Leroy N. Soetoro
2019-05-26 20:42:12 UTC
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-administration-fights-back-against-
lone-judges-nixing-policies-with-the-stroke-of-the-pen
Call it the power of one. Individual federal judges across the country
have been issuing nationwide injunctions against the Trump administration
in record numbers, blocking a range of executive policies from being
enforced.
Now the Trump administration is fighting back, actively looking for a case
to take to the Supreme Court in an effort to reassert the authority of the
president and limit that of the judiciary.
Can we expect a Supreme Court showdown over Alabama's abortion ban?Video
"These nationwide injunctions have frustrated presidential policy for most
of the Presidents term with no clear end in sight," Attorney General
William Barr said in a speech Tuesday. "One judge can, in effect, cancel
the policy with the stroke of the pen."
Barr and Vice President Pence have been leading the very public effort to
highlight what they say is a federal court system out of control. The
administration makes the point nationwide injunctions have occurred more
during this presidency than all others combined.
"We believe that needs to change," Pence said on "Fox News @ Night" last
week. "We believe that's really a distortion of the separation of powers
and the balance of powers in our constitution. And so we're going to be
looking for a case to take the issue of national injunctions all the way
to the Supreme Court."
Vice President Pence speaks out on defending religious liberty on 'Fox
News @ Night'Video
A Fox News analysis largely supports the administration claims.
In President Trump's first year alone, federal judges issued 20 nationwide
injunctions -- as many as president Obamas eight years in office. Those
included judges appointed by Republican as well as Democratic presidents.
The current number is more than three dozen -- on a range of hot-button
issues -- especially immigration:
Rescinding grant money to sanctuary cities
Ending the socalled "dreamers" program for young undocumented aliens
Travel ban on certain Muslim majority countries -- a policy ultimately
upheld by the Supreme Court last year.
Restrictions on transgender people joining the military
A planned citizenship question on the 2020 census
Several abortion and reproductive health policies, including
administration efforts to suspend federal funding for family planning
clinics that refer patients to abortion providers
Nationwide or universal injunctions have the effect of binding the
government from implementing laws or policies -- maintaining the status
quo at least until the issue is fully litigated. Most of the nearly 700
district court or trial judges confine their orders to the particular
parties bringing suit -- and only in the region under the judge's control.
Some legal advocates say the shift is necessary: when the harm is
nationwide -- so too must the legal relief:
"The suggestion that it's only very liberal judges putting a hold on
president trump's policies is simply not true," said Elizabeth Wydra,
president of the Constitutional Accountability Center. "This is a matter
of justice, it's not a matter of politics when it comes to the judicial
branch."
The ACLU is among the most active of advocacy groups requesting judges
issue nationwide injunctions, and it has been mostly successful.
Last August a federal judge in San Diego issued an injunction requiring
reunification of deported immigrant parents with their children. The judge
refused an administration request to delay court-ordered deadlines sought
by the Department of Homeland Security.
"The judge is refusing to let the government off the hook for the mess it
made," said Lee Gelernt, deputy director of the ACLUs Immigrants Rights
Project.
But the White House is pushing back, looking for the right case to present
to the Supreme Court. But the issue likely would not be resolved in a
presidential election year. But most legal experts say it will be
ultimately resolved by the justices.
"I suspect the Supreme Court is going to weigh in at some point on this
just because it nationwide injunction being increasingly prevalent in
recent years," said Thomas Dupree, a former Bush principal deputy
assistant attorney general. "And there's a lot of unsettled law in this
area about how far as a single district court's power projects. Can a
single judge apply his or her ruling across the nation and different
courts give different answers to that."
The administration thinks it ultimately has a winning hand since Trump's
two justices -- Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh -- now create solid
conservative majority.
And Justice Clarence Thomas in particular is eager to address it.
"Universal injunctions are legally and historically dubious," he wrote
last June in the Trump travel ban case. "If federal courts continue to
issue them, this Court is duty-bound to adjudicate their authority to do
so."
--
No collusion - Special Counsel Robert Swan Mueller III, March 2019.
Donald J. Trump, 304 electoral votes to 227, defeated compulsive liar in
denial Hillary Rodham Clinton on December 19th, 2016. The clown car
parade of the democrat party ran out of gas and got run over by a Trump
truck.
Congratulations President Trump. Thank you for cleaning up the disaster
of the Obama presidency.
The Obama-led Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS)
approved Uranium One in fall 2010. With a little luck, we'll see
compulsive liar Hillary Clinton in jail before she dies.
Under Barack Obama's leadership, the United States of America became the
The World According To Garp.
Obama increased total debt from $10 trillion to $20 trillion in the eight
years he was in office, and sold out heterosexuals for Hollywood queer
liberal democrat donors.
lone-judges-nixing-policies-with-the-stroke-of-the-pen
Call it the power of one. Individual federal judges across the country
have been issuing nationwide injunctions against the Trump administration
in record numbers, blocking a range of executive policies from being
enforced.
Now the Trump administration is fighting back, actively looking for a case
to take to the Supreme Court in an effort to reassert the authority of the
president and limit that of the judiciary.
Can we expect a Supreme Court showdown over Alabama's abortion ban?Video
"These nationwide injunctions have frustrated presidential policy for most
of the Presidents term with no clear end in sight," Attorney General
William Barr said in a speech Tuesday. "One judge can, in effect, cancel
the policy with the stroke of the pen."
Barr and Vice President Pence have been leading the very public effort to
highlight what they say is a federal court system out of control. The
administration makes the point nationwide injunctions have occurred more
during this presidency than all others combined.
"We believe that needs to change," Pence said on "Fox News @ Night" last
week. "We believe that's really a distortion of the separation of powers
and the balance of powers in our constitution. And so we're going to be
looking for a case to take the issue of national injunctions all the way
to the Supreme Court."
Vice President Pence speaks out on defending religious liberty on 'Fox
News @ Night'Video
A Fox News analysis largely supports the administration claims.
In President Trump's first year alone, federal judges issued 20 nationwide
injunctions -- as many as president Obamas eight years in office. Those
included judges appointed by Republican as well as Democratic presidents.
The current number is more than three dozen -- on a range of hot-button
issues -- especially immigration:
Rescinding grant money to sanctuary cities
Ending the socalled "dreamers" program for young undocumented aliens
Travel ban on certain Muslim majority countries -- a policy ultimately
upheld by the Supreme Court last year.
Restrictions on transgender people joining the military
A planned citizenship question on the 2020 census
Several abortion and reproductive health policies, including
administration efforts to suspend federal funding for family planning
clinics that refer patients to abortion providers
Nationwide or universal injunctions have the effect of binding the
government from implementing laws or policies -- maintaining the status
quo at least until the issue is fully litigated. Most of the nearly 700
district court or trial judges confine their orders to the particular
parties bringing suit -- and only in the region under the judge's control.
Some legal advocates say the shift is necessary: when the harm is
nationwide -- so too must the legal relief:
"The suggestion that it's only very liberal judges putting a hold on
president trump's policies is simply not true," said Elizabeth Wydra,
president of the Constitutional Accountability Center. "This is a matter
of justice, it's not a matter of politics when it comes to the judicial
branch."
The ACLU is among the most active of advocacy groups requesting judges
issue nationwide injunctions, and it has been mostly successful.
Last August a federal judge in San Diego issued an injunction requiring
reunification of deported immigrant parents with their children. The judge
refused an administration request to delay court-ordered deadlines sought
by the Department of Homeland Security.
"The judge is refusing to let the government off the hook for the mess it
made," said Lee Gelernt, deputy director of the ACLUs Immigrants Rights
Project.
But the White House is pushing back, looking for the right case to present
to the Supreme Court. But the issue likely would not be resolved in a
presidential election year. But most legal experts say it will be
ultimately resolved by the justices.
"I suspect the Supreme Court is going to weigh in at some point on this
just because it nationwide injunction being increasingly prevalent in
recent years," said Thomas Dupree, a former Bush principal deputy
assistant attorney general. "And there's a lot of unsettled law in this
area about how far as a single district court's power projects. Can a
single judge apply his or her ruling across the nation and different
courts give different answers to that."
The administration thinks it ultimately has a winning hand since Trump's
two justices -- Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh -- now create solid
conservative majority.
And Justice Clarence Thomas in particular is eager to address it.
"Universal injunctions are legally and historically dubious," he wrote
last June in the Trump travel ban case. "If federal courts continue to
issue them, this Court is duty-bound to adjudicate their authority to do
so."
--
No collusion - Special Counsel Robert Swan Mueller III, March 2019.
Donald J. Trump, 304 electoral votes to 227, defeated compulsive liar in
denial Hillary Rodham Clinton on December 19th, 2016. The clown car
parade of the democrat party ran out of gas and got run over by a Trump
truck.
Congratulations President Trump. Thank you for cleaning up the disaster
of the Obama presidency.
The Obama-led Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS)
approved Uranium One in fall 2010. With a little luck, we'll see
compulsive liar Hillary Clinton in jail before she dies.
Under Barack Obama's leadership, the United States of America became the
The World According To Garp.
Obama increased total debt from $10 trillion to $20 trillion in the eight
years he was in office, and sold out heterosexuals for Hollywood queer
liberal democrat donors.