Posted on 03/21/2025 2:32:59 AM PDT by Libloather
Amid the growing battle between President Donald Trump and the courts, a once-unthinkable question is harder to shrug off: Will the administration deliberately defy federal judges if it doesn’t get what it wants?
The issue has come into sharp relief in the challenge to the administration’s deportation of Venezuelan nationals under the purported authority of the Alien Enemies Act. The presiding judge — James Boasberg, chief judge of the federal district court in Washington, D.C. — directed the government from the bench to turn the planes around carrying the deportees. That did not happen, though the administration claims it did not deliberately defy the judge. Boasberg has since pressed the government for more information, and on Friday, he will hold a hearing to consider the matter further.
To consider Boasberg’s options and the implications, I spoke with Shira Scheindlin, a former federal judge in Manhattan who served on the bench for 22 years. She is no stranger to complex, high-profile disputes involving the government, and as I can attest from brief personal experience — I once litigated before Judge Scheindlin while I worked in the private sector — she had a well-earned reputation for exercising firm control over her courtroom and the lawyers who appeared before her.
Scheindlin said that in the debate over whether the United States is already in a constitutional crisis, the real red line is if the executive branch defies the judiciary, a move that Trump says he wouldn’t take.
But if it were to happen?
“That’s when authoritarians become dictators and really tear down the temple by just ignoring the Constitution, ignoring the judiciary,” she said. “That would be the shocking end to our 250-year experiment.”
This interview has been edited for length and clarity.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
But all the legal expenses incurred defending yourself are gone forever with more expenses required to expunge the conviction.
There are loads of sources to pay for that. USAID wasn’t about compassion.
The constitutional crisis is when a minor judge decides he is the acting President of the USA. If the Supreme Court wants to take the case, they can - immediately. If they don’t, then a minor judge cannot acts as President for 2-3 years while things drag thru the courts.
Can he or she get a bag of magic beans with their refund check?
Politico crap. Goes along with the NYT and other bird cage liners.
So, you are a simpleton that thinks there is some kind of established political process instead of political backrooms.
No. That would be somebody like you at USAID looking for a refund.
Yes indeed!
Ignoring the Constitution is the key part of what all these communist-inspired judges are doing...
Oh, that is so true. Wouldn’t be nice if he refused to obey in order to defend the Executive branch and the House impeached the judge?
Don’t forget about CovFaFo
Really? And yet it didn't when Biden and Obama both defied SCOTUS rulings?
And what about defying a Judiciary that is clearly stepping out of bounds?
Clown.
In foreign policy, the neocons are always living in 1938. In domestic policy, they are always living in 1974.
The way they took down Nixon was textbook, but relied on there being only 3 TV networks and two newspapers, and a unified ruling class.
None of these things are true any more. Trump and his team COULD be brought down by a phony “constitutional crisis”, but the chances are much, much less than they were in 1974.
EXACTLY
Well, the good judge just perjured herself right here.
Yep. Trump should ignore these rogue judges.
Congress controls all the courts other than SCOTUS.
Calling Mike Johnson! Anyone there? Mike? Thune?
Hello.
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.