Connect with us

News

Judges Slam SCOTUS as Trump Demands High Court Reverse His Tariff Defeats

Published

on

A dozen federal judges are criticizing the U.S. Supreme Court, and in particular Chief Justice John Roberts, for what they say is a pattern of overturning their rulings in cases involving President Donald Trump’s policies while offering little explanation — or none at all. Their rare rebuke comes just as the President has demanded the high court reverse lower court rulings yet again, this time in a pivotal case: Trump’s massive tariffs, which many legal experts and several courts have already deemed unconstitutional.

“Lower court judges are handed contentious cases involving the Trump administration,” NBC News reports in an exclusive. “They painstakingly research the law to reach their rulings. When they go against Trump, administration officials and allies criticize the judges in harsh terms. The government appeals to the Supreme Court, with its 6-3 conservative majority.”

“And then the Supreme Court, in emergency rulings, swiftly rejects the judges’ decisions with little to no explanation,” according to NBC News. “A short rebuttal from the Supreme Court, they argue, makes it seem like they did shoddy work and are biased against Trump.”

READ MORE: Rubio Says US Blew Up Alleged Drug Boat ‘On the President’s Orders’ — Legality Questioned

One judge called the current environment “inexcusable,” lamenting the SCOTUS justices “don’t have our backs.”

NBC noted that when federal judges rule against Trump and his administration, “they are frequently targeted by influential figures in MAGA world and sometimes Trump himself, who called for a judge who ruled against him in a high-profile immigration case to be impeached. White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller has said the administration is the victim of a ‘judicial coup.'”

At the center of the controversy is the Supreme Court’s growing reliance on its ‘shadow docket,’ a mechanism the Trump administration has repeatedly used to its advantage.

READ MORE: ‘Fantasyland’: Democrat Denounces Trump’s ‘Unhinged’ Plan for ‘Personal Greed and Power’

Instead of filing a petition for the Supreme Court to hear a case and waiting for oral arguments to be scheduled if it agrees, Trump has often bypassed the process — nearly two dozen times since January — by going directly to the justices with emergency requests.

Seventeen times the Supreme Court has granted Trump’s emergency requests.

Late on Wednesday night, the Trump administration again went to SCOTUS, this time demanding the justices overturn the rulings of two separate courts, which had deemed his tariffs unlawful and unconstitutional.

On Friday, in a 7-4 ruling, a federal appeals court affirmed an earlier U.S. Court of International Trade decision that Trump’s sweeping and unilateral imposition of tariffs exceeded his authority.

The Supreme Court has yet to respond.

READ MORE: ‘Monsters’: The Five Trump Cabinet Secretaries a Top Political Scientist Wants Impeached

 

Image via Reuters

There's a reason 10,000 people subscribe to NCRM. You can get the news before it breaks just by subscribing, plus you can learn something new every day.
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

‘Gun Grabbers’: Trump DOJ Blasted for Weighing ‘Legally Illiterate’ Trans Gun Ban

Published

on

The Trump Department of Justice is reportedly weighing how to ban transgender individuals from owning firearms — despite Second Amendment protections — after two mass shootings this year involved suspects believed to be transgender. Transgender people are linked to fewer than one percent of all mass shootings.

“The Gun Violence Archive, which tracks shootings in which four or more people (not including the shooter) are shot or killed, estimated last year that fewer than 1 percent of the shootings it reviewed in the last decade were carried out by trans individuals,” according to Mother Jones. The media outlet added that “to blame the unnerving prevalence of mass shootings in America on the existence of trans people here isn’t just a dangerously stigmatizing, politically motivated take. It’s also bad math.”

President Donald Trump has already banned transgender people from serving in the U.S. Armed Forces, claiming gender dysphoria is incompatible with military service.

READ MORE: ‘Deeply Concerned’: Top Republicans Scorch RFK Jr. Over Vaccines

Banning transgender people from owning firearms “would represent a dramatic escalation of the Trump administration’s fight against the rights of transgender Americans,” CNN reports, noting that “senior Justice Department officials are weighing proposals to limit transgender people’s right to possess firearms.”

DOJ leadership “is seriously considering whether it can use its rulemaking authority to follow on to Trump’s determination to bar military service by transgender people and declare that people who are transgender are mentally ill and can lose their Second Amendment rights to possess firearms, according to one Justice official.”

Doing so would likely require classifying people with gender dysphoria as not mentally ill, but “mentally defective,” CNN reports, if any such ban were to be legal under federal law.

Critics are blasting the Trump administration.

“Well, there it is. The Trump administration is exploring a ban on trans people owning firearms. Trans people have accounted for less than a tenth of a percent of mass shootings over the past decade, but Trump is predictably seizing the opportunity to further oppress trans people,” lamented writer Charlotte Clymer.

Clymer added: “The firearms ownership ban for trans people is patently unconstitutional, and I’m willing to risk sounding naive in saying the courts will immediately reject it, including SCOTUS. But meanwhile, this signals where the Trump admin is moving on trans people. And it’s terrifying.”

READ MORE: ‘What You Said Were Lies’: Democrat Shreds RFK Jr. in Fiery Exchange

“In a totally unsurprising twist, MAGA are the gun grabbers they’ve warned us about,” wrote Joshua Reed Eakle, executive director of Project Liberal.

“Republicans are coming for your guns!!!” declared political analyst and strategist Rachel Bitecofer.

“This is an overtly discriminatory civil rights violation. Trans people have the same legal rights as other Americans — end of story. There are lots of good reasons to keep certain people from owning guns. Being trans isn’t one of them,” wrote Democratic congressional candidate Kat Abughazaleh.

Reason magazine’s Billy Binion called it “legally illiterate.”

“Any court would laugh it out in 30 seconds,” he added. “We have something called ‘the Second Amendment’—which I thought conservatives supported.”

Even President Trump admits most mass shooters are not transgender. In an interview with the right-wing Daily Caller on Monday, the president was asked about transgender suspected mass shooters.

“I do say it’s also taking place with people that were not transgender, you know?” Trump said, adding, “generally it’s people that aren’t transgender, so you know.”

READ MORE: Rubio Says US Blew Up Alleged Drug Boat ‘On the President’s Orders’ — Legality Questioned

 

Image via Reuters

 

 

 

 

Continue Reading

News

‘Deeply Concerned’: Top Republicans Scorch RFK Jr. Over Vaccines

Published

on

The Senate’s second-highest ranking Republican, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-WY)—a physician—delivered a blistering rebuke of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., accusing him of advancing vaccine policies that undermine public health. Republican Senator Bill Cassidy—also a physician—also harshly questioned the HHS chief.

“Secretary Kennedy, in your confirmation hearings, you promised to uphold the highest standards for vaccines,” Senator  Barrasso began. “Since then, I’ve grown deeply concerned.”

READ MORE: ‘What You Said Were Lies’: Democrat Shreds RFK Jr. in Fiery Exchange

“The public has seen measles outbreaks, leadership with the National Institutes of Health questioning the use of mRNA vaccines, the recently confirmed director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention fired. Americans don’t know who to rely on,” Barrasso exclaimed.

The Wyoming Republican noted that 89% of voters and 81% of Trump voters agree that “vaccine recommendations should come from trained physicians, scientists, public health experts.”

“If we’re going to make America healthy again, we can’t allow public health to be undermined,” Barrasso charged. “So could you explain what steps you’re going to be taking to ensure vaccine guidance is clear, evidence based, and trustworthy?”

READ MORE: Rubio Says US Blew Up Alleged Drug Boat ‘On the President’s Orders’ — Legality Questioned

Kennedy responded: “We’re going to make it clear, evidence based, and trustworthy for the first time in history.”

U.S. Senator Bill Cassidy (R-LA), who has faced harsh criticism from Democrats who consider him the pivotal vote in confirming Kennedy to HHS, also blasted RFK Jr.

The New York Times, which described Thursday’s hearing with RFK Jr. as a “withering barrage of questioning from a Senate committee on his vaccine policy and his record as President Trump’s health secretary,” reported that Senator Cassidy had “voted to confirm Kennedy on the condition that he wouldn’t disrupt access to vaccines.” But Cassidy “said that he believes Kennedy is in fact doing so through his actions as secretary.”

“We’re denying people vaccine,” Cassidy told Kennedy.

“You’re wrong,” Kennedy replied.

Watch the video below or at this link.

 

READ MORE: Judges Slam SCOTUS as Trump Demands High Court Reverse His Tariff Defeats

Continue Reading

News

‘What You Said Were Lies’: Democrat Shreds RFK Jr. in Fiery Exchange

Published

on

U.S. Senator Michael Bennet dismantled Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s testimony in a blistering Senate Finance Committee hearing Thursday, accusing him of peddling “lies.”

In the heated debate, Senator Bennet, saying he quoted manufacturers on vaccine safety, blasted Kennedy.

“I quoted them today. What I said was accurate. What you said were lies,” Bennet charged.

The conversation got more heated, with Kennedy demanding Bennet answer his questions, a tactic the HHS chief has used before.

“You’re evading the question,” Kennedy said.

READ MORE: Judges Slam SCOTUS as Trump Demands High Court Reverse His Tariff Defeats

“No, I’m asking the questions here,” Bennet declared.

“You’re evading that question,” Kennedy repeated. “I asked you a question.”

“I’m asking the questions, Mr. Kennedy, on behalf of parents and schools and teachers all over the United States of America who deserve so much better than your leadership,” Bennet said, blasting Kennedy.

“That’s what this conversation is about,” he added.

Watch the video below or at this link.

READ MORE: Rubio Says US Blew Up Alleged Drug Boat ‘On the President’s Orders’ — Legality Questioned

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.