12

Trump vs. the Judges: Judicial Treachery and the End of Democracy

Posted by freedomforall 4 days, 15 hours ago to Politics
14 comments | Share | Flag

Excerpt:
"As the Trump Administration is thwarted in its efforts to cut federal spending, bloat, and waste time and again by activist judges, the people of the country must understand what is going on and what it likely says about the nation’s future. These judges—most of whom were appointed by Democratic presidents Clinton, Obama, and Biden—have taken it upon themselves to make policy and to engage in political maneuvering to spare the political status quo the fate for which the American people voted last November. Unironically and unapologetically, they are undoing the will of demos, purportedly to save democracy.

Interestingly, the Democrats who cheer the activist judges and their rulings are open and unremorseful about their overt injection of politics into the system of judicial review. Chuck Schumer, the Senate Minority Leader, crowed to PBS “Newshour” this week that he and his fellow Democrats are responsible for “saving democracy” because they intentionally packed the courts with judges that shared their ideology and would be unafraid to apply it to any case involving President Trump. “We did put 235 judges, 235 progressive judges, judges not under the control of Trump, last year on the bench, and they are ruling against Trump time after time after time.”

As justification for their use of the courts to stymie the will of the democratically elected administration, the Democrats (naturally) cite Marbury v. Madison, in which every schoolboy (and girl) used to be taught strengthened the concept of judicial review and established the courts as a proper constitutional check on the executive and legislative branches. The catch here is that Marbury v. Madison was decided on procedural, constitutional grounds, thereby intentionally sidestepping the contentious politics of the case. More to the point, the ruling purposefully constrained the ability of elected officials to use the courts as vehicles for their political gambits, even as it also reined in the Supreme Court itself, arguing that its actions in defense of politically stacking the judiciary were unconstitutional."
=================================
D.C. NIFO
SOURCE URL: https://amgreatness.com/2025/03/22/trump-vs-the-judges-judicial-treachery-and-the-end-of-democracy/


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by $ jbrenner 4 days, 12 hours ago
    Marbury v. Madison itself was judicial overreach and established a poor precedent that Thomas Jefferson wrote against.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by tutor-turtle 3 days, 14 hours ago
      Why do we even need a President, or a Congress for that matter, when we have unelected, unaccountable judges (from Canada, no less) to dictate our foreign policy?

      DemonRats have no policy America wants, needs or asked for.

      They don't have any arguments that fly with the vast majority of the electorate.

      What they have are unelected radical judges who can use their judicial overreach with no accountability to the people whom through their
      poorly though-out actions, (read: one-world-goverment views) negatively affect.

      We elected President Trump in overwhelming numbers.

      Stand up and help him help the people who voted for him, or get the fv¢k out of the way.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by mhubb 3 days, 20 hours ago
    it is much, much worse
    the Illegal Aliens Act was passed with a clause that excepts it from Judicial Review, per Fox News

    ANY "judge" that tried is violating Law and SCOTUS

    any such "judge" that tried to stop this law MUST BE removed from being a Judge
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Olduglycarl 3 days, 7 hours ago
    There's that phrase again: 'Political Stacking'. that's Not what we do, that's what they do. All we look for is ruling by the statements of the constitution and moral law. No "Opinion" needed, most is black and white!
    I thought that writing that might make me feel better . . . but it didn't, . , . , I'm still extremely pissed off !
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by CrustyOldGeezer 3 days, 14 hours ago
    No "judge" has the constitutional power TO GRANT CITIZENSHIP to ILLEGAL INVADERS AND TO PRETEND THEY DO IS AN unconstitutional usurpation of authority.
    Giving AID AND COMFORT TO AMERICAS ENEMIES WHILE ON US SOIL IS AN ACT OF TREASON.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Thoritsu 3 days, 15 hours ago
    An unconstitutional law (or ruling) remains unconstitutional. Until SCOTUS rules, some of these should just be ignored. The Executive provides the ONLY enforcement recourse. Why police yourself if you completely disagree?

    DOGE access to whatever the Executive wants them to review is a great example. The Executive should simply ignore any limiting ruling, and assert "I am the elected Executive. If I want information distilled from data within an Executive Department, I will get it, and no court may inhibit this. It is fundamental to the separation of powers. Some Executive actions may be enjoined, but not information. SCOTUS, please get around to reviewing this, and setting a precedent on information, so we can move on."
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by mccannon01 3 days, 15 hours ago
    What we are up against is the left's idea of "democracy" currently running the Democrat party is actually Marxism hiding behind the name (or any name that works at any given moment in time) in order to bring about one-party rule (theirs). Then they can usher in what will inevitably become like the "Peoples Democratic Republic of [North] Korea" where "We The People" actually means "We The People of the Government". It doesn't matter if these activist judges or other minions of the left actually understand the concept as long as they rule and vote (or loot and burn) in favor of the party. I can't believe all these judges are ignorant of the concept. They are deliberate. They are unconstitutional in attempting to overthrow the executive branch in a traitorous coup playing out in a Marxist main stream media and behind the scenes in an entrenched government bureaucracy infiltrated by other Marxists and useful idiots - you don't need a lot, just enough to pull it off.

    The Trump team is a gigantic roadblock to the coup and lawfare is one of the tools the left still has in place. Pop the corn, it's going to get worse before it gets better.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo