Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

applegrove

(118,786 posts)
Wed May 8, 2019, 06:20 PM May 2019

Trump 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 aren’t 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"

22 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Trump will ask the Supreme Court to forbid lower judges from blocking unconstitutional laws (Original Post) applegrove May 2019 OP
This is 1930s Germany all over again gohuskies May 2019 #1
yeah, sure, that makes sense. mopinko May 2019 #2
But her emails StarfishSaver May 2019 #3
"She's more dangerous than Trump" and... NurseJackie May 2019 #6
Oh it's a revolution all right Docreed2003 May 2019 #12
Well, that's a switch gratuitous May 2019 #4
Ask yourself why any President would want this law. world wide wally May 2019 #5
Ummmmm, he's guilty of something maybe? BigmanPigman May 2019 #21
Kick dalton99a May 2019 #7
i'm not that bright, but would this not set back any decisons on controversial issues years? Until dameatball May 2019 #8
This message was self-deleted by its author applegrove May 2019 #9
This has nothing to do with statutes of limitations. former9thward May 2019 #17
Ah, thank you for clarifing. I figured someone would. dameatball May 2019 #18
So, the Executive branch wants to own the Judicial branch? Seig heil! VOX May 2019 #10
I may be wrong, but I don't believe the SC will allow this still_one May 2019 #11
Agreed. TwilightZone May 2019 #14
I think he will protect his legacy Blue_playwright May 2019 #22
The mask is off now, isn't it? nt The_jackalope May 2019 #13
Not going to happen. Iliyah May 2019 #15
Roberts will never allow it. Nt tymorial May 2019 #16
Let's just wait though...take our time....bc... Chin music May 2019 #19
The Judicial branch is not a hierarchy like that... Wounded Bear May 2019 #20

gohuskies

(1,157 posts)
1. This is 1930s Germany all over again
Wed May 8, 2019, 06:24 PM
May 2019

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.

gratuitous

(82,849 posts)
4. Well, that's a switch
Wed May 8, 2019, 06:26 PM
May 2019

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?

dameatball

(7,399 posts)
8. i'm not that bright, but would this not set back any decisons on controversial issues years? Until
Wed May 8, 2019, 06:29 PM
May 2019

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)

former9thward

(32,082 posts)
17. This has nothing to do with statutes of limitations.
Wed May 8, 2019, 07:19 PM
May 2019

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.

VOX

(22,976 posts)
10. So, the Executive branch wants to own the Judicial branch? Seig heil!
Wed May 8, 2019, 06:39 PM
May 2019

America is quickly morphing into right-wing dictatorship.

Impeach NOW, while there’s still something left to work with!

TwilightZone

(25,483 posts)
14. Agreed.
Wed May 8, 2019, 06:48 PM
May 2019

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)
22. I think he will protect his legacy
Wed May 8, 2019, 09:19 PM
May 2019

And this blatant Trumpian power grab is definitely something that would destroy any legacy he might build.

Chin music

(23,002 posts)
19. Let's just wait though...take our time....bc...
Wed May 8, 2019, 07:26 PM
May 2019

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

(58,713 posts)
20. The Judicial branch is not a hierarchy like that...
Wed May 8, 2019, 07:30 PM
May 2019

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."

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Trump will ask the Suprem...