka act like Democrat Judges) they mounted a full court press. Schumer threatened them. They tried to pass a court packing bill (it lost by 1 vote). They tried to get Thomas to resign on trumped up ethics charges. IOW, they did things.
Where are the Senate R's? Nowhere to be seen. where is the pressure on the Senate R's? Nowhere to be seen. Instead we get Dumbo Rightwingers blustering about "eliminating District courts" or calling Boasberg a "Traitor".
Right now, anyone of 700 District Judges can stop Trump from doing almost anything. Trump can't even have Musk look at SS data, without all 700 judges approving. This is insane. Where is Thune? Where is Miss Lindsey? Why aren't they attacking this?
Wait until Trump and Miller start talking about the inherent powers appearing in a "penumbra" surrounding the Rose Garden which happened on Inauguration Day.
Christopher B., the ideologically committed will always be able to find exceptions and distinctions for themselves, but others may not be convinced, particularly by an assertion that Washington maintains a strict line between one's politics and one's finances.
“The whole will of democracy is imbued into the elected president.”
The founders are rolling over in their graves.
If only we had a law professor who could explain how district courts are supposed to work.
Law isn't my field, but it seems incredible that a district judge can make a ruling that applies to anything beyond that district. Our system cannot be designed so that any one of several hundred unelected people can grab the steering wheel and decide to drive.
It seems like district judges can only do temporary orders. A huge amount of damage can be done in a day. Money can be spent, documents can be shredded and files can be deleted.
"Silence, peasant!" - David French
“The whole will of democracy is imbued into the elected president.“
This is an ignorant statement. The President is not even democratically elected.
The “will of Democracy” is imbued in Congress.
One of the reasons we are so screwed up is that Congress has ceded much of its power to the President.
“The whole will of democracy is imbued into the elected president.”
The founders are rolling over in their graves.
Bullshit. You can't refute the statement with logic and facts so you (checks notes) claim the Founders who actually wrote extensively on the power inherently vested in the Chief Executive to properly balance the legislative and purse-holding powers of Congress, somehow would be aghast at an actual vigorous executive.
So just spell it out: who do YOU think embodies the "will of the entire electorate" if not the one person who stands for election by all voters in the country? If not the Chief Executive, who does embody Democracy?
It almost seems like you people expect the opponents of trump to lie down spread their legs wide open and accept whatever rogering the administration can muster. Competition is hard. This is where persistence pays off. If you want to succeed, don't dilute yourself and to thinking that whining and crying like a 3-year-old toddler is more appropriate than persistent application of force.
The “will of Democracy” is imbued in Congress.
Another bonehead statement. Congresscritters have no executive agency. They never had that power and so could not have "conceded it" to POTUS. They represent the will of their respective constituents. But "will" implies action and the only national office empowered to really act to fulfill the law is POTUS. Congress can't just will things to happen: it takes an agent to do it.
Bills have already been submitted and though they would "normally" die a filibustered death in the Senate, Johnson will most likely add the bill to restrict District Rulings to affect only their local jurisdiction to the reconciliation package. Don't forget Johnson smiling like the Cheshire cat when he said "we have a secret plan." Ditto the EO saying only citizens can vote and each ballot must be linked to a verified ID.
Hat tip to Nancy Pelosi for paving the way for major legislation being added to a Reconciliation Bill! We're playing for keeps now.
Mike (MJB Wolf) said...
“The whole will of democracy is imbued into the elected president.”
The founders are rolling over in their graves.
Bullshit. You can't refute the statement with logic and facts so you (checks notes) claim the Founders who actually wrote extensively on the power inherently vested in the Chief Executive to properly balance the legislative and purse-holding powers of Congress, somehow would be aghast at an actual vigorous executive.
So just spell it out: who do YOU think embodies the "will of the entire electorate" if not the one person who stands for election by all voters in the country? If not the Chief Executive, who does embody Democracy?
3/27/25, 8:22 AM
———————————- —
The President is not elected by the people, he is elected by the states.
When the Constitution was enacted the only branch elected by the people was the House of Representatives. That was later expanded to the Senate.
Only the Supreme Court should have the authority to enjoin Congress or the Executive.
James Boasberg is the Austin Capobiano of the judiciary system.
AMDG said: "One of the reasons we are so screwed up is that Congress has ceded much of its power to the President."
This gives away the game. What Congress ceded power to was *executive branch agencies*. Now calling that a giveaway to the President is technically true, in that the President has total constitutional authority over executive branch agencies. But Democrats are now trying to pretend otherwise - that he has no power over the unelected bureaucracy at all, that both judges and Congress have more power over executive branch agencies than this (and only this) Chief Executive does.
Trump is asserting his legitimate power over those rogue executive branch agencies. It's not his fault that Congress ceded so much of its power to them.
Americans want criminal illegal aliens and illegal gangs out of the nation.
Biden-Soros imported them on purpose. ILLEGALLY.
None of them deserve "due process"
> French is being dishonest to help his side
Must be another day ending in 'y'.
If you have to assert a hierarchy of branches mentioned nowhere in the Constitution exists, you're losing the argument.
Dave Begley: "I don’t know why more people aren’t talking about Boasberg’s failure to recuse himself for conflicts of interests based upon what his daughter and wife due for a living. A real disgrace. CJ Roberts should call this guy up on the phone and read him the Riot Act,"
Why are you finding it so difficult to accept that Roberts is perfectly okay with what his friend Boasberg is doing?
Judge Boasberg wipes his ass with “national security”.
🤡 Clown 🤡 gotta go!
No matter what you do, there is pushback. The phrase “ in the fullness of time” helps. Trump is accomplishing a great deal, to everything will work, and many things won’t work until later, when system ambiguity can be resolved. But if you get 50% of what you want, you are a hero.
Peachy said...
Americans want criminal illegal aliens and illegal gangs out of the nation. Biden-Soros imported them on purpose. ILLEGALLY. None of them deserve "due process".
“Due process” in this case means immediate removal of the illegals. Anything else is FYTW to the American people and legal residents.
Where were the courts when Biden was opening the border to spurious refugees and asylum seekers? Biden, or whoever was running the country when Biden was in the White House, did this. Trump is trying to clean up the mess.
I am not a lawyer either (that even has a handy abbreviation IANAL, which I won't use), but my understanding is that these things have to make their way up through the court system, so it's inevitable that lower court judges will have the opportunity to meddle in things that extend far beyond their own districts.
People now vote for the President. Demos in action. There is no other federal office for which all voters can cast a ballot.
It's not a coincidence that it's so difficult to undo the harms inflicted upon the nation by the cabal around Biden. Their strategy was to create as many fait accompli as possible. Each judge they appointed is one of those fait accompli. Without Supreme Court leadership restraining this unruly process through quick appellate review, we are about to relearn the civics lesson that the judiciary lacks executive authority.
Correction Rocco @9:07AM…
Boasberg is the Austin Capybara of the judicial system.
The president has the constitutional power and responsibility to see that the laws are faithfully executed. That can only refer to the laws, as passed by congress in concrete, singular textual form, and signed by a president, subject to constriction (not expansion) by SCOTUS.
Actions or decisions made by agencies authorized by congress cannot have the effect of creating new law.
This is an entirely personal comment, Stephen Miller looks like i always imagined the Devil would look like. Everything he says only solidifies that opinion. Ew.Creepy and nonsensical.
Periodic reminder that Trump did not Crack 50% of the popular vote. also that he runs 1 of 3 branches of federal government and is bound by the laws passed by Congress.
It's true that where you stand on most questions often depends upon where you sit. And David French has chosen the chair on the ultra left side of the row. I will agree with Howard that Team Trump is giving the "conventional order" of things a thorough rogering. Or more correctly he's giving the conventional order of things a rather thorough high colonic cleanse. There's a lot of stuff wrong with the conventional order. He's pushing and rearranging the edges of the envelope. That rearranging is long over due. He won't get all he wants--but the effort is therapeutic, and the nation will be the better for it when he's done.
Mike (MJB Wolf) said...
People now vote for the President. Demos in action. There is no other federal office for which all voters can cast a ballot.
3/27/25, 10:33 AM
————————-
Tell that to Presidents Gore and H. Clinton.
Left Bank of the Charles, Esq, said...
“The whole will of democracy is imbued into the elected president.”
The founders are rolling over in their graves.
****************
Now THERE's a tightly reasoned legal argument!!!
SNORT
Dear Victoria:
Crystal Mangum lied. Miller was right. Someday, you will have to live with it.
Sincerely,
The sane Rest-of-us who dwell in Reality
AMDG said:
"The President is not elected by the people, he is elected by the states."
>>>>A distinction without a difference. The people of each state choose a person-- from a very limited slate-- who they want to become POTUS. Their electors vote for that person (faithless electors aside).
"When the Constitution was enacted the only branch elected by the people was the House of Representatives. That was later expanded to the Senate."
>>>> But "the people" in these instances are "the people of each state voting for candidates to represent them and their state, not someone to represent them as the national leader.
Bottom line: No person but the POTUS is chosen as a constitutional officer via national election.
“This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land.”
When Stephen Miller speaks of “executive power,” it’s a tautology under our Constitution that no judge including the Justices on the Supreme Court have any executive power. By the same token, the President has no legislative power or judicial power.
“The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.”
The judicial power is not unitary in the way that the executive power is, the judicial power is shared between the Supreme Court and the inferior courts. While the Constitution gives the Supreme Court original jurisdiction for some types of cases, for all other cases it is given appellate jurisdiction.
Left Bank: [quotes the Supremacy Clause]
Yes, well, the Trumpers think they are defending the Constitution, too.
Just like when the Gold Star dad waved his pocket constitution around at the DNC, this recitation convinces no one who doesn’t already agree with you.
JSM
Periodic reminder that Trump did not Crack 50% of the popular vote.
And just what does that have to do with anything? Is there some sort of magic power available if one passes that barrier?
"And just what does that have to do with anything? Is there some sort of magic power available if one passes that barrier?"
S/he has a thing about that. To my knowledge, s/he has never explained why.
Here are a few thoughts from an "OLD conservative". 1} A lot of what folks are saying up-thread is true, but irrelevant. 2) Our Constitution was designed to deal with conflict.
Don't get your knickers in a twist about some particular court ruling.
3) Yes, some judge will issue a stupid (political) decision, and that will f *ck things up for awhile, but
4) If we are on the right side, we'll be fine, in the long run, but need to be patient.
OTHERWISE, the alterantive is chaos
The “will of Democracy” is imbued in Congress.
Half of Congress- the House of Representatives. Even though now elected by popular vote- a mistake made in the amendment process that should be reversed by another amendment- and we have done that before- the Senate still represents the states. A very undemocratic institution.
We're a Republic, not a democracy.
Post a Comment
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.