Posted on 06/28/2025 4:59:40 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
Poor dears. Reality sucks.
No, they won’t. Activist judges running roughshod on the Constitution will have to start doing their job properly or step down.
Their judges will ignore the SCOTUS decision.
Wow! This is borderline illiterate!
The camels nose has been under the tent for too long.
It will take a few more wacks to get the camel back into his place.
These judges do not seem to understand that they are delegitimizing the entire federal court system by exceeding their legitimate powers. And once delegitimized, they will not be able to regain that respect for a long time.
They never had unlimited or unrestrained power.
I challenge anyone on the planet to post factual and verifiable text in either the Constitution or any law that establishes a district federal judge to have any nation-wide sweeping powers above and over Constitutional Article II powers of the Executive.
It's never existed. The district judges assigned this so-called powers to themselves like any good ol' fascist would.
Impeached in the House is irrelevant because unless convicted by the senate they keep their position and can continue their malfeasances. In short impeachment is like being charged with an offense. Unless found guilty no serious consequences other than the process itself which is a guaranteed not guilty for liberal judicial insurrectionists is nothing
Limits that always existed before — until Jan 20, 2025.
It wasn’t really about limiting presidential power. It was about making sure district courts did not exceed their jurisdiction. They are district courts not national courts.
The six prudent justices understand. The judicial branch has no power other than the respect and deference paid to it by their co-equal branches, and the People.
The democrats see activist judges as “politics by other means” cloaked with the respect earned by past and present judges who adhere to the con law II taught doctrine of “nonjusticable matters”—which include political questions.
Even if SCOTUS rules against the Executive, SCOTUS has zero enforcement capacity. Never mind some piddly-azz district judge thinking they have some big hammer. That job then reverts to Congress and impeachment.
That’s basically right. The judges did the nationwide injunction under the theory that as a court of equity, they were obligated to protect all those who might be harmed by what they saw as a grievous wrong, not just the parties to the action in their courtroom.
But there’s already a way to deal with that - it’s called a class action (or mass action) lawsuit.
As Pam Bondi said several times: O 35 out of 40 nationwide injunctions came from just 5 of the 94 federal judicial districts - all obviously in the bluest of democrat areas. The democrats “judge shopped” to bring action in those courts knowing the judges would act as they did.
Trump will not proceed and any judge who tries to claim he does not have to obey this decision will have some ‘splainin’ to do. Trump will either ignore him (based on this decision) or they’ll end up back in court where in all probability the judge will be smacked down individually and hard. I don’t think any of them want that.
But it's clear that more injunctions have been issued against Trump than all other Presidents combined - in fact more than were issued in total over the past century. SCOTUS realized this is beyond the powers of federal judges and limited them accordingly.
The ruling only limits “district court” judges from issuing nationwide rulings.
Nothing here is stoping appeals courts from doing so
That’s a real eye-opener. Thank you.
Oh no! The courts can’t just lord over us?
Say it isn’t so!
It wasn't an Executive Order, it was an effing Memorandum.
"The policy, an executive branch memorandum, was announced by President Barack Obama on June 15, 2012."
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.