Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

President Trump Signs EO That He Will IGNORE All Lower Court Rulings Until SCOTUS Rules on the Constitutionality of Activist Judges
Geller Report.com ^ | 3/12/2025 | Pamela Geller

Posted on 03/12/2025 7:44:27 PM PDT by Beave Meister

Trump signs EO stating that he will IGNORE all lower court rulings until SCOTUS rules on the Constitutionality of activist Judges attempting to usurp Executive power.

(Excerpt) Read more at gellerreport.com ...


TOPICS: Chit/Chat
KEYWORDS: activistjudges; badbehavior; bullshit; djt; donaldtrump; eo; executiveorder; fakenews; geller; gellerrport; getagrippeople; gulliblefreepers; judges; judgewatch; judicialoverreach; nottrue; pamelageller; pamgeller; presidenttrump; scotus; tds; thedonald; trump
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-130 next last
To: Beave Meister

It’s BS. The Federal Register is up to date and there is no EO referring to this.

The Geller Report just became dead to me.


81 posted on 03/13/2025 5:12:52 AM PDT by EQAndyBuzz (Privatize the administrative state!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Beave Meister

the point is the district judges need to stay in their lane

congress can do it

USSC can do it


82 posted on 03/13/2025 5:19:18 AM PDT by joshua c
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DesertRhino

“Dammit, I told before ....it’s chigroes!”

Well, now my coffee is everywhere.


83 posted on 03/13/2025 5:30:53 AM PDT by bk1000 (Banned from Breitbart)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: EQAndyBuzz

Perhaps it was just said in the context of being wishful thinking.

Not a bad idea. This actually is a real Constitutional crisis created by the democrat party and deep state as it keeps the elected POTUS from being able to exercise the agenda voters wanted.


84 posted on 03/13/2025 5:39:18 AM PDT by dforest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Bruce Campbells Chin

Figures you would side with the enemy.


85 posted on 03/13/2025 5:41:37 AM PDT by central_va (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Repeal The 17th

However, it should be true.


86 posted on 03/13/2025 5:43:14 AM PDT by central_va (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers
Wouldn’t stand up in court and the SCOTUS would not back Trump on this.

LOL. Right. So keep bending over and taking it. Loser....

87 posted on 03/13/2025 5:44:15 AM PDT by central_va (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: dforest

“This actually is a real Constitutional crisis created by the democrat party and deep state as it keeps the elected POTUS from being able to exercise the agenda voters wanted.”

At worst, if Trump does ignore the federal courts it becomes an optics issue. Biden ignored SCOTUS and nothing happened to him. My understanding is there is nothing legally preventing Trump from ignoring the fed courts TRO’s. His lawyers can ask how much bond has been posted by the plaintiffs for the TRO.


88 posted on 03/13/2025 5:44:37 AM PDT by EQAndyBuzz (Privatize the administrative state!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: Bruce Campbells Chin

When you play fair there is only one result.

The left wins.


89 posted on 03/13/2025 5:45:39 AM PDT by cgbg (The Democrat Party is a criminal enterprise.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Bruce Campbells Chin
How'd you like if Obama would have ignored Supreme Court decisions on gun control, Citizens United, the Obamacare Medicaid mandate, or his Clean Power Plan?

Your point is illogical because the EO, if real, forces SCOTUS to make a decision.

90 posted on 03/13/2025 5:46:17 AM PDT by central_va (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: dp0622
Calling what would be common sense silly is well, a little appalling on its own.
91 posted on 03/13/2025 5:48:34 AM PDT by central_va (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: blitz128
Yes, blackmail is the historic underhanded way to reign in judicial overreach of federal power.
92 posted on 03/13/2025 5:50:49 AM PDT by central_va (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: central_va

Remember the 10000 physical fbi records in Clinton White House, imagine the “information” now.

You can’t blackmail if there is nothing bad, my take, these judges are mostly scum and perverted by their power.

Roberts is ground zero


93 posted on 03/13/2025 5:54:55 AM PDT by blitz128
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: blitz128
The Nazi party had the German judiciary by the balls. The behind the scenes key to their rise in power.
94 posted on 03/13/2025 5:57:43 AM PDT by central_va (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: central_va

Churches as well
I have asked repeatedly, what does it mean to be a nazi in this day and age?
What is more relevant is what states acts more like nazi germany and hitler?


95 posted on 03/13/2025 6:01:28 AM PDT by blitz128
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: central_va; The Duke
The specific comment to which I was responding referenced Andrew Jackson, whose famous judicial comment (allegedly) was:

"John Marshall [Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court] has made his decision; now let him enforce it."

So that particular comment was not a reference to ignoring just district court injunctions, but ignoring the Supreme Court itself. That's why I responded by saying Trump can't/shouldn't/won't do that.

Again, I think district courts issuing national injunctions against the Federal government is ridiculous, and I've posted on FR multiple times before the election that Congress should stop that. And it is Congress that should do that because Article III, Section I of the Constitution gives to Congress, specifically, the power over "inferior" courts:

The judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.

But the reality is that despite what Trump is saying right now, Republicans were cheering on district court judges that issued injunctions against the Obama and Biden Administrations, which those Administrations did follow. There were a couple they slithered on for a short period until they were addressed by a Circuit Court, but they never said "we're ignoring these until the Supreme Court rules on this."

The only way this is going to actually accomplish something rather than just devolve into posturing is to get Congress to do its job and limit the jurisdiction of lower federal courts. That doesn't require an Amendment -- just legislation regarding exactly what power is, and isn't "vested" in "such inferior courts."

Of course, as is typical here, any point with a shred of nuance gets shouted down.

96 posted on 03/13/2025 6:17:14 AM PDT by Bruce Campbells Chin ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: cgbg
When you play fair there is only one result. The left wins.

Again (ugh...), Republicans were cheering on district court judges who issued national injunctions against Obama and Biden policies. So it seems we favor judges doing that when they're in power, but against it when we are.

I think they're a bad idea either way, and that Congress should do its freaking job and limit the jurisdiction of lower federal courts by statute. At least lead with that effort before just saying you're going to ignore them.

97 posted on 03/13/2025 6:21:11 AM PDT by Bruce Campbells Chin ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: Bruce Campbells Chin
And it is Congress that should do that because Article III, Section I of the Constitution gives to Congress, specifically, the power over "inferior" courts:

But they are not going to do that so we can't live much longer in judicial tyranny. Sorry, but status quo lovers like you are going to lose one way or another. Patriots are getting restless. Action will be taken. If not now then soon. Things are GOING to collapse because what is happening is not sustainable. That is plain fact.

A Constitutional crises is not a bad thing if things get resolved. Ignoring flagrant power grabs is the worse thing....

98 posted on 03/13/2025 6:23:45 AM PDT by central_va (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: Bruce Campbells Chin

99 posted on 03/13/2025 6:24:27 AM PDT by The Duke (Not without incident.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: Bruce Campbells Chin

You are correct. It is Congress’ duty to limit the jurisdiction of lower federal courts.

But, thanks to the 17th Amendment, it will not happen.


100 posted on 03/13/2025 6:35:46 AM PDT by Jacquerie (ArticleVBlog.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-130 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
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

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