The court of public opinion is part of the system of checks and balances. In the long run, the courts need public support. The law needs public support. The Chief Justice can assert that judges are neutral arbiters, just doing their job in a meticulously professional way, but if people don't believe that, it's not going to work. And if it isn't true, should you hope that people will nevertheless believe, because without the courts carrying out their traditional rituals with solemnity we're lost?
March 19, 2025
"You have a President who has sworn to get tough on the border and get tough on crime expelling from the United States — by his description — hundreds of criminal gang members."
"And so that's an easy narrative to understand. You know, who in the world wouldn't want a bunch of criminal gang members kicked out of the country? And what kind of crazy liberal judge would order those gang members back into America? And if you watch conservative media, that's the argument they're putting out. You know, this judge wants these gang members roaming around the streets, attacking your family and loved ones. You know, obviously this is terrain the Trump administration chose carefully to fight on, and they believe in the court of public opinion, most people will be on their side of this issue."
Says Luke Broadwater, in "Trump’s Showdown With the Courts," the new episode of the NYT podcast "The Daily."
Posts
150 comments:
Its hilarious seeing the same people who tried to pack the courts, and were screeching insults at Alioto and Thomas just yesterday, now play the "We must support and respect our Judges Card".
The Judiciary - and that seems to include Roberts - are exceeding their authority and acting as if the Judiciary is the supreme branch of Government. They arent. Its up Congress and Trump to fight back and rein them in. The District courts abusing their power, and it seems Roberts is Ok with that. So, something must be done.
Personally, I think Trump should start by pullng a Andrew Johnson. I'm sure that will get Roberts off his duff.
"And if it isn't true, should you hope that people will nevertheless believe, because without the courts carrying out their traditional rituals with solemnity we're lost?"
People have a tendency to cut slack, which is easy and requires little effort. Until the shoot-outs start, on their block. Until they're run off the road or T-boned by someone with no license, no insurance, no visa, but a substantial blood alcohol content. Until their apartment complex, or the one next door, is taken over. Until the nice girl is raped and murdered by illegals.
How many examples does it take to change sentiment? How high do they have to stack up, before the public takes notice? The last election should be all the reference that is needed for an answer, but Progressives keep coming back with more 'shut up, racist'. It appears that a more forceful insistence is required to get the point across, no? Maybe a more detailed, more public examination of the records of the judges getting shopped. Judge Boasberg has quite an... interesting past, concerning Donald Trump. He gave a slap on the wrist to FBI agent Clinesmith for forging evidence on FISA warrants. Did he really take vacation time to sit in the courtroom as a spectator, in order to see Donald Trump appear in court? I think Justice Roberts is setting himself up for a fall.
Let me get this straight. Trump is a dictator and his supporters are supposed to be nazis. Yet they are not the ones painting swastikas on everything they see (something a nazi would do). If it were true, that Trump is a dictator and his followers nazis, would Trump jail these judges? Or his supporters try to murder the offensive judges? Again, it's the true nazis that are painting swastikas everything, threatening the lives of others, by attacking tesla owners and burning down tesla dealerships. As far as I'm aware, Trump has not had the cia kill any judges, or put any judges in jail, and Trump supporters and not out there burning down courthouses or threatening the lives of Judges. Yes, they are calling for impeachment, but we all know that will never happen.
I see the NYT is also trying to reframe the Trump narrative to a straw man argument they can easily burn down.
11 July 2024, Treasury labels Tren de Aragua a “Criminal Organization” per Biden Executive Order:
https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy2459
The difference is Biden only labeled them, and then did almost nothing about them. Putting these foreign gang members in US prisons only gives them an avenue to recruit inside the country. The gang was created in Venezuela prisons.
ah broadwater, don't ever change, ignoring the facts of the case in question,
More info here:
https://www.domesticpreparedness.com/articles/tren-de-aragua-from-prison-gang-to-transnational-organized-crime-syndicate-in-the-u-s
https://redstate.com/shipwreckedcrew/2025/03/18/federal-judge-denied-doj-chance-to-object-before-issuing-tro-to-prevent-gang-members-from-being-deported-n2186813
Count me the group that has totally lost faith in the courts. Most are just political hacks in black robes. Many of the latest rulings are just obviously political attacks.
As a former law clerk for a federal judge, it has taken me a long time to reach the point of saying that federal judges need to be put in their place, and a few impeachment inquiries, requiring the judges to provide the judiciary committee with all communications with outside parties and browser history, would be a good start.
And if you watch conservative media, that's the argument they're putting out.
Holy carp, you were just making a valid point but you had to wreck it by calling it a ‘narrative’? It it isn’t EXACTLY what the judge is doing you need to take on the burden of trying to explain how it’s different…or we’re going to call you what you are- just another lazy liberal hack…
is judge Ann Reyes (sp?) a biden appointed judge? She is not judge material - as she is a partisan hack.
one of the parties to the boummediene suit on gitmo detainees that erased a century of precedents was released and former an islamic state cell in france, quelle surprise,
"The Chief Justice can assert that judges are neutral arbiters, just doing their job in a meticulously professional way, but if people don't believe that, it's not going to work. And if it isn't true, should you hope that people will nevertheless believe, because without the courts carrying out their traditional rituals with solemnity we're lost?"
Roberts' problem is that he does nothing to rein in obvious overreach by the lower court judges. He seems to really believe that the appellate courts will behave more properly and overrule these out of control district judges. Roberts is extremely naive. SCOTUS will eventually have to start taking up these now or in 2 years' time during which the reputation of the court system further declines.
"I think Trump should start by pullng a Andrew Johnson."
I don't think there are any Confederates left to pardon.
she should have recused since she?? is transgender,
He's not necessarily wrong, but he oversimplifies things. While there is the "gang members are bad" narrative, I've also watched Trump officials articulate the compelling legal reasoning behind their actions and why the judge has no jurisdiction. For those willing to actually listen, their case is persuasive and makes clear this judge is nothing more than a partisan hack.
That's a problem for the judicial system to remedy, starting with the Chief Justice, not Trump.
Anyone who has been to law school in the last 50 years is familiar with the ideological capture of the legal profession by the left. This will not reverse itself. The legal profession and its government auxiliary, the courts, has lost the halo it acquired when it fought for civil rights in the 1950s and 1960s. The legal profession is now the primary implement of tyrrany.
Any judge who interprets the law in a manner that disagrees with very stable genus Donnie’s adderal whims and dementia fever dreams is usurping power.
- MAGAt Nation
honestly they don't even try anymore,
Roberts and the rest of them just really aren’t equipped to have to justify themselves. They arrogantly assumed the DC media machine would allow them to maintain the prodessional and personal lifestyle to which they’ve become accustomed. Meanwhile voters voted in and now root on the disrupters. These assholes really don’t know what to do now- there was no plan B…
What I like about that NYT podcast is how in the transcript the participants are reduced to numbers, which is fitting.
I'll be charitable and call it sloppy clerk's effort, I could be more scathing, how the dissolution of remain in Mexico, abetted the invasion from the South,
As an ignoramus, naturally I tend to think there aren't enough ignoramuses on the bench. But seriously, am I wrong?
"And if it isn't true, should you hope that people will nevertheless believe, because without the courts carrying out their traditional rituals with solemnity we're lost?"
Hope is not a plan. Roberts should have led with a strong statement regarding the separation of powers, with a reassurance that the courts have no desire or ability to encroach on the role of the executive. Remember when SCOTUS in the first Trump administration was on a campaign to reduce the district courts' practice of issuing orders with national application? They need to get back to that pronto.
Gangs are minor problem but attract attention. Hundreds of thousands, or millions of people here illegally getting free benefits average low income person does not get, and taking money which should go to poor citizens is a major problem.
Also, many working illegals take jobs from citizens. While there are some jobs that some Americans won't do, there are some Americans who will do any job available to support themselves or their family.
"You know, this judge wants these gang members roaming around the streets, attacking your family and loved ones."
I, for one, do believe that. And I believe a lot of leftists/Democrats want those killers, murderers, rapists, gang members back in this country. Did any Democrat officials lift a finger to stop the gang takeovers of whole apartment complexes? They turned away or silently cheered. Have any Democrats objected to the judge trying to get the gang members back in this country? Not that I know.
as spelled out in other threads, there are multiple conflicts of interests, that should have precluded ruling or effected change of venue,
Congress should rein in these District Court judges. We can’t wait for the Appeals and what-not in all these cases. Plus, there’ll be a new case every time Trump makes a move on anything.
Roman Hruskas request has come true,
…which I don’t say to suggest plan A won’t ultimately succeed. Trump’s time is (term) limited so a strategy of Hawaiian judges forcing us all to live in the lawless region between an inferior court’s partisan decision and the Supremes decision to actually read the Constitution at a 5th grade reading level…well, it will probably work out…for them.
So, first he broke the Congressional Democrats by getting them to use all sorts of political capital on insanely stupid positions.
And now he’s doing the same with the courts?
Trump should start by pullng a Andrew Johnson. I'm sure that will get Roberts off his duff.
I'm not sure pulling Johnsons to get somebody off isn't just going to make this whole thing even more controversial.
we know that Boasberg is just a cavalcade of category error, going back nearly a decade,
hawkeyedjb said...
"Did any Democrat officials lift a finger to stop the gang takeovers of whole apartment complexes?"
Reminds of when Martha Maddatz proclaimed to JD Vance that it's only “a handful of apartment complexes,” to which Vance retorted: “Martha, do you hear yourself?” It was glorious.
I, for one, do believe that. And I believe a lot of leftists/Democrats want those killers, murderers, rapists, gang members back in this country. Did any Democrat officials lift a finger to stop the gang takeovers of whole apartment complexes? back in this country. Did any Democrat officials lift a finger to stop the gang takeovers of whole apartment complexes?
This statement is just bullshit. The only evidence you have that these people are "killers, murderers, rapists, gang members", is because that is what Trump is claiming, there has been no formal procedure other than rounding these people up. Heck, the government won't even reveal how many were deported or their names. And the whole "gang takeovers of whole apartment complexes", is simply a lie spread by Trump and his minions.
And remember to justify this, Trump is claiming that the Venezuelan government supports and intentionally sent these people here to cause trouble. More absolute bullshit.
there are echoes of the Levick Groups enlisting of white shoe lawfirms on behalf of Gitmo terrorists, like that which the most recent justice, Ketanji Brown,, did on behalf of the 20th hijacker,
Judge Reyes was born in Uruguay, but relocated to the USA as a child. She is an out lesbian, radical feminist, nominated to the position by President Joe Biden; and is both the first Latina and the first openly LGBT person to serve as a district court judge in Washington, D.C. Any wonder she thinks that the "ban on transgenders" (actually removing the privilege they were granted to remain active despite requiring medical treatment.) was somehow "soaked in animus"?
intel reports on the disposition of Tren De Aragua and their ties to the Cartel del Sol, their operations in Chile, in line with SEBIN
venezuelan secret police, assymetrical warfare or hybrid warfare as the Chinese dubbed it,
This statement is just bullshit. The only evidence you have that these people are "killers, murderers, rapists, gang members", is because that is what Trump is claiming,
Yes, that is a bullshit statement you are making Freder. First, they are gang members. It isn’t hard to identify them as such, because they mark themselves with tattoos. All of them are either charged and/or convicted of violent criminal activity in the US. How do you think the US government got their hands on them so easily? Because they already had a record in the US.
What Leland said, everyone arrested so far has a US criminal record. The Trump administration isn't picking up people off the street. So yeah, the idea insinuated on The Daily is that conservative media is making this up. But who hasn't been honoring detainers for decades?
Freder is a good loyal brownshirt.
thats just regarding the Boasberg case, of course Roberts let this clownshoe go on with the Ahmed Ali decision,
Lilliputian-esque federal district judges tying the good Gulliver the Trump down.
This is the same judge that gave Ray Epps a suspended sentence and 1 year probation for telling people to go into the capitol on J6.
The central and south American gangs have criminal records back in their country of origin. Not just here.
The corrupt left must deny it all - because crook Joe and his Soros puppet masters - let all the criminal gangs into the US.
Where in the Constitution does it grant federal judges the authority to give orders to a sitting president? I'm specifically talking about federal judge who ordered President Trump to command an airliner carrying deported gang members to return to the US. What an ass. Now we have another federal judge ordering the reinstatement of all USAID employees. Another ass.
the very same, and he sentenced many with the abuse of te 1512 statute, which was thankfully reversed by the Court, but only after two years of legal malpractice,
you have to ignore the holding in Luedke among others,
Freder is the Whoopie Goldberg of the Althouse blog.
this is a simple application of 'broken windows' theory, that they want to discard,
well he's gone full sunny hostin, and you never do that,
Freder is the Whoopie Goldberg of the Althouse blog
…I kind of expected judge Roberts would be announced as a guest on The View this week…
Freder is a good loyal brownshirt.
So, because I believe that these deportees are entitled at least a semblance of due process and a little bit of transparency (at least give us their names and how many you actually deported) and point out that hawkeyedjb published a bunch a lie makes me the brownshirt.
First, they are gang members. It isn’t hard to identify them as such, because they mark themselves with tattoos. All of them are either charged and/or convicted of violent criminal activity in the US.
And other than the Trump administration stating this without providing the least shred of documentary evidence, how do you know this.
It wasn't that long ago (just three months) that none of you believed a word the Biden administration said.
“In times of profound change, the learners inherit the earth, while the learned find themselves beautifully equipped to deal with a world that no longer exists.”
― Eric Hoffer
The fact none of these judges recuse themselves when they have multiple family members working for the "victims" (Boasberg) or prosecutors (Merchan) is damning. Maybe they thought the USAID-NGO slush fund would never be found out.
But it's out now and they just blatantly ignore their duty to the law to appear and act impartially. They don't even go so far as to try and appear impartial. Whoever CJ Roberts was trying to reach in writing (where was it even published?) his pushback to Trump, it isn't me. And his words are in fact hollow and more out-of-date than mayonnaise from last century.
because they lied most fragrantly about everything regarding the border Afghanistan, Gaza, need I go on, in fact the lead company briefer, flew the Fatah standard on her twitter page,
they lied most fragrantly
They lied like a knock-off perfume salesman about everything.
Trump's a fast learner up against a mob of know-it-alls.
Bet on Trump.
At least Roberts is no Judge Jeffreys. Not yet at least.
Golly. Maybe there is some reason to kick Venezuelan gangbangers out of the country besides getting an edge on the courts, hence the Democrats. Classic lefty thinking: everything is political. It was therefore predictable that this hack judge would try to stop the deportation to the political detriment of his Democrat consorts. The gangbangers pose no real threat to anyone in Lilliput.
Freder - you demand proof and evidence - and it's all there. Yet you deny it. YOU devout leftists need to provide proof that we owe Criminal gangs due process. These criminal gangs were allowed into our nation ILLEGALLY. Deportation and in some cases deportation and prison... is all we owe them.
Ask Laken Riley's family, while you are at it.
Criminal gang illegal aliens are not subject to "Due Process."
emphasis on THEY ARE NOT CITIZENS OF THE US.
There is a very simple answer to all of this nonsense. Trump needs to ignore the lower courts. ALL of the lower courts are created and authorized by Congress as per our Constitution. They are not an equal to the President. SCOTUS is the only court that has power to equal that of the President the rest as creature of Congress do not. IGNORE THEM OR THEY WILL KILL OUR COUNTRY.
Hate to admit it but some of us deplorables in Portlandia used to say that public opinion on crime would change when enough white women get raped. I denounce myself.
"Black humor is like food. Not everybody gets it." —Josef Stalin
Pollyanna is clearly today’s guest editor. ✍️
“At some point, expectations will be so low that a president will feel free to ignore judicial orders altogether.”
That point has already come.
Isn't that part of the plot - dear loyal leftists?
Trump ignores leftist district judges - and then the loyalists howl!
The left is a corrupt and inept Tantrum club. The Democrat Party is a sewer.
Freder: “So, because I believe that these deportees are entitled at least a semblance of due process ….” Really? Deportation is civil, not criminal. What due process are they “entitled to” and how do you know they haven’t gotten it? Did you believe J6 defendants were entitled to bail under the Eighth Amendment or are your “beliefs” only triggered by people who are here illegally and prone to commit serious crimes?
The People and our [unPlanned] Posterity Lives Matter (PuPLM). Democrats need to lose their religion.
"Turn the airplane around" might have to be the dumbest court decision EVER.
Judges are corrupt and power hungry. If the white female lib wins the WI Supreme Court race on April 1st, you can say good-bye to Act 10. Even though Act 10 was supported by the majority of voters, the elected legislature, and the elected and recall re-elected Governor. These judges are on a power trip.
Judges are human and biased and have personal agendas. Roberts is knowingly lying. Disturbing he doesn't even acknowledge this reality. The courts have become the Land of Make Believe.
Can we fly the Venezuelan gang members to Madison, WI please? I'm sure they love this corrupt judge.
Yes. LLR-democratical Rich and Field Marshall Freder and alk the other lunatic leftist posters at Althouse blog really are going to keep dying on this hill, and the trans/pro-groomer hill, and the Forever War hill, and the Protect Waste Fraud and Abuse hill and the Pro-hamas/islamic terrorist hill and every other psycho 80-20 Issue hill they can find.
""gang takeovers of whole apartment complexes", is simply a lie spread by Trump and his minions."
So, would you believe a report from CNN?
https://www.cnn.com/2025/01/14/us/aurora-colorado-apartments-closing-gang-activity/index.html
"The only evidence you have that these people are "killers, murderers, rapists, gang members", is because that is what Trump is claiming"
But just about everyone does believe it, therefore, from a political standpoint, you are losing.
Comedy gold:
And other than the Trump administration stating this without providing the least shred of documentary evidence, how do you know this.
As repeatedly pointed out, and can be clearly seen in videos where their shirts are lifted up (as if the face tats weren't enough), they ADVERTISE their membership in Td'A. You don't have to have had my decade-plus experience teaching multi-generational gang members to understand these tattoos are not just "expression."
It wasn't that long ago (just three months) that none of you believed a word the Biden administration said.
Yes, they said Td'A had NOT taken over apartments in Aurora, CO; they said there was not a thing to be done to staunch the flow at the border; they said Joe was "sharpest he's ever been" and "outworking us all (in the White House);" they said the Afghan withdrawal was "perfectly executed;" so yeah.
WE DIDN'T BELIEVE ANY OF THEIR GODDAMNED LIES.
"to justify this, Trump is claiming that the Venezuelan government supports and intentionally sent these people here to cause trouble"
Why wouldn't Venezuela do this. There is an historical precedent. We know that back in the 80s Cuba opened up the prisons and sent the inmates to Florida.
its kind of a lumpy hill of course if you subsisted on a diet of corporate press, well your brain is likely to atrophy,
The other day one of the Vile Vindman's demanded that JD Vance resign.... because JD said something Vile Vindman(D) (Arrogant authoritarian f-head) didn't like.
"It wasn't that long ago (just three months) that none of you believed a word the Biden administration said."
Only because they were proven liars.
Is it just me or is Freder starting to sound a little desperate?
"So, first he broke the Congressional Democrats by getting them to use all sorts of political capital on insanely stupid positions.
And now he’s doing the same with the courts?"
If anything, the Trump people are probably surprised there haven't been more legal challenges. So, yes, fully expected and so fully targeted for a deliberate effect. And the Donks are happy to, hysterically, oblige.
I don't understand the hyperventilating about Roberts. He knows that, quite soon, he's going to have to uphold the powers of the Executive Branch and that, when he does, the Left are going to lose their shit. So he's trying to preemptively calm the waters a bit with a show of Althousian cruel neutrality. It won't change the outcome.
"Black humor is like food. Not everybody gets it." —Josef Stalin
My son had this t-shirt when he was in high school (he bought it himself).I was very pleased.His teachers were less enthused...
When Obama got in power the Dems created a government funded, domestic propaganda machine. In the end, it only worked on themselves. They broke their own brains.
why because he didn't put a halt to effendi ali's pretentions, because he along with the six others sanctioned the fraud, because he didn't take up the Bannon Eastman Guiliani Navarro cases, all agregious malpractice,
Another day at The New York Trumpzette.
The Cracker Emcee Refulgent: "I don't understand the hyperventilating about Roberts. He knows that, quite soon, he's going to have to uphold the powers of the Executive Branch and that, when he does, the Left are going to lose their shit. So he's trying to preemptively calm the waters a bit with a show of Althousian cruel neutrality. It won't change the outcome."
Disagree.
Robert's will likely go to his tactic of massively narrowing the scope of any decision that is properly pro-Trump team legal position so as to allow Robert's dem pals to run serial and parallel lawfare attacks that each can continue outside the narrow limits Robert's sneakily employs.
The Colorado baker case is a perfect example of how Roberts does that. The CO baker wins,m after years of liigation, returns home and within 72 hours a new case against him is launched by an activist/leftist CO gov crew.
The court of public opinion is part of the system of checks and balances.
Ask those who disdain the court of public opinion what they think of the right to trial by jury.
If anything, the Trump people are probably surprised there haven't been more legal challenges
…did I hear the press sec mention there were over 170 challenges against the administration at the time she said it? More now…
beetlejuise
"by his description", I guess, because they can't easily say "asserted without evidence" But the NYTimes writer must never agree with the President. That's in their Style Handbook.
"The court of public opinion is part of the system of" lynch mobs too. And this dismissal of fundamental due process - including simply ensuring the proper identification of people are who government agents say they are - is appalling.
And it craps on everything the legal profession stands for.
Nothing at all like the narratives that the Republicans want to take away Medicare and Social Security, rig the tax system to make sure "The Rich" don't pay their "Fair Share" of taxes, and turn back turn back hardworking single moms at the border, after putting their kids in cages.
How long have they been lecturing us about "optics?"
Going all out for illegal alien criminal gang members. Not a good look. To point it out would be "pouncing."
because without the courts carrying out their traditional rituals with solemnity we're lost?
Watching the courts is like watching circus clowns: they are neither solemn nor funny. But the show must go on, bring out the elephants.
"Solemnity" is bullshit; generally a cover/demand for respect despite a lack of substance (exception--memorials and funerals).
Seriousness is what we should expect from our courts. If they want respect, they need to act with seriousness.
This is from Donald Trump’s recent State of the Union:
This is my fifth such speech to Congress, and, once again, I look at the Democrats in front of me, and I realize there is absolutely nothing I can say to make them happy or to make them stand or smile or applaud. Nothing I can do. I could find a cure to the most devastating disease — a disease that would wipe out entire nations, or announce the answers to the greatest economy in history or the stoppage of crime to the lowest levels ever recorded, and these people sitting right here will not clap, will not stand, and certainly will not cheer for these astronomical achievements. They won’t do it no matter what.
The reaction among the various hyper-partisan federal judges to Trump’s legitimate actions as President, is an example of his words written large for all to see. Trump is for peace in Ukraine, then his efforts towards peace must be thwarted in any way possible. Trump wants to deport murderers and rapists? Then to Democrats and partisan hacks like Freder this must be stopped. “Due process,” bleats Freder. Like Laken Riley received any sort of due process?
If Trump proposed curing childhood cancer, Freder and partisan Democrats would pen lengthy diatribes about why childhood cancer should be left alone.
Yes, Freder you are a genuine Nazi brownshirt trying to pretend to the world that you are opposing Naziism. You’re too stupid to realize how easy it is to see through your pose.
The Chief Justice can assert that judges are neutral arbiters, just doing their job in a meticulously professional way, but if people don't believe that, it's not going to work.
It's odd that most of these neutral arbiters are judges appointed by Our Savior, BillyBoy, and The Old Drooling Fool. Maybe that's why "people don't believe that".
- Krumhorn
I believe that we have gotten to the point where federal judges should be prohibited from issuing temporary restraining orders with national effect against government action. At a minimum there should be full on adversary hearing before a judge can act. Even assuming that the delay for a fully-briefed and evidentiary hearing creates harm, far more harm is caused by the perception of a judge acting on ideological grounds in political matters. And that's precisely what has been happening for the most part by ideologically driven leftie judges.
- Krumhorn
Freder, you idiot: millions of illegals were let into this country w/o undergoing the "due process" legal immigrants and visitors get---you know, like presenting valid passports with required visas to Immigrations authoriites , all that mundane shit. Instead Biden and Mayorkas just let the sumbitches in.
And now you come bleating about "due process" before deporting these criminal aliens----a process which would FLOOD and DESTROY our court systems!!!
Sorry, but every such illegal arrived here...illegally and with the Biden administration's connivance and wholesale violation of our laws, and thus they can be ejected from our country without giving them "rights" they do not have.
"they believe in the court of public opinion most people will be on their side"
Do Mr. Broadwater and the NYT prefer some other definition of "our democracy?"
Lurker said...
Do Mr. Broadwater and the NYT prefer some other definition of "our democracy?
The “Our” in “Our Democracy” refers to rustlers, cutthroats, murderers, bounty hunters, desperados, mugs, pugs, thugs, nitwits, halfwits, dimwits, vipers, snipers, con men, Indian agents, Mexican bandits, muggers, buggerers, bushwhackers, hornswogglers, horse thieves, bull dykes, train robbers, bank robbers, ass-kickers, shit-kickers, and Methodists.
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2025/03/19/judge-who-blocked-usaid-cuts-is-long-time-democrat-activist/
Lurker said...
Do Mr. Broadwater and the NYT prefer some other definition of "our democracy?
When Democrats talk about “our democracy”, they’re really talking about “our bureaucracy”.
the Democrat Party, is a Party of:
genital mutilation
forcing YOUNG girls to shower with MEN
CRIMINALS
FOREIGN CRIMINALS
CORRUPTION
WASTE
CENSORSHIP
TERRORISM
DESTRUCTION of Electric Vechicles
what's NOT to LOVE about this new Democrat Party?
Senator Schumer just released a video, where he mocked business owners that wanted to stay in business, rather than being taxed to death.. THIS is the New Democrat Party
https://www.msn.com/en-us/politics/government/chuck-schumer-mocks-notion-that-people-resent-spending-money-they-earned-on-taxes/ar-AA1BbiFC
“And you know what their attitude is? ‘I made my money all by myself, how dare your government take my money from me? I don’t want to pay taxes.’ Or ‘I built my company with my bare hands, how dare your government tell me how I should treat my customers, the land and water that I own or my employees?’ They hate government, government’s a barrier to people, a barrier to stop them from doing things, they want to destroy it, we are not letting them do it and we’re united,” Schumer continued.
Richard Epstein and John Yoo no longer update Hoover's Law Talk podcast, nor Epstein his own Hoover Libertarian podcast. Their expertise on law and its principles no longer has any application, because the law has slipped its principles and they have nothing to say that leads to understanding.
"Trump administration chose carefully to fight on"
And not on just this issue. Trump's team knew they would be fighting the courts every step of the way and chose their battles accordingly. More like Trump 10.2 rather than Trump 2.0. These guys came prepared.
I don’t hear much objection to action by the Trump administration under the Alien Enemies Act. Any of you legal scholars wanna bet any legal credibility you have left to disparage Trump on that one? Anyone? Anyone?
Bukele is right we are facing a judicial coup the objective of which is to stop government reform, not to follow the law. Robert’s better get off his ass. Trump is just the guy to blow up the judiciary. The Democrat connection to these sleazy judges is shocking.
How much "due process" is needed if you're here illegally? Seems pretty cut and dried.
Following FDR in the 1930s, the courts became activists and routinely dominated every hot issue of the 20th century. Entitlements. Abortion. Guns. Race. Gender. Immigration. Etc. Trump is consciously calling this out...courts will fight back how?
Trump's gambit is that he (and his many legal allies this time) can pull the USA back to 19th century model of Manifest Destiny, the Monroe Doctrine, non-activist courts, and an independent executive branch.
I suspect it'll half work, but over the next 50 years mutate into the rebirth of the labor movement, a New Deal, etc. History is filled with nothing but rhyming and pendulum swings.
The problem is that there are only three genuine conservatives on the Supreme Court right now. It's anyone's guess how Roberts, Kavanaugh, and Barrett will view the issue of executive authority. We know the other six will be 3-3, so only two of the above can thwart Trump and solidify judicial sovereignty over the government if that's what they want to do.
Chuck Schumer said...
“And you know what their attitude is...?"
I have worked in private business all my life. I have not met a single person who believes the nonsensical strawman-ideas put up by Sen. Schumer. Schumer is telling us that he is utterly ignorant of the opinions and reasoning of the people who make the private (that is to say, productive) economy function. He is locked in his little bubble of unaccountability, in a profession where bullshit is rewarded and celebrated, where he will never be required to do anything useful. In other words, he participates in the part of the grand human endeavor where people like him will excel.
Schumer is in a fight for his job, or so his words betray...
What if another judge ordered the Feds to keep on expelling those illegals who are criminals or terrorists? What if another judge ordered that transwomen should not be shipped back into women's prisons? What if another judge ordered that Congress never authorized waste and fraud and that waste and fraud should be stopped whereever found? what if every order from a Dem judge was countered by an order from a Trump judge?
Or, what if another judge ordered that all abortions later than 15 weeks, country-wide should be halted in line with those states where the rights of the unborn are protected? What if a judge ordered Congress to be closed so that judges, who are Our Betters, could rule the country properly? What if a judge ordered the war in the Ukraine to continue?
Freder sticking up for violent gang members from other countries. Here illegally.
Gee. Never saw that one coming. /s
Maybe you should go run your mouth to Laken Riley's family. See how many teeth you'll have left.
"what if every order from a Dem judge was countered by an order from a Trump judge?"
What if Trump found judges who would order him to do what he was planning to do? Then, when the Dem judges ordered him to stop, he could say "Sorry, I can't. I've been ordered by the court not to."
If the authority of the lower courts is so broadly interpreted that they can effectively stop the assumption of power by a duly elected president than the courts are the institutions violating the Constitution. Roberts needs to engage with that.
Because of delays, district courts willing to do these TROs and then injunctions and then cases are entirely able to prevent such issues from even being adjudicated within a president's four year term. As an example, in Trump's first term, the EPA overturned the CA emissions waiver. That was still in the courts when Trump's first term ended.
A second example - the refusal of admission on an H1-B visa to Dr. Rasha Alawieh, because on arrival photos of Khameni and Nasrallah and other Hezbollah biggies were discovered on her phone (most deleted shortly before arrival), and she admitted to going to Nasrallah's (the head of Hezbollah) funeral, plus apparently espoused the "spiritual" teachings of these people. Which are hardly separate from their political teachings, and which explicitly mandate enmity to the US, Israel and Jews. This is what I would call a good catch. No way should she have been let into the country.
The perusal of phones and social media was instituted under Obama, primarily due to the Christmas massacre of the daring duo at San Bernardino.
I voted for Trump because after watching a torchlight parade through Philly, with the attack on a Jewish deli, watching the anti-Semitic attacks in NYC steadily mount, watching Jewish students not permitted to access various campus areas by,, ya know, the "Greenshirts", and the Jewish students locked in the library room at Cooper with a mob banging on the doors and windows - after that sort of thing - after seeing the government not act to rebut it - I said to myself "I've seen this movie before and it's truly a horror movie. I'm leaving."
More voters voted for Trump. In part because of these issues. The ABA sucks. The legal academy sucks. The Ivy League administrators suck. They have all abandoned reality and decency. The state of journalism can best be described as septic.
It is past time for the federal judiciary to take a good long look in the mirror and realize "Man, you ugly!"
And yeah, Trump sucks in many ways also - but so did Churchill. Trump's right in many corrective ways.
Drago said...
"Robert's will likely go to his tactic of massively narrowing the scope of any decision that is properly pro-Trump team legal position so as to allow Robert's dem pals to run serial and parallel lawfare attacks that each can continue outside the narrow limits Robert's sneakily employs."
He can go full Roberts and declare the decisions to be a tax.
it matters what kind of process they use to determine that the people are in fact criminals and noncitizens
"And if it isn't true, should you hope that people will nevertheless believe..."
I guess it depends on what sort of thing you're believing. The left believes that a guy who chops off his dick and takes female hormones is a girl. Is that the sort of belief you're hoping for?
"it matters what kind of process they use to determine that the people are in fact criminals and noncitizens."
Probably they relied on the due process that resulted in them being convicted criminals in the first place.
Do you really think Trump ordered the DOJ to just round up a bunch of random Venezuelans?
Baotbuilder - yes that is exactly what the collective left assume - without evidence.
I responded to a person who was complaining about Trump's tactics by saying, "This is the BEST CASE SCENARIO for your side. If you stop it the way you're trying to do, it only gets much much worse for you."
Biden broke the covenant by opening the border. People who would rightly demand due process in other cases aren't keen on gumming up the deportation process for gang members who shouldn't be here anyway. When it comes to the Democrats, the media, advocacy groups, and the courts, the curtain has fallen, and people don't believe in the wizard anymore. Many people have taken the red pill and feel like Indiana Jones confronted with the swordsman. I don't love the last analogy (given how it ended for the swordsman). Maybe there's something better in "1984."
The Supreme Court hears about 65 cases each year. 40 years ago they heard about 150 cases.
Roberts is a lazy diva.
The Supremes would say that quality is more important than quantity. The problem is the Court is so incremental in its approach that it leaves many questions — like conflicts between the Circuits- unresolved. I have seen many instances where the law is very unsettled and the Supremes fail to provide useable guidance.
Yancy Ward" "...Roberts is extremely naive." NO! He is a shill at best, corrupt at worst.
I guess it depends on what sort of thing you're believing. The left believes that a guy who chops off his dick and takes female hormones is a girl. Is that the sort of belief you're hoping for?
@Mason G., the guy doesn’t even have to do that. He can keep his penis, testes, and testostetone — all he has to do is say “I feel as though I’m female” and he can ogle and leer at showering women and girls to his heart’s content.
I have worked in private business all my life. I have not met a single person who believes the nonsensical strawman-ideas put up by Sen. Schumer. Schumer is telling us that he is utterly ignorant of the opinions and reasoning of the people who make the private (that is to say, productive) economy function.
@hawkeyejdb, I agree, but I'd like to take this in a slightly different direction. Far too many people on the left have no effing clue about how much hard work it takes to succeed in business.
"You didn't build that." Remember Fauxahontas and Obama saying that? If they ever tried to set up and run a business instead of peering over their upturned noses at real people doing real work they'd sing a different tune. The late George McGovern could have set them straight. He tried to open a simple Bed & Breakfast only to fail before the doors even opened because of all of the regulatory hassle he faced.
Stupid Democrats think capitalism is all about Jamie Dimon and central banks. And they are part of it, but capitalism is also the young guys in cheap off-the-rack suits from JC Penney's who are trying to get a business loan to acquire and fix up a couple used box trucks and refurbish an old warehouse so that they can start a moving firm. It's also a middle-aged mechanic who has been fixing cars in his home garage and wants to buy an old gas station with a working lift so he can expand his business and maybe hire a couple of people to help. And it ain't as easy as overeducated but underbrained Democrats seem to think.
"The Law" seems to have left behind any semblance of principles or integrity in positions that are high profile. Politically motivated Judges are not helping. But perhaps they don't really care about that though. They have a different agenda.
There's the law, and then there's the application of the law. Judges, with few exceptions, have largely failed at the latter, and beneath their robes, they have made the law into a sausage factory. The same is true of prosecutors. They're politicized prima donnas, demanding fealty and failing to apply the law objectively. I doubt one in ten are ethical people. And then there is the funding of the courts. We say we want violent men imprisones, but provide courts with a fraction of the money to achieve this. I never got my day in court.
My husband was lucky to clerk for one of those one in ten: Anthony Alaimo. First Italian, let alone Sicilian appointed to a Southern court. By Nixon, a man who was one of the least elitist and racialist Presidents of our lifetime. Ironically, his court was not far from where mass lynchings of Italians occurred in the Lynching Era. How many people know that, after blacks, Italians were the most prevalent victims of lynching? Bygones.
He spent most of WWII helping other prisoners of war escape. He concealed his knowledge of European languages. And he stayed behind, to help the others. A real man. A good judge.
He fought for victims and for humane treatment of prisoners. We don't make them this way anymore.
Roberts appears to have a foundational principle of "don't rock the boat" as to judicial practices. He has made some (but not nearly enough) vocal concerns about district court overreach with national TROs. But, for Roberts this isn't a crisis. After all the process allows the cases to be heard (over time) and appealed (over time) and appealed (over time). Seems to suit Roberts with his lifetime appointment. Suits the HELL out of the left where delay is their best remaining tactic.
Trump (and most of his supporters) recognize that speed is of the essence. They are convinced that the lower courts have over reached and see the brakes being applied. Time is not on the side of those trying to save the sinking ship America.
Starting, maintaining and building a business "ain't as easy as overeducated but underbrained Democrats seem to think."
Amen, brother. It also takes guts and/or a leap of faith. I've know a few people that built a business from scratch. To a man they put EVERYTHING they owned on the line. To a man* they made the business an all-consuming effort. And to a man they came close to not succeeding.
It takes guts. Most of us don't have that level of what it takes.
*Yes, the people I have in mind were all men.
Trump’s conceptual breakthrough is that he doesn’t see a contract as a list of things he can and can’t do. He sees it as a price list for things he wants to do. A lawyer tells him “you can’t do that, it breaches the contract.” Trump says, “ok, well under the contract, what happens to me if I breach?” The lawyer says $X amount. Trump either says it’s worth it, or says screw it, guess I have to stick to the contract.
His genius is to take this same approach to constitutional law. People think “the judge issued a restraining order - you have to stop.” Trump says, “what happens to me if I don’t?” And he has spent the last 4 years minimizing those costs: avoiding the appointment mistakes he made last time, filling the congress with MAGA people instead of RINOs who would go along with an impeachment, etc.
So he realizes the cost of defiance is pretty low, compared to the cost of letting his agenda get derailed.
JSM
Isn't the REAL problem here that Trump is using a war power in a situation that isn't a war?
If he is able to do this in this case, how will he apply the principle in the future? Is overriding the courts really a precedent you want?
Painting an illegal immigrant crime problem as a war is using the ends to justify the means.
Would we be better off today if in the 1st half of the 20th century Italians had been deported without due process?
Saying that the 20 million (or so) illegal entrants to the USA must receive "due process" before any deporations can take place is the same as saying that nobody will be deported - and we all know it. You could turn every spare building in the nation into a courthouse and litigate every case; even under Trump, more people will arrive illegally than will ever be deported. Which was exactly the intent of the people who favor the 'rule of law' only after ignoring the law 20 million times.
So many comments! It seems the issue of lawfare vs executive authority is interesting to a lot of readers. Here's hoping the use of lawfare is among the issues Trump planned to address in advance of his administration coming into office. I have a feeling it is, as he is still producing changes to government faster than the Left can react to them. When today he issues his expected EO re closure of the Dept of Edumacational Grift, with request for Congressional action on same, what will the lawfare approach be? That he can't ask Congress to enact suggested laws? It is to laff. May the steamroller of Executive Branch reform of the federal government only speed up over the next four years. There is much that needs crushed.
"The law needs public support". It does if it's going to be obeyed ... an iron fisted enforcer can do the job of public support too.
We need to be careful....
"Would we be better off today if in the 1st half of the 20th century Italians had been deported without due process?"
1) The immigration act of 1924 brought immigration into the US to a trickle, the vast majority of Italian immigrants came to the US in the 19th century.
2) The immigrants that came did so legally. They didn't just walk across the border.
3) There was no government welfare system so immigrants had to work. In fact part of the screening process for immigrants was to ensure that they could work.
4) Some immigrants were deported because they were engaging in criminal activities, some even self-deported to avoid imprisonment.
Freder, more than anything else, wants to be the one shoving you into the Stolypin cars.
True that the volume of illegal immigrants is a huge problem (which of course would have been reduced if our immigration laws matched up with the demand for immigrant labor.
Perhaps the process that is "due" has to be adjusted to the circumstances, i.e. streamlined. And, draconian deportations to notorious hellholes certainly will have lots of people looking to get the hell out. (Personally, I worry about the toll on the enforcers of draconian measures and the lionization of their bosses.)
My wife's early 20th ancestors immigrated illegally from Italy and the Netherlands, but they found relatively easy ways to regularize their status. My locality, PA coal country, is filled with the descendents of 20th century immigrants from Italy and eastern Europe.
Can anyone address the question of use of war powers in a non-war situation? Are you all OK with that?
Hey Jim, "war" isn't the issue. Government of Venezuela purposefully, publicly, sent massive numbers of "migrant" criminals and gang members to the US to enter the country illegally. That is an invasion, evan a government sponsored one, and is another reason allowing for executive action by the President under the old law that you are complaining about Trump not following. And if its war you want, see the War on Poverty, the War on Crime, The War on Drugs, the War on Homelessness, and so on and so on and so on for precedents to executive declarations of War without Congressional mandate.
So, mikee's argument is that it is a war. That's OK. Congress has the power "To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;"
Do it, get congress to declare war on Venezuela and deport or intern all their citzens (and exclude their oil.)
We are well past that point. I am at the point where I not only would accept, but applaud 500 judges on the bottom of the ocean as a good start.
Fredo isn't a brownshirt. Brownshirts actually got in the street and fought - I seriously doubt that Fredo has ever been in a fistfight, even in middle school. Fredo, like his namesake, is only good at demanding respect and proving that he deserves none.
Jim said: "My wife's early 20th ancestors immigrated illegally from Italy and the Netherlands, but they found relatively easy ways to regularize their status. My locality, PA coal country, is filled with the descendents of 20th century immigrants from Italy and eastern Europe."
It is unlikely that early 20th Century immigrants from Europe immigrated here illegally. What laws, did they supposedly break? People from Europe were coming here in large ships that came through designated entry points, and anyone who was barred by the immigration laws (which were minimal before the mid-20's anyway) were screened out.
One jumped ship in NY harbor.
The other was AWOL from the Italian army in WW1, found passage to NY, and ended up joining the US Army (he was already a combat veteran), gaining legal status, and getting gassed in France.
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.