General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsTrump will ask the Supreme Court to forbid lower judges from blocking unconstitutional laws
Trump will ask the Supreme Court to forbid lower judges from blocking unconstitutional laws
By Matthew Chapman at Raw Story
https://www.rawstory.com/2019/05/trump-will-ask-the-supreme-court-to-forbid-lower-judges-from-blocking-unconstitutional-laws/
"SNIP......
On Wednesday, Vice President Mike Pence told the right-wing Federalist Society that President Donald Trump will ask the Supreme Court to abolish the practice of nationwide injunctions.
A Supreme Court Justice has to convince four of his colleagues to uphold a nationwide injunction but a single district court judge can issue one, effectively preventing the duly-elected president of the United States from fulfilling his constitutional duties, said Pence. This judicial obstruction is unprecedented. In the days ahead, our administration will seek opportunities to put this question before the Supreme Court.
Courts frequently issue injunctions, which block the government or other entities from taking a certain action. A nationwide injunction is an injunction that also applies to people who arent part of the lawsuit and such injunctions are frequently used by both liberal and conservative litigants to prevent that government from enforcing unconstitutional laws.
Simply put, Pence is saying that lower courts should not be allowed to block the government from enforcing a law even if that law is found unconstitutional they should only be allowed to exempt the specific person or people who sued from the law.
......SNIP"
gohuskies
(1,154 posts)Trump and his republican co-conspirators, i.e., Faux News, the Senate and the stacked courts are following the path of Mussolini and Hitler. This will end badly for everyone.
mopinko
(69,994 posts)are you fucking kidding me?
StarfishSaver
(18,486 posts)NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)PS: Hey Susan... fuck you!
Docreed2003
(16,850 posts)Just not what that nitwit expected...or maybe she did
gratuitous
(82,849 posts)For the last decade, Republicans have gone judge-shopping, usually in Texas, for friendly jurists to issue nationwide injunctions against laws like the Affordable Care Act because of a misplaced comma that appeared in the fourth draft while the legislation was being prepared. Now they don't want lowly District Court judges stopping laws that are unconstitutional on their face. I wonder *coughABORTIONcough* *coughVOTINGRIGHTScough* what issues St. Michael of Pence might be eyeing here?
world wide wally
(21,738 posts)BigmanPigman
(51,567 posts)dalton99a
(81,392 posts)dameatball
(7,394 posts)the USSC has time to take them up? Sounds like another way to get Trump through some statutes of limitations and also a way to effectively derail the other 3rd of the balance of power....if there still is one. If I'm wrong please advise. Thanks.
Response to dameatball (Reply #8)
applegrove This message was self-deleted by its author.
former9thward
(31,936 posts)It would mean a district court judge could only enjoin a law in their jurisdiction. Not the rest of the country. The final decision on a law, controversial or not, would still be set by the SC.
dameatball
(7,394 posts)VOX
(22,976 posts)America is quickly morphing into right-wing dictatorship.
Impeach NOW, while theres still something left to work with!
still_one
(92,061 posts)TwilightZone
(25,428 posts)John Roberts, for all of his clear faults, has shown an aversion to his institution being used as a tool to create a banana republic. It remains to be seen if he'll stick to that, but this seems like something he would knock down without much thought.
Blue_playwright
(1,568 posts)And this blatant Trumpian power grab is definitely something that would destroy any legacy he might build.
The_jackalope
(1,660 posts)Iliyah
(25,111 posts)tymorial
(3,433 posts)Chin music
(23,002 posts)waiting has worked so well. We hire govt people to work for us, and we pay them top dollar, franking privileges, air fare, health care. Today was a great START. Let's go.
Wounded Bear
(58,598 posts)The SC judges don't command lower court judges how to rule. That's not how it works.
Lower court judges make their rulings, and then, on appeal, higher court judges can decide if they were right or not. They can't call them and say, "Hey, Joe, if you get a case about (insert favorite issue here) make sure you make this call."