Posted on 02/12/2025 8:27:40 AM PST by Red Badger
Activist judges across the nation have launched an all-out war against President Donald Trump’s constitutional authority, continuously blocking and interfering with his administration’s efforts to enhance national security and eliminate bureaucratic waste.
These unelected leftist judges—many appointed by Obama, Biden and other radical Democrats—have weaponized the judiciary, twisting the Constitution to fit their anti-Trump agenda.
Recently, over five federal judges issued temporary injunctions against President Trump’s executive orders, including measures to freeze government spending, dismiss ineffective civil servants, and restrict birthright citizenship.
These activist judges are imposing their personal political biases over the clear mandate given to the President by the electorate.
According to a detailed breakdown of the U.S. government’s structure under the Constitution, the executive branch, led by the President, is designed to enforce laws and manage the operations of federal agencies, including those within the Executive Office of the President, like the Office of Management and Budget, and the 15 executive departments, like the Department of Treasury and the Department of Education.
Vance responded to the ongoing travesties on Sunday with a perfect analogy. Drawing on both his military experience and legal background, he noted what would happen if a judge tried to sabotage a general or an attorney general from performing their legal duties.
“If a judge tried to tell a general how to conduct a military operation, that would be illegal,” Vance wrote. “If a judge tried to command the attorney general in how to use her discretion as a prosecutor, that’s also illegal.”
“Judges aren’t allowed to control the executive’s legitimate power,” he concluded.
(Excerpt) Read more at thegatewaypundit.com ...
Again, NUKE THE UNCONSTITUTIONAL PORTION OF THE FEDERAL GOV'T!
Thank you!
BKMK
INDEPENDENT ESTABLISHMENTS AND GOVERNMENT CORPORATIONS: African Development Foundation
The United States is 36 trillion dollars in debt.
ALL government owned ‘corporations’ should be dismantled or sold................
Bondi should order the arrest of the judges!!
Here’s the Organization Chart That Exposes How Unelected Activist Judges Are Undermining the Role of Each Branch of Government
Please help me out here. I just don’t see how this org chart does anything to explain how judges are undermining the Administration. It may show that they are ursurping the role of the Administration so far as some things are concerned but it does not show how they are “undermining” the administration. They are just doing that and the org chart has nothing to do with the how.
Though these black-robed crows don’t justify their restraining orders the one thing that Trump appears to be in violation of in at least most instances of freezing or blocking or withdrawing funding is the Impoundments clause of the Congressional Budget Act. The CBA of 1974 took away most of the Administraions ability to control spending. Sure, it provides that the Administration can appeal to Congress to withdraw appropriation but that has never been done.
Biden showed how it is done. Ignore them. Use the Obama “Pen and Phone” doctrine.
The inferior Courts are subservient to the Supreme Court.
They have no business telling the Executive Branch or the Legislative Branch how to run their respective branches.
If this continues, then there will come a time when the lowest court in the land will order the Congress to pass or not pass a bill.............
None of the money in USAID came from a congressional budget or any specific aid appropriation. There has not been a congressional budget for over a decade now.
.
I have considered that argument as well and even suggested it, I believe, in these pages saying that the Congress needs to clean up their own violation of law before they accuse another for similar. Also that, as you say, these funds, none of them resulting from the long string of Continuing Resolutions actually constitute regular authorizations and appropriations. They now exist as part of an irregular stop-gap procedure never meant to be permanent.
How do you see the funds at USAID as not being congressionally appropriated? Most funds now that are not discretionary are never authorized but merely appropriated in the omnibus budget that was authorized sometime long-long ago and that simply gets increased year-by-year by the CBO according to their version of inflation and growth.
I gather it is much easier and more common to have appropriation without authorization but that the assumption is it would seldom be done.
Whether these various funds are subject to terms of Impoundement will be for the court to decide I think.
Management of our government is a mess. The rules of Congress are like many bad contracts; structured for advantages to someone and the framework for litigation not meant to be clear, concise and unassailable. People determined to be honest really don’t need rules or contracts.
I understand the position of the inferior courts and that the Legislative branch they and all courts are part of is separate but equal to the Administrative branch. Upon appeal by anyone who thinks the law has been broken are they not authorized and required to act on violation of the law / Constitution? The question to me is not of their authority but the absence of their good sense. not every complaint by anyone is due consideration as some are so obviously foolish that they justify being ignored and dismissed out of hand.
It would be much better if those who have a beef to state it and the legal grounds for it first instead of running to the court. The freeze they have imposed by doing that is no less questionable than the freeze Trump has executed. In fact it is probably more questionable than what Trump is doing now. At least in my opinion.
What the court stomps on in all respects is the Administrations right to freeze / suspend funds until they can get a handle on what is right and what is wrong. In other words, when in a hole stop digging. That is a management prerogative that is obvious it would seem. What clouds that premise is how DOGE is either reporting itself or being mad out to be doing and that is cutting funds without authorization in view of the Impoundments clause of the Congressional Budget Act.
What else seems to be completely within the land of the Administration and DOGE is to review activities. Indeed, it is their obligation to do so and report their findings. In many cases it is also their obligation to make correction.
At least a few things have been blown out of proportion, probably intentionally:
1. Return to the office. The Administration’s right to require.
2. The “Fork in the Road” memo. A generous offer in lieu of termination for cause to those who have decided to not return to the office. It had to be made to all employees under labor law but it is specifically for those who don’t like to work at the office.
3. The Administration can terminate of any agency not created by Congress. It probably can’t reorganize or eliminate any agency that is created by Congress. Many choose to simply ignore either side of these conditions.
4. The Administration can change any policy just as Congress can change rules they create for fulfilling their Constitutional duties. Compliance with the Constitution does not specify how it is done including things like policy, number of people to do the job, what you name buildings, what is in websites or is not in web sites and most assuredly whether or not you have a DEI policy, training, image or anything of the sort. The only thing the Constitution says is that you can’t discriminate when it comes to hiring. That sounds like merit is just fine to me. In fact, anything else is not permitted.
5. If the Administration thinks it is best for the Department of Agriculture to be in Kansas City and there are funds appropriated for that they can do it. Move Department of Interior to Utah or BLM, fine.
In Reinventing Government, Clinton and Gore had a full review made of all agencies. It was done to agencies by people from other agencies. They identified, often wrongly, something like 340,000 positions to eliminate and a year after the study was done the pink slips went out. Cutting the size of government has been done before with almost no notice or comment. Trump is withing his rights and obligation since he was elected on this as one item of his platform to reduce the size of government and to root out waste, fraud and abuse. It seems that Congress, the Legislative Branch, and the Judicial branch would enthusiastically support that effort since it is the will of the people and their job to make that happen.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.