Republicans now act just like AOC and the Progressive cancel culture activists.
Trump Cancel Culture
Massive applause for Chief Justice Roberts for his willingness to stand up to the Republican Cancel Culture.
The Wall Street Journal reports Chief Justice Roberts Criticizes Trump’s Call to Impeach Judges
Chief Justice John Roberts decried calls from President Trump and his supporters to impeach judges who have ruled against administration policies, saying that the court system should be left to resolve legal disputes through the traditional system of litigation.
“For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision,” Roberts said Tuesday in a statement. “The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose.”
The comments came following an extraordinary statement from Trump, who on social media demanded the impeachment of a federal judge who is hearing a challenge to the removal of alleged Venezuelan gang members under a long dormant 18th century statute, the Alien Enemies Act.
Trump lashed out at Boasberg in a social-media post, calling the judge “a troublemaker and agitator who was sadly appointed by Barack Hussein Obama.” The president continued: “I’m just doing what the VOTERS wanted me to do. This judge, like many of the Crooked Judges’ I am forced to appear before, should be IMPEACHED!!!”
For weeks, the president’s supporters—including his billionaire benefactor Elon Musk—have been calling for impeachment of judges who found against the administration in preliminary stages of litigation over its policies.
My stand is on Roberts’ statement, not the ruling of Boasberg.
By calling for the removal of Boasberg, Trump has proven to be no better than AOC and the Progressive Left that wants to pack the court and remove any judge who disagrees with them.
“Judges in America are completely out of control, they literally have ZERO accountability, that is not normal,” said one of my followers on X.
Actually, Trump is completely out of control and Roberts is correct.
Following Court Orders
Please recall that that I was angry with Biden for trying to circumvent the Supreme Court decision on student loans.
But that was nothing like this. Biden resisted the student loan order, but not by disobeying, rather concocting another legal theory, which ultimately also lost.
It’s one thing to take a court order and try to change what you’re doing in such a way to achieve your objectives. But Trump is just refusing to follow court orders. This is new.
No President or Vice President never said that the Administration might not follow court orders, until now.
If you have an argument and you think the judge has wrongly decided the issue, you obey the order and appeal to an appellate court, on an emergency basis if you have to.
If you’re right, you win there. But no one, under any circumstances has the right to determine that a court is wrong and ignore its order.
There is no question about that. That is what is fundamentally wrong about this remarkable affair.
Activism In the Eyes of the Beholder
Democrats thought the Supreme Court ruling on abortion was “activism”.
The TCC calls every disagreement ” activism”.
Attacking Lawyers for Representing Clients
The Trump Cancel Culture (TCC) is even smacking law firms for simply representing someone.
On March 12, the Washington Post commented Judge says Trump penalties on law firm send ‘chills down my spine’
Last week, Trump signed an executive order hitting Perkins Coie with a sweeping directive that bans the federal government from hiring the firm, or from using contractors who work with it, except in limited circumstances. The order also bars Perkins Coie employees from entering federal buildings and suspends their security clearances.
U.S. District Judge Beryl A. Howell ruled from the bench after the two-hour hearing, saying Trump exerted “extraordinary power” and that Perkins Coie proved it had suffered immediate damages from the penalties.
“I have enormous respect for Williams & Connolly,” Howell said, referring to the law firm representing Perkins Coie in the case, “and enormous respect for them taking this case when not every law firm would.”
The judge said Trump’s executive order appeared to violate the First Amendment rights of Perkins Coie and noted that the firm was not granted any due process. She said the Trump administration wrote the order in such a broad manner that it was hard to determine any goal beyond retaliation.
“It sends little chills down my spine,” Howell said, describing the executive order as the president punishing a company he believes is not acting in the president’s interest. “Why shouldn’t we be chilled by this?”
Everyone is constitutionally entitled to defense. John Adams represented the British soldiers who fired at the Boston.
In the history of our country, no one has ever gone after lawyers for whom they represent. Trump is doing that now and I expect the Court to snack Trump.
Trump will lose.
The Autopen
The Constitution does not require that a pardon even be in writing, much less signed. This is in contrast to laws, which the Constitution says the President must sign.
Consistent with this reasoning, in 1929, the DOJ wrote an opinion that the form of a pardon was immaterial. This opinion was relied upon by the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals the only time the question has come up. And in 2005, the Bush DOJ concluded the same thing.
Further, there has never been any question that an autopen is acceptable so long as the President directs that it be used. In legislation, where a signature really is required, Presidents have used the autopen for decades. Thomas Jefferson first devised and used an autopen. So, if autopens don’t work, many statutes in the book are invalid.
I do not believe Biden knew what he was signing, But there is no way to prove that.
Trump will lose.
Cancelling Pardons
No president had ever challenged a prior president´s pardons.
That is a betrayal of a constitutional order.
Trump will lose.
Supreme Court Rejects Trump’s Pause on USAID Payouts
On March 5, I commented Supreme Court Rejects Trump’s Pause on USAID Payouts
My Warning Then Is Now Reality
As I said on February 6, “The unfortunate impact might very well be the courts block everything when some very good things may have happened if Trump took a legitimate case-by-case look.“
That this quite conservative court overruled Trump on timing does not bode well for Trump’s more ridiculous actions such as ending birthright citizenship.
As I also said on February 6, “We should not be in this setup.”
Yes this was a temporary ruling. Trump will appeal. So what?
If you can’t prevent the distribution of Congressionally approved funds, you certainly can’t shut down an agency that Congress has mandated.
All Trump has to do is go to the Republican-controlled Congress and get it to repeal the USAID statute. A President can’t do that. Or at least not assuming we’re still living in a country governed by the US Constitution.
Hello DOGE, Judge Orders Thousands to Be Rehired, What Will That Cost?
On March 13, I commented Hello DOGE, Judge Orders Thousands to Be Rehired, What Will That Cost?
Chalk up another loss for Trump in the Courts. Wins have been few, losses many.
Another Ill-Advised Self-Inflected Mess. The judge’s ruling is correct.
On March 14, I commented Why Did Trump Lose in Court on the Mass Firing of Government Workers?
The short answer is DOGE did not follow the law. The long answer is complex.
Alsup Wants an Appeal
“If you want to appeal this, God bless you. I want you to because I am tired of seeing you stonewall on trying to get at the truth, giving me snippets. I want someone to go under oath and tell us what happened in these phone calls, and agencies claiming they did this on their own” .
So Stupid
This is all so stupid. Team DOGE did mass firings of people, including those with perfect reviews, on grounds of performance.
Alsup says that the government can reduce its force under the RIF Act, but has to follow the process. So why not follow the process?
Trump was supposed to give 30 days’ notice but did not bother. And he fired people with impeccable reviews on grounds of incompetence.
Fools label the judge’s order as “activism”.
If and when Trump decides to get rid of employees under the RIF act in a legal manner, he will win. Otherwise he will lose.
Strategic Crypto Reserve
On March 8, I asked By What Authority Can Trump Create a Strategic Crypto Reserve?
If the answer is none, then there won’t be one, without Congress.
There is no vested power for Trump to fund a crypto reserve with taxpayer or Treasury funds.
Even crypto fans should be nauseated by this effort, the hypocrisy, and the obvious inherent corruption.
If Congress approves and funds a crypto reserve, then we will have one.
Birthright Citizenship
No president has ever challenged birthright citizenship by executive order.
Supposedly it’s “activism” to reject Trump’s ridiculous claim despite the fact that the circuit and appeals court have no choice other than follow the law of the land, as already ruled by the Supreme Court.
I have discussed this subject many times, most recently in Appeals Court Rejects Trump’s Birthright Citizenship Executive Order
The Appeals Court ruling was 95 percent likely, so this is no shocker. But let’s review the case.
Trump will lose.
Make Plaintiffs Pay
On March 6, CNN reported White House Memo Aims to Chill Emergency Lawsuits by Making Plaintiffs Pay
The Trump administration is taking a shot at the onslaught of emergency lawsuits being filed against it by invoking a rarely used rule that can force people who challenge the government to post money at the start of a court case, according to a White House memo.
In theory, the move could chill individuals, unions and advocacy groups from filing cases, and legal experts say it could be a sly and potentially effective tool for the Justice Department.
Several lawsuits against the Trump administration are being filed each day, often in opposition to immigration and diversity policy changes, spending freezes, the firing of government employees and the efforts of Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency. As of Thursday, nearly 100 lawsuits like these are active in the federal courts.
The White House circulated the memo to agency leaders on Thursday criticizing the lawsuits as partisan-driven efforts that are potentially frivolous, “undermining the democratic process” and exploiting courts where there may be sympathetic judges.
But a handful of the lawsuits have been successful in early stages, convincing judges that changes the Trump administration has made may be unlawful, and agencies have had to put on hold some of the administration’s plans. One federal judge on Thursday, for instance, decided the Trump administration “put itself above Congress” unlawfully when it categorically froze federal grants toward states’ health care programs and to highway, electric grid, broadband and clean water improvement projects.
This is humorous. The White House has no right to change the American system of litigation costs.
The law and every state and then federal courts is that, boring a specific legislative action, allowing the recovery of cost, each party bears its own cost.
In the event that plaintiff files a frivolous lawsuit, the defendant can seek cost, but it is extraordinarily rare that this is granted. As in less than one percent of cases.
Trump will lose.
TCC Activism – Ten Things
- Ending Birthright Citizenship by Executive Order
- Firing employees without required 30-day notice
- Firing employees for no reason despite that RIF requirement
- Openly defying court orders, triggering as statement from the Supreme Court
- Acting against law firms and lawyers for representing clients the TCC doesn’t like
- Ridiculous Litigation Cost mandate
- Funding new programs not authorized by Congress
- Blocking programs funded by Congress
- Cancelling pardons
- Rejecting Autopens used since Jefferson
That’s 10 extreme to obviously unconstitutional things that Trump has done.
Fools complain about lawsuits and an “activist” court. What a hoot!
Once again, I support DOGE provided it is done in accordance with the law. Otherwise I don’t.
With a majority in Congress, Trump can and should be able to win many things, but not everything.
So far, Trump has mostly a string of losses in court and I expect most of those losses will hold by the Supreme Court.
I have not looked at the deportation case. I can say that open defiance of a court order is very problematic for reasons stated. If Trump had a strong case, he would have won on appeal.
On all of the other issues, had Trump just followed legal paths, some of them very easy, he would be much better off, and so would the country.
A King or a President?
Trump does not want to be President. He wants to be king. And the supporting TCC wants to pick judges that disagree with the king.
This is a terrible setup for obvious reasons.
If we don’t have an independent judiciary, we don’t have rule of law. And if we don’t have rule of law, there is no point to having a constitution at all.
Investors will abandon the US.
Moreover, the next time the Democrats are King they will reverse everything in the opposite direction. It’s no way to run a country.
A few votes in key states the other way, and we might be looking at Queen Kamala.
The current path is sickening. I cannot and will not support unconstitutional orders by King Trump any more than I would those of Queen Kamala or King Biden.
Thus, I openly and loudly cheer Roberts. Everyone who does not want to trash the Constitution for a Monarchy should as well.
Addendum
Excellent WSJ Article came out on this subject shortly after my post.
Mr. Trump should know better than anyone the poisonous impact of partisan impeachment proceedings and should be urging his congressional supporters not to use this tool as Democrats have. Political and philosophical differences are not high crimes or misdemeanors, nor is it treasonous to reach a different interpretation of the Alien Enemies Act of 1798.
For reasons that have nothing to do with the particulars of this case or immigration policy, Mr. Boasberg just so happens to be a disgrace to the federal judiciary.
But this column is aware of no evidence that he committed any crimes. Impeachment is not the answer. The lawfare abuses against Donald Trump may tempt him to give his partisan adversaries a taste of their own medicine, but his duty is to our country.
Addendum 2 Security Bonds
Please consider Trump Memo on Civil Procedure Rules Spawns Confusion and Misinformation
A recent example involving the security bond requirement: a federal case, National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education v. Trump. A group representing college diversity officers sued the Trump administration over an executive order that barred colleges receiving federal funding from promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion programs, seeking a preliminary injunction to temporarily block Trump’s order from taking place.
On February 21, a federal court in Maryland issued the injunction and set a security amount at $0. “Because a bond of the size Defendants appear to seek would essentially forestall Plaintiffs’ access to judicial review,” U.S. District Judge Adam Abelson wrote in his ruling, “the Court will set a nominal bond of zero dollars under Rule 65(c).”
The Trump administration’s memo, issued 13 days after the federal court granted that injunction, disagrees with this reasoning. “Injunctions can cost taxpayers millions or even billions of dollars,” the White House said in a March 6 fact sheet. If courts were to end exceptions for litigation filed on constitutional grounds, the White House argues, that would result in fewer injunctions issued, and more savings for American taxpayers. “Consistent enforcement of this rule is critical to ensuring that taxpayers do not foot the bill for costs or damages caused by wrongly issued preliminary relief by activist judges,” Trump’s memo stated.
However, such enforcement authority does not lie with the executive branch. That rule clearly states that courts determine the security amount. Even if the president disagrees with courts that set that amount to $0, discretion lies with the courts and not the executive branch.
Once again Trump is FOS.
Trump did an EO on this as if he decides.
Legal jackasses take a few words out of context with no understanding of case law.
I repeat. Trump will lose.
Importantly, everyone in their right mind should want Trump to lose. Otherwise the next Democrat King would do the same thing.
Good for you for plainly stating the obvious and standing up for American values, without which we would not even be prosperous. . Please keep commenting on how we are incentivizing every country and every business in the world to pivot away from an untrustworthy, erratic and arbitrary administration so willing to abuse its power, its allies, and its neighbors. It’s now common sense risk management to seek to diversify away from the US and be wary of the dollar.
Guess we know now who is sitting upon his pile of gold, hoping desperately to be right at least once in his life.
I would diversify away from the US because of the $36 trillion debt, over $120 trillion in unfunded liabilities, debt to GDP of 120%, the fact that our tax receipts don’t cover interest and defense spending, but, most of all, because of its weak, pearl-clutching citizens who are more concerned about their feelings than about the country’s rapidly deteriorating finances.
The US debt isn’t 38 trillion. That is just the federal portion. How many trillions more are owed by state governments? Local governments? Only takes any one of them to default to cause a general rise in bond yields or a general downgrade of Munis. Then other debt laden local or state governments might default or be unable to roll over debt and a domino cascade of defaults and market seizures follows. Then that will do what to the USD and the ability to finance the Ponzi scheme known as the US. At that point any niceties of law or court rulings or following the constitution will mean squat. There won’t be any judges wasting time to stop the deportation of illegal gangbangers as the activist judges and gangbangers will be targets of millions of angry people.
Got gold? Got guns? Got a decent conservative community around you?
Good points all. This worries me a lot. It floors me that people don’t see the risk because they so hate Trump and Musk.
Where would a person go?
I have bought real estate in latin america and I can guarantee you one important reality: Your property rights are at least or more tenuous in other countries as they are here.
In many/most other countries that you and I can afford to live in, either as a renter or buyer, there is a sentiment that goes something like this: You, the ‘rich’ american, can afford to be charged more, bilked, defrauded, burgled, home-invaded, and generally swindled out of as much or all of the wealth that you are willing to put at risk..
While the ‘Authorities’ look the other way or actively participate in your agony.
This was learned by 8 years of foreign investment/ownership.
Learn everything you can about any country you plan to invest in before you put your money at risk.
Almost all have drawbacks that will cause a serious investor to balk.
I looked at and traveled multiple times to several..
I was able to avoid the more painful lessons but it was not cheap or easy.
If you cannot afford to expatriate yourself to a safe haven such as Switzerland or Monaco, be very careful before you pile in with your $$.
All I have to do is read the comments to your article to get a good laugh for the day. Let’s face it, Biden was a moron and Trump is in the same class. When I think of those two it reminds me of the movie Dumb and Dumber. While half of the commenters are complaining about the judges you should be complaining about how much common sense does it take to follow the law? I also don’t need an economics degree to understand that Trump’s tariff policy is going to run our economy into the ground. Trump seems to be so bent on doing things that he fails to load his brain before shooting off his mouth. I’m afraid we’re in for a wild ride.
Oh poor baby Robert’s and clique shaking in their robes should have been impeached for rewriting the Affordable Care Act’s slave penalty to a tax for failure to pick a big Pharma insurance plan; but, than again, the Taney Court judges were never legally impeached for signing off on their Dredd Scott return a slave from a free state ruling due to a lack of congressional votes and the popularity of house slaves—like the recent UN judge from Uganda convicted for enjoying a female house slave in merry Old England. . . .
Trump will end winning many of these fights – not because of the EOs, but because of the criminality involved in so many of these organizations.
What USAID was doing was… criminal.
Same with FEMA, HHS, etc.
It was money-laundering on a scale we’ve never seen before.
So they can do it the easy way or the hard way.
I will be that DOJ will find several ways to address these rogue agencies.
And perhaps some Judges.
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/2025/03/19/more-background-on-judge-james-boasberg-the-fight-continues/
Someone awaken me from this nightmare that is the U.S.A. This is NOT my father’s America.
Donald Trump will always overplay his hand. He earned the nickname “Don the Con” for very good reasons. Trump cannot help himself; he will always exaggerate, bend the truth to achieve his ends, flout norms, and operate on the edge or over the edge of laws and regulations so long as he thinks he can get away with it. This can work with a billionaire real estate developer. Still, if we are the country that we say we are, a nation of laws and values, and a country that rejects the idea of being ruled by a King, this type of person will not succeed as the President.
Misleading headline, there was “no warning”
Judicial Coup: Radical Leftist Judges Wage All-Out War Against President Trump and the Nation — 129 Legal Challenges Filed in Two Months, MORE THAN ALL US PRESIDENTS COMBINED!
No cancel culture. Are you sure? https://www.newsweek.com/military-remove-enola-gay-photos-dei-rules-2041029
Roberts expressed his serious doubts regarding obozo-care just days before re-writing the law to make it “constitutionally palatable”.
He then voted to affirm it.
What kind of dirt does the system/blob/establishment have on this man?
It must be really humiliating.
He grovels to sustain the status quo as often as needed.
EVERY TIME.
To John Roberts: Shut The Fu@k Up Already.
This John Roberts?
“Roberts, personally, is just as responsible for this fraud as anyone else — or do you not remember the decision he handed up with the PPACA (Obamacare) in which the Supremes found the law unconstitutional as it was a direct tax and then they rewrote it from the bench, which they have no Constitutional capacity, per the Constitution itself, to do.”
(Quote RE: Karl Denninger post)
No cancel culture. Are you sure? https://www.newsweek.com/military-remove-enola-gay-photos-dei-rules-2041029
Mike Shedlock needs to do homework and not allow the TDS to direct his thinking.
Firstly trying to tie to AOC beyond ridiculous.
Secondly , you don’t have to be at war, do some homework.
Thirdly, these are local judges and if they are allowed to do this then it’s time to get rid of constitution and president and allow judges to run things.
Fourthly, most of these judges have conflict of interest, do some homework.
Fifthly, read article 2 and please stop be so smug, I get that TDS takes you there.
Please state it up front that Trump’s not your guy and your writing will reflect that. I’m okay with that but don’t try and make it look like you’re using reason.
No cancel culture. Are you sure? https://www.newsweek.com/military-remove-enola-gay-photos-dei-rules-2041029
The Dems are fighting against deportations SO HARD that Trump & his National Security Team feel the need to invoke the Alien Enemies Act to do what he was elected to do: deport illegals and TdA are the worst of the worst being protected by the ACLU & activist judges like Boasberg & many others.
Common sense says that judges can be extremly biased and rule according to their own bent. These far left judges appointed by obama and biden are trying to sabatoge the agenda that the American voters voted for. Bringing back to American soil murderers, rapists, drug dealers, sex trafficers, child molesters, ect, ect, ect,. is just plain insane. Trump is no angel, but he does have common sense. What is wrong with these leftists with black robes? well, I’ll tell you,………. they are full of false pride and are more than willing to put the American people at risk just to satisfy their own appitite for power and control. Roberts obviously is lacking “common sense”
What about changing laws those judges uses like ghr impoundment control act of 1974 instead breaking rule of laws?
roberts stepped way outside of his lane. impeachment of a judge is a legal process that is not illegal to bring. just like it is not illegal to be charged with a crime. the process will decide what is right and what is wrong.
roberts has just tainted the supreme court, our rule of law and democracy. shame on him.
Another good commentary from Sean Davis on today’s Real Clear Politics:
https://x.com/seanmdav/status/1902036046180745300
A few years ago, a German “historian” named Richter argued that the Greek Cretan villagers in 1941 were wrong in killing the German parachuters before having safely landed on the ground. He argued that this was a violation of war conventions, and that the Greek government should compensate the Germans for killing the invading Nazi parachuters. That’s what happens when you ignore the intention of the law, and instead you stick to the letter of it.
Trump’s legal adventures prove that the power in the USA is not held by the government, but by the partisan preferences of the Appellate Courts. That’s scarier than a dictatorship.
You do not seem to understand that the very core principle of our legal system has always been the idea of due process and innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. It is well understood that this system prioritizes preventing wrong convictions over the guilty walking free. On a case-by-case basis, this seems to violate common sense, but as a system, our system is the best and most fair legal system in the world. The idea of our system of justice only works when the core principles of that system are respected.
Illegal aliens are not U.S. persons and not subject to the same constitutional protections.
What “due process” rights do illegal aliens have under the Constitution?
P.S. for the “core principles” to be respected, they have to be implemented in a manner worthy of respect.
I suggest that you do a little more research before you make a statement like “Illegal immigrants are not U.S. persons and not subject to the same constitutional protections.” In the context of my comment on due process under the law, all persons on U.S. soil are subject to the legal protections of due process regardless of their citizenship status. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/what-constitutional-rights-do-undocumented-immigrants-have
“It’s one thing to take a court order and try to change what you’re doing in such a way to achieve your objectives. But Trump is just refusing to follow court orders. This is new.”
Hence the moniker: King Chaos the Shit Talker…
On Biden it does not fit; the comparison we should acquit.
Mike, I’m being marked by your site for spamming…not sure why…let me know if possible, thanks.
Woke and anti-woke are two sides of the same BS grifting coin. Culture wars are fucking dumb as shit in my view. They are generally used as a distraction and division tactic to divert attention away from something else or to give the populace a “boogieman” that needs to be slain by their political savior of choice.
That’s 10 extreme to obviously unconstitutional things that Trump has done.
Yes. He wants to be a King.
This is why he was so vehemently opposed by so many.
If Justice Roberts didn’t have senile dementia he would recall that no judge has Constitutional authority to counter a command of the Commander In Chief. Justice Roberts should be impeached for senile dementia and insurrection. Ignorance of the law is no excuse.
This is nonsense drivel.
there are over 1700 unelected federal judges who can each overrule the president and order him what to do.
I’d like to see the video of Old Johnny Robs doing his thang at Epstein Island!
‘THEY’. OWN. HIM.
You been retired too long. Maybe go get a part-time job, keep those gray cells active.
When you move fast and break things, you tend to quickly break stuff. Like laws.
Pull back, regroup and try again. Trump’s childish reaction is not a good look, never has been. But he’s all emotion online, no substance. I guess he believes it’s what we want. I just want the Trump that made his case in a calm rational way to Rogan over three hours, not the sound bite rant orange man.
As for the Boasberg order, it’s utterly embarrassing that you’re defending this judge. He’s an activist judge and Trump & the GOP have every right to seek his impeachment. To act like this activist judge is beyond impeachment is more ludicrous than his ruling. The President is the Commander in Chief, and his number one priority is the safety of American citizens. Removing TdA terrorists should be at the top of everyone’s priority, including the courts. Trump’s invoking the Alien Enemies Act is well within his right as Commander in Chief. Finally, the argument can easily be made that the courts are a far greater impediment to constructive change than the two-party / uniparty system in Congress.
Tren de Aragua (TdA) is a designated Foreign Terrorist Organization with thousands of members, many of whom have unlawfully infiltrated the United States and are conducting irregular warfare and undertaking hostile actions against the United States. TdA operates in conjunction with Cártel de los Soles, the Nicolas Maduro regime-sponsored, narco-terrorism enterprise based in Venezuela, and commits brutal crimes, including murders, kidnappings, extortions, and human, drug, and weapons trafficking. TdA has engaged in and continues to engage in mass illegal migration to the United States to further its objectives of harming United States citizens, undermining public safety, and supporting the Maduro regime’s goal of destabilizing democratic nations in the Americas, including the United States.
Impeachment of this judge won’t happen. The Dems won’t vote for it.
However some of the judges actions might be illegal and he can be prosecuted under RICO for criminal collusion with some of the Dem activist lawyers.
Is the US at war or not?
I say no. And if not, the judge made a defendable ruling.
Mish, was America at war in 1991? 2001? Yes, of course, we were, al beit “undeclared”. These were foreign wars. We are now in a domestic war with what might be approaching 1M illegal aliens out of 25M who are willing & capable of doing harm to the United States once told to do so by the cartels, Russia, Iran, China or even NK.
Go ask the families of the hundreds of thousands of drug overdose, rapes, murders, & other violent crimes if we are at war?
OF COURSE WE ARE AT WAR, MISH!! What part of this do you and Boasberg not get? How far are you willing to go to ignore this FACT, thereby defending these gangs who are here illegally and committing all sorts of hardship, death & destruction for Americans?
In 1798, our enemies didn’t have the capacity to do a clandestine war. Wars evolve along with technology & strategy, Moreover, the United States of America is in a Cold War with China who is funding all sorts of asymmetrical economic, espionage, crime, drugs, etc operations within the borders of the United States. It’s absolutely ludicrous for you or anyone else to act like we’re not at war.
This is the most serious point that can be made. Let’s speculate that Trump’s policies eventually create a recession. Sidebar: we don’t cut the deficit down to a manageable level without causing one or possibly two recessions in the next 7-10 years. So, this means he’ll be voted out of office & replaced by most likely a weak Dem president. That’s when China is going to pounce on Taiwan. So let’s not worry about what happens to Tiawan. We’ve got much bigger problems. Let’s worry about what level of coordination there is between China, Russia, Iran & the cartels.
So here the question that I’m leading to: What level of chaos, death & destruction do you think 10K or more highly motivated & armed illegals from these 4 countries, including TdA, can do here domestically, if coordinated with a Chinese attack on Tiawan? Civilian attacks, attacks on the electrical grid, ground-launched rocket / EMP attack over 2-3 strategic locations in the US? Those are the risks. That’s the asymmetric war we’re fighting against, MISH!
Feel free, along with Baosberg, to keep your head buried in the sand, hoping that the bad guys don’t get together just at the right time.
The statute in question does NOT require a declaration or state of war, that’s just one of the scenarios it allows.
A King or a President also fits a King or a Judge. Judges are making law. Roberts and Barrett had their chance to stop this and turned turtle. A ‘Temporary’ ‘Restraining’ Order is a short term order to STOP an action. It is not a indefinite order to Force things to happen. What would be your plan to overcome an activist Federal Judiciary and reduce Leviathan?
He’s not worried about what the “final outcome” will be. He hates Trump, so all he’s concerned with is yammering endless about how Satan like Trump is.
No cancel culture. Are you sure? https://www.newsweek.com/military-remove-enola-gay-photos-dei-rules-2041029
What about instead removing the impoundment control act of 1974 in congress instead of threating judges who apply it?
So was Biden right and Constitutional when he paid thousands of dollars to 10 million illegals to invade our country? I could give many examples of illegal, corrupt, unconstitutional actions by Biden that have caused irreparable damage to this country. So they got away with flagrant disregard for the law but now we have to dot our I’s and cross our T’s and follow the letter of the law and trust a corrupted Judicial system to save us? How many people think that even Roberts has been compromised? Plenty of talk and “conspiracy theories” out there. Are you sure they are not correct?
I’m not so sure the old rules still apply. I’m not so sure we can trust our “Constitutional” system. One more example- on issues like foreign policy and the possibility of nuclear war do you really trust that the vast majority of the US Congress actually represents the American people? Or perhaps do you think that for whatever reason (ideology, blackmail. bribery, etc) that they may owe their allegiance to a foreign country whose name we all know cannot be mentioned.
Re: “… no one, under any circumstances has the right to determine that a court is wrong and ignore its order.”
I can’t believe a Libertarian would write that! How many freedoms were wrongly given up due to “court orders”, even in just the past 5 years?
Rosa Parks disagrees with you. The Boston Tea Party disagrees with you. The slavery abolitionists disagree. “My body, my choice” disagrees. The list is very, very long.
Everyone, under any circumstances in which a blatant injustice is being done, has both the right and the obligation to stand up against tyranny, no matter the source, but especially if it’s a “legal” one.
Trump, more than most people, will disagree because he’s been lawfared for 8 years running. He knows very deeply that biased courts make unjust rulings far too often.
I think Trump is quite right to challenge the system and to pressure where he can for long-needed reforms. There need to be stricter limits to both executive AND judicial authority.
Yawn, another disappointed hypocrite.
Who declared you to be God and the ultimate decider of a “blatant injustice being done”? Or are you just another fooled J6 protestor?
“to stand up against tyranny”? LOL Trump still thinks he’s heading up the “Apprentice” and wants to fire a judge that won’t bend a knee. Trump can’t wait 2 weeks for the TRO to be examined by a legal appellate court. The Constitution set up all three branches of the government. Thinking you don’t have to answer to the branch that interprets the law, that’s not tyranny?
federal district judges are not an equal branch
First, you are wrong; federal district courts are a part of the judiciary branch set up by Article III of the Constitution: https://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/court-role-and-structure
Second, your argument is specious in its conclusion. That’s like saying Homan can’t deport people even though he is the head of an executive branch agency. Only Trump can physically deport people himself because he is the President?
The Boston Tea party started an insurrection. Not many succeed. But it was not legal under British Law.
Under our Constitution, no one has the right to ignore a judge.
And cases can legally be appealed. There are provisions for emergency appeal.
Legislators and judges are not gods.
An essential part of the “rule of law” is that when a law is not serving a useful purpose and needs to be challenged, people do challenge it. This often includes defiance of court orders by those willing to accept the consequences.
A Brief List of Citizen Challenges to Unjust Laws and Court Orders in the past 100 years:
Evading Prohibition.
Draft dodging.
Fragging.
Pursuit of Abortion rights and abortion prohibitions.
Medical marijuana.
Assisted suicide for the terminally ill.
Protesting against segregation.
Title 9 rights for biological women.
COVID vaccine mandates.
Protest-riots against perceived police bias.
Deliberate violation of artificially low speed limits.
Abetting Illegal immigration.
As I wrote above, the list goes on and on…
You forgot a few big ones for your list:
Wife beaters
Neo-Nazis
J6 Protestors…
All these people also think “An essential part of the “rule of law” is that when a law is not serving a useful purpose and needs to be challenged…”
Your argument is a red herring as in this particular case, Trump doesn’t even want the legal process to start to see if the law is serving a useful purpose. If it goes all the way through the Supreme Court with the same determination, he can ask his Republican Congress to create any immigration policy he wants.
The stark reality is that democrats are using the legal system to thwart democracy. You know democracy, it is what democrats claim they are defending.
With well over 500 federal judges, a handful can block a presidents agenda and while there is a legal process, it is way to slow to counter how democrats are using the legal system.
It seems that we no longer have 3 branches of government. Rather just 1 and that branch reaches conclusions at a snails pace.
The stark reality is the law like the impoundment control act of 1974 favor the democrats. The right way is to remove such laws and not to threat the legal system for applying them.
What about the poor saps who are not part of one of these gangs but are now in foreign jail. Was there ever any proper review of these individuals. (One was supposed a barber from Columbia whose family has stated he was never part of the gang. But he does have tattoos so I guess that’s enough to a jail with no prospect for judicial review).
As someone already said, impeachment of a judge is a legal process. You may disagree with the way it is applied, but there’s nothing illegal about impeachment proceedings by Congress.
With respect to birthright citizenship, I think the whole point of the executive order is to force SCOTUS to consider the merits of an alternative interpretation. It is clear from history that legal precedents are not set in stone – SCOTUS has reversed its decisions before. If President Trump looses, then fine. But the whole point is to try.
It’s a waste of time. But yes, it’s legal.
Do you really want the Senate tied up in this for perhaps months going after numerous judges or would you rather have the Senate focus on a budget?
A better process would be to remove laws like the impoundment control act of 1974 instead of threatning judges for applying it.
Roberts was clearly talking about Judge Boasberg who has been an integral (conspiratorial) part of the lawfare against Trump for years. Since these cases are all likely to go to SCOTUS, is Roberts going to recuse himself for having prejudicially commented on a pending case? Probably not. Because he’s a dick. As far as the propriety of Trump calling for Boasberg’s impeachment, it’s totally acceptable. The constitution lays out who can be impeached and how. It’s entirely a political decision. And as for Boasberg’s ridiculous ruling, Sean Davis laws it out in black and white:
https://x.com/seanmdav/status/1902018329943917037?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1902018329943917037%7Ctwgr%5E52260e1f994a0bc47baef5aa05bd5275bad688e8%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Frantingly.com%2F
Do not overlook Judge Boasberg let off the Federal Attorney Clinesmith who falsified e-mail evidence to create the FISA spying on the Trump campaign. No jail, not even a license suspension. Nothing.
“By the book” the 9/11 terrorists were able to achieve their goals. Up to the point of taking over the planes, they had committed no crime. Law is an art, not an exact science. So is politics. That’s why those deported criminals had received more money from the U.S. taxpayers than the recent hurricane victims.
“By the book”… probably means that they should have been kept here, and the president should have sent an anti-terrorist unit to kill them on sight.
I agree that by the book works best when you have to fire people, but violent crime is a different discipline.
The law was made to serve man. Man was not made to serve the law.
Our southern border was a leaky gut which flooded our country with dangerous gangs and terrorists. Judge Boasberg wants them bock.
Maybe he’s on the take with the Cartels?
If it is found that one of the Federal District Judges overstepped their authority, they should be summarily and administratively removed from office, not impeached.
Did judges Boasberg and Mary McCord, FISC judges, approved Trump’s intelligence surveillance ??
You know it, baby. Mary McCord isn’t a judge but she is a CIA operative, married to Sheldon Snook – clerk for Justice Roberts and probable source for the leak of the Dobbs decision that brought agitators to justices’ homes to coerce them to change their minds. Mary McCord was the nexus in all of the Russigate/ law fare efforts in Trump 1.0. She’s in the fine tradition of James W McCord, Watergate burglar and CIA operative, toppling governments at home and abroad.
Trump’s move is not the system “We, the People” ordained and established as the US Constitution. I find it disgusting and horrifying to rile the people up against a judge who I must assume is, in good faith, trying to discharge his duties. The question is not, do I agree or disagree with Trump’s aims, it is, rather, can he leapfrog over the Constitution to get there?
If the Prez gets this empowered, wouldn’t that be terrible from his party’s view, if the next one is the other party? These folks are willing to go all in to burn the family furniture in a permanent way, for temporary expedients.
It’s less that he’s riling up the people than that he’s waking them up to a judge who knowingly disregarded Supreme Court precedent of Ludecke v Watkins.
My gosh, thanks for a common sense reply.
Since Roberts offered his unsolicited opinion, does he speak for the entire court? Or do the other 8 justices get to weigh in separately?
And more to the point, are we to believe that he is capable of being impartial when this case and others like it are being heard? Roberts has entered the political fray. He deserves to be impeached for such disregard for his role as fair arbiter.
My gosh what a jackass comment you made Sentient.
Roberts:
“For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision,” Roberts said Tuesday in a statement. “The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose.”
True statement
And Trump is attacking judges because he does not like the ruling. Period!
I believe it would be unanimous.
For OBVIOUS reasons
People who can build great companies and send rockets to space stations to rescue astronauts that the previous bogus president refused to bring home because he was a vapid underachiever. People who can’t become judges.
What else should one do in response to lawless behavior on the part of a judge?
They are not high priests, the only ones who can gaze into “the mysteries” of the law. They are stinking politicians in robes. They are as unaccountable as any power existing in the US oligarchy.
What was lawless?
The Judge made a decision the US is not at war.
Is that ridiculous?
What is lawless is breaching the impoundment control act without removing it in congress (the act that prohibit impoundment).
“John Marshall has made his decision now let him enforce it,” Andrew Jackson
Andrew Jackson was seen as authoritarian in his own time, hence the whig party.
A radical Federal judge can be brought to congress either to impeach him, or humiliate him in public, especially if he is a corrupt judge who took bribes. A senate 2/3 vote has to confirm it. Bring a few invincible dems judges to stop the lawsuits avalanche. This process has nothing to do with the Supreme Court. Chief justice Roberts: mind your own business.
This is his business. Trump is attacking the court!
It’s not Trump’s invention for movants demanding a TRO to post a bond. In Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 65. Injunctions and Restraining Orders
…
(c) Security. The court may issue a preliminary injunction or a temporary restraining order only if the movant gives security in an amount that the court considers proper to pay the costs and damages sustained by any party found to have been wrongfully enjoined or restrained. The United States, its officers, and its agencies are not required to give security.
The system is being gamed. I practiced law for 45 years and have seen activist judges come and go. Boasberg is swimming in ultra vires waters (short translation is that he has no authority) and Roberts is getting ahead of his headlights. Impeachment is a political and constitutional remedy. Probably won’t succeed because of the 60% vote, but it would make great drama to expose truly partisan judges. Boasberg was a FISA judge who failed to sanction the FBI bad actors. That is not blind justice which is supposed to treat all alike.
Exactly right. Mish, as usual, opines on a subject neither he nor his legal minded friend have a clue. A bond is required to pay for damage suffered as a result of the improper injunction. The damages that the government will sustain if the injunctions are overturned will be enormous. Who should pay for it? I suggest the judges be personally liable for any amounts not collectable from the plaintiffs.
You are are clueless. …
a recent example involving the security bond requirement: a federal case, National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education v. Trump. A group representing college diversity officers sued the Trump administration over an executive order that barred colleges receiving federal funding from promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion programs, seeking a preliminary injunction to temporarily block Trump’s order from taking place. On February 21, a federal court in Maryland issued the injunction and set a security amount at $0. “Because a bond of the size Defendants appear to seek would essentially forestall Plaintiffs’ access to judicial review,” U.S. District Judge Adam Abelson wrote in his ruling, “the Court will set a nominal bond of zero dollars under Rule 65(c).”
a recent example involving the security bond requirement: a federal case, National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education v. Trump. A group representing college diversity officers sued the Trump administration over an executive order that barred colleges receiving federal funding from promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion programs, seeking a preliminary injunction to temporarily block Trump’s order from taking place. On February 21, a federal court in Maryland issued the injunction and set a security amount at $0. “Because a bond of the size Defendants appear to seek would essentially forestall Plaintiffs’ access to judicial review,” U.S. District Judge Adam Abelson wrote in his ruling, “the Court will set a nominal bond of zero dollars under Rule 65(c).”
You’re not right about everything… the deportation of the Venezuelans was non unconstitutional, the judge was out of order. There does need to be some action taken about activist judges, but it needs to be done by the judiciary working with the legislature, not by the executive.
Trump’s not doing anything. He’s just saying what should be done. And he’s right, Boasberg should be impeached. Mish thinks it’s some badge of rectitude to side with sanctimonious establishment types like Romney who clutch their ascots and gasp “well – I never !” at Trump’s plain speech. Boasberg has long been a corrupt judge.
C’mon man. Roberts is totally compromised.
Let’s look at the facts. Roberts appointed Boasberg to be the Chief FISA Judge. When did that occur. It occurred after Roberts Chief of Staff (Snook) resigned. And why did he resign? Because he likely was the culprit who released the Dobbs decision. And who is Snook married to? Mary McCord. And who is Mary McCord. She was Boasberg’s Amicus on the FISA court. Prior to thst she was at the heart of all the lawfare against Trump. She was also a key Obama advisor. .
Boasberg has the goods on Roberts. He knows about the leak. He likely knows many other things. Including illegal adoptions and Epstein connections. And he knows that from Mary McCord. Who got her info from her husband.
Let’s deal with reality. Roberts has no business sticking his nose in the issue. He’s defending a judge that has the goods on him. It’s not his place to comment on whether impeachment is proper or not. That’s up to Congress.
The Judiciary is the weakest link. They have no real enforcement power. They have no army. They don’t control any of the levers of authority.
All they have is their credibility and it has evaporated.
The Administration should begin resisting immediately.
Bringing out Homan more frequently would work wonders. Let him explain to the American people the character of these animals he is deporting.
Then let these freaks of Judges go about doing their academic analysis.
Homan is a delusional old man fighting the last war.
For such an Old guy he is certainly kicking ass.
Preparations for midterms are underway and those thwarting last elections will of the people, continue to be exposed.
Oh, you want the illegal aliens who are rapists and murderers to stay. What last war? Do you know who Homan is?
The last war was Afghanistan, and we all know how Brandon ended that one. The difference between the Biden & Trump administrations regarding national security is night & day.
Biden’s 50% time spent on vacation tells us everything we need to know about how sh!tty of a president he was.
Exactly! This Homan guy expelling illegal aliens when that is his job is unacceptable. Didn’t he watch what happened under the celery stick all of the illegals ‘surge to the border’ as celery stick asked? Homan has to do better. Just watch more video of Headboard Harris as border czar to see how it’s done. And then watch Mayorkas, chief of the border czar and how he tapdanced. That’s what Homan should be doing, amirite?
I’m not so sure, Scott…everything about him seems as serious as a heart attack.
Tom Homan belongs in the Graybar Hotel. For a good long time.
The FISA court confirm intelligent surveillance. Judge Boasberg is a juicy target.
DC is a disgusting nest of traitors whose #1 priority is preserving DC’s power and privilege, the voters be damned!
“No army”?
I thought you were a lawyer (of some basic type). Have you not heard of the 2nd Amendment? The rightful and correct Judiciary has the “militia” of citizens ready to defend the country against despots!
Go hard, 2A
OMFG. I did not know that Roberts Chief of Staff was married to Mary McCord, one of the most evil people on earth and a prime mover to destroy the legal system. That is fantastical all on its own
That makes me respect Roberts even less. And he is already at zero in my book.
Eric’s comment nailed it better than anyone. It should be elevated and pinned as the top comment. Mish, did you know all the facts Eric brought up? Did you know that Boasberg let Clinesmith off with a slap on the wrist? If not, you should start rethinking your entire view of the U.S. government.
Another conspiracy-theory-ridden hypocrite.
This sounds eerily similar to the Democrats trying to take down Clarence Thomas because his wife Ginni is a Bible-thumping advocate for religious organizations that appear before the Court, after she makes sure Clarence shows up for their judicial decision in a really good mood LOL
Please, bring back killers, rapists and terrorists as his majesty judgeship decrees.
It is only right.
If a person wanted to destroy whatever confidence American people might have had just keep on with the Ruse that there is a functioning judicial system that exists to protect civilians right to Life, Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness.
Great article. It seems sometimes that we are all turning crazy. The schools and colleges are really doing a poor job.
Sanity arises from the SCOTUS chair …
What next? Will Elon’s GROK AI name Elon as America’s
greatest distributor of misinformation?
Oh No… et tu GROK?
(Tesla to sub 200 in two trading days)
Karoline Leavitt spills the beans:
Trump’s DOJ are focused on ‘fighting law and order’.
Boasberg’s wife and daughter are both being reported as employed by or working with NGOs that provide services to illegal aliens. We need further exploration of all facts of this. If true, he should have recused himself.
Sure, but he should also be impeached for knowingly disregarding Supreme Court precedent in Ludecke v Watkins that established that a president’s expulsion orders under the Alien Enemy Act of 1798 are not even subject to judicial review.
Wow! Thank-you. I am sure you are not the only one thinking this way.
A few cracks are starting to show.
Hello ! Is anyone here old enough to remember Nixon and (gasp!) a constitutional crisis? When much US geopolitics was managed by some unelected guy with a German accent? How about skipping past Congress properly declaring war – by a President who was the product of a corrupt political machine. Vulgarity? Coarseness? How about a past President who was racist, used the N-word and whipped out his :Jumbo” to make a point? I Can Go On…… I’m not all that worried.
When he steps over that line and chooses to ignore the courts, that will be full-on dictatorship. This would be no surprise. He’s never been accountable for anything, he plays with the board like we are all his game pieces, and he has tried over and over again to double-down and push to see just how much resistance he will experience from the Americans he hates so much and feel we should be happy to make him our king.
Normally I’d agree but the pendulum as need whip hard the other way. Impeachment is political process, just like the appointment of most of these judges. There is only one court in the Constitution, the rest can come and go.
Is Roberts going to rule it unconstitutional remove a judge by legal means? How about when DC courts get “adjusted” by Congress? “Inappropriate” only begins to describe the backroom dealings which they partake. DC is a 90%+ Democrat-party-based Capitol that is still trying to rule over us, not for us. Root it out I say.