Posted on 07/09/2019 3:25:44 PM PDT by Trump20162020
Again, it depends on whether or not the branch of government whose power is being usurped doesn’t stand up for itself. I know when people hear phrases like “enumerated powers” and “checks and balances” and whatnot their eyes start to glaze over but, dambit Gumby, The President better get somebody out there who can explain it. At least try to.
Is there anything a Judge can’t do nowadays?
—
Yes. Be honest and follow the law.
No, the judge does not have this authority.
The litigants have the right to choose their attorneys.
DJT will put out an EO to put the question BACK on the Census. This case will then become moot because the SOC putting on the question might require the APA to be followed. However, an EO does not have the same requirement and the resistance will be forced to challenge the EO in the 9th district.
They will then force the issue back to SCOTUS and the EO will stand on its own merits. Because the Court has already ruled adding the question is fine. It is just the manner it was added that had Roberts panties in a wad.
And then we will check the box if you are a citizen.
Yes a 47-year old judge at that. I give credit to Obama for going youth on majority of his judges. We celebrate that trump gets many 60 year olds appointed. We have zero long term outlook at all.
*********************************************
I suggest you go in and check the dates of birth of Trump’s judicial appointees.
Because we let them?
The Court cannot tell a party who it can use as counsel. This judge (an Obama appointee, of course) is waaaaaay out of bounds. When the judiciary becomes political, the rule of law is over. We are pretty much at that stage, and only bad shit can be the result.
************************************************
Of course this judge will be overruled... E V E N T U A L L Y. This political judge is engaging in DELAYING TACTICS ... just as the despicable John Roberts did. Delay, delay, delay!
it is extraordinarily rare or even irregular for a court to prohibit a party to change attorneys
this undermines the entire concept of being represented in court...as the judge is forcing a party to continue a case with counsel it does not choose to have representing it anymore
this raises a number of constitutional problems and in all likelihood a higher court would overturn any adverse ruling after a party were forced to proceed with counsel not of its choosing
All I can speak to is California law and 27 years before the bar. Is federal law different?
If you change lawyers you generally ask for time for the new legal team come up to speed. The judge is saying that there will be no additional time.
Where have you been for the last ten or twelve years? If not longer?
I will never understand where people get this kind of bad information from.
The median age of President Trump's Circuit Court nominees is 49. This is younger than the median age of the Obama nominees (53). It's also younger than the median age of any of the past 5 presidents.
As for District Court judges, many of Trumps nominees are in their late 30s or early 40s. The media and the left were just freaking out about how: "TRUMP PUT THE YOUNGEST JUDGE EVER ON THE FEDERAL BENCH!"
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/zoetillman/donald-trump-youngest-judge-allison-rushing
The administration has been hoisted on its own petard. Having claimed for months that an early decision is vital in order to get the forms printed they are now wanting to change lawyers and get months more to bring the new team up to speed. The judge it telling them to stick with their original story.
thanks.
and still, denying a party its choice of counsel... and forcing it to proceed with counsel not of its choice....
raises serious constitutional and procedural issues
nevertheless..
(from what i can gather, the administration is going ahead with its version of the census forms anyway, court or no court, at this point.. per Attorney General Barr’s determination of legality.. which seems quite correct imho... we will see...)
That is the only arrow left in their quivver. The Constitutional issue has been settled and they can only throw rocks at the procedure gears. Their next step will to try to get the House to prevent the Administration from spending any money on putting the question on the Census. I think that such a move would also require action of the Senate as well, so they will try to say that it's a new funding requirement and can't proceed without Congress approval.
This is all good. The American people approve of the question and they are watching what the Democrat fools are doing.
Obviously the Judge has disqualified themselves from ruling on this case.
It may be grounds for appeal but it is well within the power of the judge to order a case to proceed. And if that means with lawyers that the defendant wants to replace then so be it.
(from what i can gather, the administration is going ahead with its version of the census forms anyway, court or no court, at this point.. per Attorney General Barr’s determination of legality.. which seems quite correct imho... we will see...)
Ignoring the Supreme Court much less an appeals court is a risky tactic. It's a tailor made issue for the Democrats in the campaign and they can speculate what other issues Trump would ignore if the courts rule against him.
-
Old Lawyers are Deep State for the Block.
They want Judge to help them block Trump.
‘
Did SCOTUS rule when Obama removed the citizenship question?? What was his stated reason?
That won’t stand
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.