Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bondi: “will no longer defend” the removal restrictions in court or in litigation regarding Administrative Law Judges.
Conservitive Brief ^ | 2/23/25 | Jon Dougherty

Posted on 02/23/2025 11:25:58 AM PST by MrZippy2k

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-30 next last

1 posted on 02/23/2025 11:25:58 AM PST by MrZippy2k
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: MrZippy2k

ALJs are the enforcers of deep state petty tyranny .

This may end up being one of the more significant and under appreciated reforms the Trump Admin has made so far


2 posted on 02/23/2025 11:33:32 AM PST by rdcbn1 (TV )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrZippy2k

“Bondi told conservative influencer and podcaster Benny Johnson that President Trump “has given a very strong directive, and that’s going to be followed.””

Way to go BENNY!

https://www.youtube.com/bennyjohnson


3 posted on 02/23/2025 11:37:32 AM PST by faucetman (Just the facts, ma'am, Just the facts )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrZippy2k

Can someone please translate this into layman’s terms?
There’s a lot of negatives upon negatives here.


4 posted on 02/23/2025 11:45:17 AM PST by Eccl 10:2 (Prov 3:5 --- "Trust in the Lord with all your heart, and lean not on your own understanding")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrZippy2k; rdcbn1; faucetman
Here is the letter I send to papers and commentators annually now.

Supreme Court 9, Administrative State 0

On April 14, 2023, the Supreme Court struck a blow supporting our Constitution and individual liberties. Beginning in the late nineteenth century, citizens began losing many freedoms through administrative edicts. Appeals of these regulations had to be made to courts within an agency, which has already found the people guilty. Such power harks back to discretions of English kings unrestrained by Parliament found in such places as King’s Council and the Star Chamber.

The Supreme Court acted to reassert the jurisdiction of district and circuit courts and the legislature as established by the Constitution. All power was to reside there, so Americans could avoid the sad experience of English citizens. Justice Kagan delivered the unanimous opinion of the court saying, “One respondent attacks as well the combination of prosecutorial and adjudicatory functions in a single agency….They maintain in essence that the agencies as currently structured, are unconstitutional in much of their work”.

You and I could relate too many examples of people’s frustrating experiences facing government bureaucrats. Their sufferings cause me to reflect on a passage where Fredrick Douglass describes overseer duties. I only substituted for the words slave, overseer, and master.

“No matter how innocent a citizen might be it availed him nothing when accused by the bureaucrat of any violation of a regulation. To be accused was to be convicted and to be convicted was to be punished….To escape punishment was to escape accusation….few citizens had the fortune to do either under the overseership of the agency.”

Supreme Court 9, Administrative State 0

https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/4145682/posts

The History and Danger of Administrative Law

https://constitutionclub.wordpress.com/2014/10/01/the-history-and-danger-of-administrative-law/

5 posted on 02/23/2025 11:46:25 AM PST by Retain Mike ( Sat Cong)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eccl 10:2

As near as I can tell, unelected judges have wrapped themselves in regulations that aren’t laws and aren’t constitutional to protect themselves. Trump and Bondi are removing those regulations and removing the judges that think they can stop Trump.


6 posted on 02/23/2025 11:56:44 AM PST by EandH Dad (sleeping giants wake up REALLY grumpy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: MrZippy2k

most excellent.


7 posted on 02/23/2025 12:22:52 PM PST by GreatRoad ('In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act' )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrZippy2k

Constitution the enemy of the Marxists and Communists.


8 posted on 02/23/2025 12:35:20 PM PST by Vaduz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EandH Dad
Trump and Bondi are removing those regulations and removing the judges that think they can stop Trump.

I don't think Trump and Bondi now have the power to remove judges. Unfortunately, that still requires impeachment in the House with a simple majority and subsequent remove via the Senate with a 2/3 vote to remove.

I believe the 'regulations' that have been removed were serving to make it difficult or prevent impeachment and removal by Congress.

9 posted on 02/23/2025 12:40:27 PM PST by JesusIsLord
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: MrZippy2k

The decision follows growing frustration within the Trump administration over [ludicrous] judicial roadblocks to its executive actions.

There fixed it.


10 posted on 02/23/2025 12:43:17 PM PST by TalBlack (Their god is government. Prepare for a religious war.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JesusIsLord

These are judges operating in federal agencies IOW not judicial branch


11 posted on 02/23/2025 12:44:43 PM PST by AppyPappy (If Hitler were alive today and criticized Trump, would he still be Hitler?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: AppyPappy
These are judges operating in federal agencies IOW not judicial branch.

My misunderstanding. Thanks for the clarification!

12 posted on 02/23/2025 12:46:57 PM PST by JesusIsLord
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: JesusIsLord

Phew. I was afraid you were going to ask me to make it make sense.


13 posted on 02/23/2025 1:03:13 PM PST by AppyPappy (If Hitler were alive today and criticized Trump, would he still be Hitler?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Eccl 10:2

It is the prohibition of prohibitive/restrictive/proscriptive injunctions.


14 posted on 02/23/2025 1:15:14 PM PST by Migraine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: EandH Dad

thank you


15 posted on 02/23/2025 1:17:46 PM PST by Karoo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: EandH Dad

Very good.


16 posted on 02/23/2025 1:35:17 PM PST by tumblindice (America's founding fathers: all armed conservatives)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: JesusIsLord
AJLs are generally considered Article II (Executive) judges, not Article III (Judicial) judges.

AJL's must be appointed by the president or by heads of departments. Senate advise\consent is not needed.

Couple of decent articles about how we got here with a definitions about removal and it doesn't seem to be by impeachment:

"Under U.S. law, a federal agency may take action against or remove an administrative law judge “only for good cause established and determined by the Merit Systems Protection Board on the record after opportunity for hearing before the Board. ”

https://www.ntd.com/job-protection-rules-for-administrative-law-judges-are-unconstitutional-says-doj_1049210.html

https://www.courthousenews.com/supreme-court-set-to-review-presidents-power-to-fire-agency-judges/

For instance, AJL's for immigration are appointed by the AG.

Since DOJ is no longer going to defend the shielding law layers for ALJs upon removal, I wonder if Pres. Trump will now start firing them and let somebody sue...taking it ultimately to SCOTUS if needed ?

Should be interesting...and I'm fresh out of popcorn
17 posted on 02/23/2025 1:53:02 PM PST by stylin19a ( If you think it's hard to meet new people, try picking up the wrong golf ball)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: stylin19a

Good post.

I think that is the plan.

It makes sense—if the judges are in the executive branch the President should be able to remove them at will.

It would probably be easier to just fire all of them at once—save the taxpayers money with just one court case.

Lol.


18 posted on 02/23/2025 1:59:59 PM PST by cgbg (The Democrat Party is a criminal enterprise.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: cgbg

arg...AJLs should be ALJs


19 posted on 02/23/2025 2:04:09 PM PST by stylin19a ( If you think it's hard to meet new people, try picking up the wrong golf ball)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Migraine

“It is the prohibition of prohibitive/restrictive/proscriptive injunctions.”

Have you even TRIED say that out loud??? I’m still dealing with tongue cramps.


20 posted on 02/23/2025 2:11:22 PM PST by egfowler3 (COVID-19, today's Hypochondriacal psychosis (aka: Delusional parasitosis))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-30 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson