Rogue Anti-Trump Judge Hit With Articles Of Impeachment

[HisArpy]

Congress needs to reel in this district judges and relegate theses judges to rule on issues within their districts. Need to create an appellate tribunal, perhaps consisting of one judge from each of the circuit courts for issues that have national relevance. IMHO

The FO part is coming. Yesterday DeSantis crafted a draft proposal and posted/sent it to Congress which would eliminate Federal Court jurisdiction in cases like what we're seeing now.

All the court had to do was obey its mandate. Instead of doing that they decided they're all black robed tyrants with infinite power. They are now going to learn they aren't and that lesson is going to hurt.

How? Because the judicial branch doesn't need to be as large as it is if it can't hear as many cases because it no longer has jurisdiction over the subject matter. That means many of those in robes are going to find themselves on the unemployment line with their fellow lib activists.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

The FO part is coming. Yesterday DeSantis crafted a draft proposal and posted/sent it to Congress which would eliminate Federal Court jurisdiction in cases like what we're seeing now.

All the court had to do was obey its mandate. Instead of doing that they decided they're all black robed tyrants with infinite power. They are now going to learn they aren't and that lesson is going to hurt.

How? Because the judicial branch doesn't need to be as large as it is if it can't hear as many cases because it no longer has jurisdiction over the subject matter. That means many of those in robes are going to find themselves on the unemployment line with their fellow lib activists.

So now your story has changed to the judge did have jurisdiction. Interesting, why the sudden change?

 

[HisArpy]

Judges ALWAYS err on the side of caution in the beginning. I have Been in courtrooms for 19+ years. It takes time for discovery, motions, etc. So a judge is going to err on the side of concern and not make a hasty decision

Status quo is meant to be preserved but in order to do that the judge is constrained by certain rules.

One of those rules is the likelihood of success on the merits. Here that outcome is doubtful because; 1. The court has no jurisdiction in many of the cases since employment matters can only be litigated in a specific court. 2. In those cases which can be brought in the federal courts, many cannot show irreparable harm. 3. The likelihood of success portion of the test fails.

This is an objective test and the courts consistently fail in objective tests and instead insert subjective tests in order to achieve their ends. They are so enamored with this they will even do it after being given explicit instructions to do otherwise.

 

[icanhelp1]

The FO part is coming. Yesterday DeSantis crafted a draft proposal and posted/sent it to Congress which would eliminate Federal Court jurisdiction in cases like what we're seeing now.

All the court had to do was obey its mandate. Instead of doing that they decided they're all black robed tyrants with infinite power. They are now going to learn they aren't and that lesson is going to hurt.

How? Because the judicial branch doesn't need to be as large as it is if it can't hear as many cases because it no longer has jurisdiction over the subject matter. That means many of those in robes are going to find themselves on the unemployment line with their fellow lib activists.

This Judge shopping for judges with like interest and ideology is not ruling on the merits of the case, just the opposite, in my opinion. It creates the appearance of impropriety and favored status towards litigants with like agendas. It facilitates partisanship over the correctness of judicial review. Some cases being litigated today states in the constitution that are not open to judicial review and yet they do it anyway. IMHO

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

This Judge shopping for judges with like interest and ideology is not ruling on the merits of the case, just the opposite, in my opinion. It creates the appearance of impropriety and favored status towards litigants with like agendas. It facilitates partisanship over the correctness of judicial review. Some cases being litigated today states in the constitution that are not open to judicial review and yet they do it anyway. IMHO

If the judge didn’t rule on the merits of this case, what exactly did they rule on?

 

[icanhelp1]

If the judge didn’t rule on the merits of this case, what exactly did they rule on?

TDS

 

[Philthy_Phil]

Ah, the sweet smell of fascism.

You don't kiss the ring, you go to jail.

 

[RobDownSouth]

The FO part is coming. Yesterday DeSantis crafted a draft proposal and posted/sent it to Congress which would eliminate Federal Court jurisdiction in cases like what we're seeing now.

A state governor wasting valuable state resources to draft proposed federal laws seems to be a misuse of state resources. A jaded onlooker might look at this futile exercise and call it a cunning stunt.

One can imagine the Speaker of the House gaveling the US House of Representatives to order. House business is in recess while we examine this important missive from the State of Florida!

 

[DeluxAuto]

MAGATs hate facts.



https://www.facebook.com/reel/1733220394266782/?mibextid=rS40aB7S9Ucbxw6v

 

[whiskeytangofoxtrot]

MAGATs hate facts.

View attachment 2516130

https://www.facebook.com/reel/1733220394266782/?mibextid=rS40aB7S9Ucbxw6v

So much for congressional committees having a dialogue during their hearings.
Guess it only works when you're in agreement and in lock step with the cult.

 

[DeluxAuto]

So much for congressional committees having a dialogue during their hearings.
Guess it only works when you're in agreement and in lock step with the cult.

This looked like a movie where the corrupt judge was suppressing evidence.

 

[Hel_Books]

Roberts can have his opinion! It's only an opinion! No federal judge has the authority over the executive branch. None of them! If they did, why have a president? End of story! Buckle up Beuttercup, the fun hasent even started yet!!

This is a remarkably silly statement. In the USA, the federal government has frequently been in court. Do a quick on-line search and you'll find many such cases, for example United States v. Nixon.

 

[HisArpy]

This Judge shopping for judges with like interest and ideology is not ruling on the merits of the case, just the opposite, in my opinion. It creates the appearance of impropriety and favored status towards litigants with like agendas. It facilitates partisanship over the correctness of judicial review. Some cases being litigated today states in the constitution that are not open to judicial review and yet they do it anyway. IMHO

congress can fix it. Two short Bills - one stripping jurisdiction for the cases where the judges are giving unlawful and sweeping TRO's and the other limiting the extent of a TRO to the parties and the jurisdiction in which the court lies.

 

[eric_erosfan]

congress can fix it. Two short Bills - one stripping jurisdiction for the cases where the judges are giving unlawful and sweeping TRO's and the other limiting the extent of a TRO to the parties and the jurisdiction in which the court lies.

Lol. Judiciary has the final say on any law.

This piece of parchment called the Constitution. What you MAGAtards call toilet paper.

And I bet there are a lot of conservative lawyers who would also not like to lose the ability to choose their court.

 

[Cheshire_cat71]

Status quo is meant to be preserved but in order to do that the judge is constrained by certain rules.

One of those rules is the likelihood of success on the merits. Here that outcome is doubtful because; 1. The court has no jurisdiction in many of the cases since employment matters can only be litigated in a specific court. 2. In those cases which can be brought in the federal courts, many cannot show irreparable harm. 3. The likelihood of success portion of the test fails.

This is an objective test and the courts consistently fail in objective tests and instead insert subjective tests in order to achieve their ends. They are so enamored with this they will even do it after being given explicit instructions to do otherwise.

Laws are interpreted subjectively. Look at the different variations of how a law is interpreted between even SCOTUS judges. It is left up to interpretation and subjectivity for the sole reason to be fluid as the days, years, and decades go by.

 

[KingDJT]

More about rogue judges including SCJ Roberts! Imagine that! The meeting of the no minds!

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/20...justice-john-roberts-caught-secretive-invite/

 

[ll74]

More about rogue judges including SCJ Roberts! Imagine that! The meeting of the no minds!

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/20...justice-john-roberts-caught-secretive-invite/

WTF is a secretive meeting? Roberts is the boss. He can have meetings with any judge he wants any time he wants.

More shitty "journalism" by GP. Gotta dig deep in the toilet for writers for that site. Obviously shitty at civics but even worse at writing

 

[ll74]

Fun fact - the judge in question ordered the release of Hilary's emails.

 

[Ja8998]

Why is there a political discussion on a sex site. The whole conversation here is antithetical to staying hard and horny. Jeez

 

[eric_erosfan]

Why is there a political discussion on a sex site. The whole conversation here is antithetical to staying hard and horny. Jeez

Hah I used to wonder the same thing. And then I realized it is fun to destroy MAGAtards wherever they turn up.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Fun fact - the judge in question ordered the release of Hilary's emails.

With MAGA's its not what you did for me yesterday, but it's what'll you do for me today that matters.

 

[HisArpy]

Laws are interpreted subjectively. Look at the different variations of how a law is interpreted between even SCOTUS judges. It is left up to interpretation and subjectivity for the sole reason to be fluid as the days, years, and decades go by.

Interpretation of the law is one thing; ignoring direct guidance on how the law is to be interpreted is another.

So far the left has LOST on almost every major issue when it comes to Trump. I point to Presidential Immunity as an example on how all the lefty loonatics thought they "had him now." It is undeniable in light of that decision that all of the lower court shenanigans were politically motivated and all of the lower court rulings against Trump weren't based on "the law" but personal bias by the judges.

The current crop of TRO's is more of the same.

 

[KingDJT]

Hah I used to wonder the same thing. And then I realized it is fun to destroy MAGAtards wherever they turn up.

Lmao.... as your party of communist perverts is being destroyed under your nose! But hey, we all have fantasies! Just for some of us, they really do come TRUE! MARCH MADNESS, ITS ALL ABOUT THE FUN!

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

Lmao.... as your party of communist perverts is being destroyed under your nose! But hey, we all have fantasies! Just for some of us, they really do come TRUE! MARCH MADNESS, ITS ALL ABOUT THE FUN!

When will people have fun at the grocery store again?

 

[KingDJT]

Oh no, say it ain't so! EXPOSE these criminals for who they are!! MARCH MADNESS. EXPOSE EXPOSE EXPOSE

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1902800064738648076.html