Posted on 04/11/2025 8:05:18 PM PDT by lovingliberty1965
So since all the Democrats have been doing is having federal judges keep trying to stall and delay Trump, I have q question here:
We know at least some Federal judges are on Trump's side, so why not use the tactic of every time an anti-Trump judge says blah blah blah, any one of the pro-Trump judges can simply say "Well, the ruling of that judge is wrong and Trump is actually allowed to do this and that" and then all the White House has to do is just simply side with the Judge on their team.
Simply put, you just have a judge counter the other one and Trump can just say he is following the latter judge since there is no law that says he MUST follow the former, since if his critics claim that the former judge's ruling is valid, then the latter ones ALSO must at least be equally valid.
Because judges hold people in contempt of court, which can include fines or jail time. Even if POTUS is exempt from such penalties, other’s in the executive branch may not be, and don’t want to find out later they can be punished. The best option is for Congress to act to limit the jurisdiction of these courts, or require three judge panels to hear such cases to avoid the forum shopping for leftist Rat judges.
“Because judges hold people in contempt of court”
Understood though my argument means that we have another judge saying Trump is OK to do what he is doing, so even if the former judge claims contempt, the other pro trump judge can claim the opposite, and could even claim to hold that former judge in contempt
Judges can’t rule without a case in front of them. The cases are filed by those who are against Trump’s policies. To get a case in front of a non-liberal judge you’d have to have somebody file suit in a different court saying they are harmed by the Trump administration obeying the other judge’s order. But it takes time to file those lawsuits, and by the time that was done an appeals court will most likely hear the original case anyway.
Looks to me like judges avoid undermining another judge. That keeps all judges in high esteem. Judges protect power they love to have. If judges start disparaging or disagreeing with each other, they will lose respect and power. This explains why Chief Justice supported the district judge.
Because people who understand nothing about the legal system cannot just fantasize childish solutions to a Constitutional system.
Without wasting too much time on this nonsense, Trump does not control the “Trump judges” or any judges.
No one can coordinate the selection of judges so Trump cannot “pick” a pro Trump judge every time another judge rules against him.
And district court decisions get appealed to the circuit courts and the Supreme Court, so no one can control how long either side’s decision can last.
Plus there is no system by which Trump can simply order up an opposite decision, and then decide which one to follow. It doesn’t work that way.
“Judges can’t rule without a case in front of them”
Are you sure? It seems every one of these judges IMMEDIATELY rules as soon as Trump does something, with no time given for someone to submit a case, these judges seem to be acting on their own
No, there are cadres of lawyers pouncing on everything Trump does and bringing the lawsuits before judges whom they already know are on their side. American Oversight is one such organization.
Trump can just hand out presidential pardons, like party favors.
We can play their petty political game.
True! ...and they cannot make blanket national rulings. Chief Justice John Roberts needs to be putting a wrench in these gears - and he may be doing so. Congress can intervene and pass a law curtailing judicial power. 😂😂😂
I have messaged Prez Trump on TS and suggested he nominate Justices Alito or Thomas as Chief Justice. As far as I know that has never been done before - moving a CJ to the back bench (not removing him from his bench guaranteed for life) and replacing him with another already seated justice.
So let's try it! Of course the Senate would have to approve the nomination.
Can’t disagree, however “federal” judges were never a co-equal branch of the government like the SC is supposed to be…
This is obviously not true for the Democrats. They seem to invariably find a judge to make a ruling against the Trump administration, when there is no basis in law or jurisdiction for that ruling.
“Because people who understand nothing about the legal system cannot just fantasize childish solutions to a Constitutional system.”
We are already witnessing right now more than a Marxist fantasy...it is a Marxist wet dream.
We no longer have a legal system that by and large adheres to the LAW.
The law and the courts only works if everybody respects and recognizes their “assumed” role as a finder of facts, a renderer of opinions, and a fair arbitrator of rights.
With 1/2 the judges being godless weaponized heathen that render baseless rulings that are convenient to their Marxist cause....the Right may at some point hoist the black flag and start slitting throats.
“They have rendered their opinions, now let them enforce it.” or so some have said.
Since when does ANY part of the Judicial branch, including the Supreme Court, have the authority to tell the Executive branch what to do or how to do it? Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution plainly says it does not. We are GUARANTEED a “Republican” form of government. This means that we get to elect people to represent our intentions and if we don’t like what they do, we can replace them at the next election. Judges, with lifetime appointments cannot meet this standard and in no way, shape, or form be allowed to control our intentions. The Judicial branch gets a voice. That’s all it gets. Without enforcement capability, it’s just an opinion. Without respect for that opinion, it’s nothing at all. Their current path is destroying that respect.
one side plays by the rules
the other does not
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.