• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

In rare interviews, federal judges criticize Supreme Court's handling of Trump cases

ColdHardTruth

ColdHardTruth

SN/YN US NAVY
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 6, 2022
Messages
27,442
Reaction score
24,515
Location
Colorado
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal

In rare interviews, federal judges criticize Supreme Court's handling of Trump cases​

WASHINGTON — Federal judges are frustrated with the Supreme Court for increasingly overturning lower court rulings involving the Trump administration with little or no explanation, with some worried the practice is undermining the judiciary at a sensitive time.

Some judges believe the Supreme Court, and in particular Chief Justice John Roberts, could be doing more to defend the integrity of their work as President Donald Trump and his allies harshly criticize those who rule against him and as violent threats against judges are on the rise.

Members of the judiciary now view the SCOTUS as corrupt.

We all know the SCOTUS is compromised and needs to be flushed out. All of the reich-wing turds on the SCOTUS need to be flushed.

www.nbcnews.com

In rare interviews, federal judges criticize Supreme Court's handling of Trump cases

Ten judges tell NBC News the Supreme Court needs to explain its rulings better, with some urging Chief Justice John Roberts to do more to defend the judiciary against external criticism.
www.nbcnews.com www.nbcnews.com
 
mrjurrs said:
SCOTUS demands lower courts use their shadow docket rulings as precedent while SCOTUS ignores precedent?

You are wildly off base.
Click to expand...
Most of the cases these judges are talking about don't have a ton of precedent because until Trump, Judges were smart enough to know when a case has merit and when it doesn't or even when they have jurisdiction.

You've got all kinds of immigration groups and the ACLU working together to cobble up hairball interpretations of statute and then forum shop until they find a judge willing to play ball. The resultant ****ed up ruling goes to SCOTUS where there's an obligation to play by the rules and the lower courts get shot down. That isn't the fault of SCOTUS. It's the fault of activist organizations using activist judges to effect political change through the courts rather than through the ballot box.
 
Lutherf said:
Most of the cases these judges are talking about don't have a ton of precedent because until Trump, Judges were smart enough to know when a case has merit and when it doesn't or even when they have jurisdiction.

You've got all kinds of immigration groups and the ACLU working together to cobble up hairball interpretations of statute and then forum shop until they find a judge willing to play ball. The resultant ****ed up ruling goes to SCOTUS where there's an obligation to play by the rules and the lower courts get shot down. That isn't the fault of SCOTUS. It's the fault of activist organizations using activist judges to effect political change through the courts rather than through the ballot box.
Click to expand...
More bullshit dodge tactics.

Stop making excuses for the corrupt and illegitimate SCOTUS.
 
ColdHardTruth said:

In rare interviews, federal judges criticize Supreme Court's handling of Trump cases​

WASHINGTON — Federal judges are frustrated with the Supreme Court for increasingly overturning lower court rulings involving the Trump administration with little or no explanation, with some worried the practice is undermining the judiciary at a sensitive time.

Some judges believe the Supreme Court, and in particular Chief Justice John Roberts, could be doing more to defend the integrity of their work as President Donald Trump and his allies harshly criticize those who rule against him and as violent threats against judges are on the rise.

Members of the judiciary now view the SCOTUS as corrupt.

We all know the SCOTUS is compromised and needs to be flushed out. All of the reich-wing turds on the SCOTUS need to be flushed.

www.nbcnews.com

In rare interviews, federal judges criticize Supreme Court's handling of Trump cases

Ten judges tell NBC News the Supreme Court needs to explain its rulings better, with some urging Chief Justice John Roberts to do more to defend the judiciary against external criticism.
www.nbcnews.com www.nbcnews.com
Click to expand...
“It is inexcusable,” a judge said of the Supreme Court justices. “They don’t have our backs.”​

Stop issuing stupid rulings and those anonymous judges might find the Supremes supporting them.

Just saying...
 
ColdHardTruth said:

In rare interviews, federal judges criticize Supreme Court's handling of Trump cases​

WASHINGTON — Federal judges are frustrated with the Supreme Court for increasingly overturning lower court rulings involving the Trump administration with little or no explanation, with some worried the practice is undermining the judiciary at a sensitive time.

Some judges believe the Supreme Court, and in particular Chief Justice John Roberts, could be doing more to defend the integrity of their work as President Donald Trump and his allies harshly criticize those who rule against him and as violent threats against judges are on the rise.

Members of the judiciary now view the SCOTUS as corrupt.

We all know the SCOTUS is compromised and needs to be flushed out. All of the reich-wing turds on the SCOTUS need to be flushed.

www.nbcnews.com

In rare interviews, federal judges criticize Supreme Court's handling of Trump cases

Ten judges tell NBC News the Supreme Court needs to explain its rulings better, with some urging Chief Justice John Roberts to do more to defend the judiciary against external criticism.
www.nbcnews.com www.nbcnews.com
Click to expand...

“Undermining”? It’s making a mockery of the federal court system. Making ruling OBVIOUSLY in direct contradiction to our Rule of Law and past precedent. It’s obviously partisan politics and such is supposed to have no business in our courts.

The courts are supposed to exist to be a specific check AGAINST partisan politics having negative impact on the Rule of Law.
 
Lutherf said:
Most of the cases these judges are talking about don't have a ton of precedent because until Trump, Judges were smart enough to know when a case has merit and when it doesn't or even when they have jurisdiction.

You've got all kinds of immigration groups and the ACLU working together to cobble up hairball interpretations of statute and then forum shop until they find a judge willing to play ball. The resultant ****ed up ruling goes to SCOTUS where there's an obligation to play by the rules and the lower courts get shot down. That isn't the fault of SCOTUS. It's the fault of activist organizations using activist judges to effect political change through the courts rather than through the ballot box.
Click to expand...
So this is all from a fever dream right?
 
ColdHardTruth said:

In rare interviews, federal judges criticize Supreme Court's handling of Trump cases​

WASHINGTON — Federal judges are frustrated with the Supreme Court for increasingly overturning lower court rulings involving the Trump administration with little or no explanation, with some worried the practice is undermining the judiciary at a sensitive time.

Some judges believe the Supreme Court, and in particular Chief Justice John Roberts, could be doing more to defend the integrity of their work as President Donald Trump and his allies harshly criticize those who rule against him and as violent threats against judges are on the rise.

Members of the judiciary now view the SCOTUS as corrupt.

We all know the SCOTUS is compromised and needs to be flushed out. All of the reich-wing turds on the SCOTUS need to be flushed.

www.nbcnews.com

In rare interviews, federal judges criticize Supreme Court's handling of Trump cases

Ten judges tell NBC News the Supreme Court needs to explain its rulings better, with some urging Chief Justice John Roberts to do more to defend the judiciary against external criticism.
www.nbcnews.com www.nbcnews.com
Click to expand...
Should I assume that most of these judges are democrats?
 
Mycroft said:
“It is inexcusable,” a judge said of the Supreme Court justices. “They don’t have our backs.”​

Stop issuing stupid rulings and those anonymous judges might find the Supremes supporting them.

Just saying...
Click to expand...

"Stupid rulings" = "Rulings that don't favor Trump"
 
Roadvirus said:
"Stupid rulings" = "Rulings that don't favor Trump"
Click to expand...
It's more like stupid rulings that try to impose criminal due process on administrative procedures or that impose an injunction under the APA when the case is actually in the jurisdiction of the Court of Claims.

What you've got is a shitload of activist lawyers that are trying to "flood the zone" with all kinds of hairball decisions that they KNOW will be tossed on appeal but, while in process, will impede the Executive. Those activist lawyers are being facilitated by activist judges and because of all this activism we now have a SCOTUS that's up to its eyeballs in litigation so they're making their opinions very brief out of necessity, not to **** over these crybaby judges that KNOW they're playing politics.
 
Lutherf said:
Right. It's important to blame others when your ****ed up decisions go down in flames.
Click to expand...
Oh look Luther once again defending people being corrupt. Shocking
 
Lutherf said:
Most of the cases these judges are talking about don't have a ton of precedent because until Trump, Judges were smart enough to know when a case has merit and when it doesn't or even when they have jurisdiction.

You've got all kinds of immigration groups and the ACLU working together to cobble up hairball interpretations of statute and then forum shop until they find a judge willing to play ball. The resultant ****ed up ruling goes to SCOTUS where there's an obligation to play by the rules and the lower courts get shot down. That isn't the fault of SCOTUS. It's the fault of activist organizations using activist judges to effect political change through the courts rather than through the ballot box.
Click to expand...
Now Luther is crying about forum shopping but we all know Luther didn't say a peep when the gop forum shops now and did under biden.

Bad faith arguments shouldnt be entertained people. They should be shamed.
 
Lutherf said:
It's more like stupid rulings that try to impose criminal due process on administrative procedures or that impose an injunction under the APA when the case is actually in the jurisdiction of the Court of Claims.

What you've got is a shitload of activist lawyers that are trying to "flood the zone" with all kinds of hairball decisions that they KNOW will be tossed on appeal but, while in process, will impede the Executive. Those activist lawyers are being facilitated by activist judges and because of all this activism we now have a SCOTUS that's up to its eyeballs in litigation so they're making their opinions very brief out of necessity, not to **** over these crybaby judges that KNOW they're playing politics.
Click to expand...
Weak projection is just weak.
Luther is saying they are the enemy while stealing your money.
 
ColdHardTruth said:

In rare interviews, federal judges criticize Supreme Court's handling of Trump cases​

WASHINGTON — Federal judges are frustrated with the Supreme Court for increasingly overturning lower court rulings involving the Trump administration with little or no explanation, with some worried the practice is undermining the judiciary at a sensitive time.

Some judges believe the Supreme Court, and in particular Chief Justice John Roberts, could be doing more to defend the integrity of their work as President Donald Trump and his allies harshly criticize those who rule against him and as violent threats against judges are on the rise.
o
Members of the judiciary now view the SCOTUS as corrupt.

We all know the SCOTUS is compromised and needs to be flushed out. All of the reich-wing turds on the SCOTUS need to be flushed.

www.nbcnews.com

In rare interviews, federal judges criticize Supreme Court's handling of Trump cases

Ten judges tell NBC News the Supreme Court needs to explain its rulings better, with some urging Chief Justice John Roberts to do more to defend the judiciary against external criticism.
www.nbcnews.com www.nbcnews.com
Click to expand...
Appling the law rather than clinging to nonsensical LW garage is doing what they're appointed to do
 
Gaius46 said:
The main criticism is that SCOTUS is not explaining a lot of these decisions which leaves lower courts with little or no guidance.
Click to expand...
They are not explaining it because they know they are wrong, and those decisions are designed to kiss Trump's orange ass.
 
Lutherf said:
It's more like stupid rulings that try to impose criminal due process on administrative procedures or that impose an injunction under the APA when the case is actually in the jurisdiction of the Court of Claims.

What you've got is a shitload of activist lawyers that are trying to "flood the zone" with all kinds of hairball decisions that they KNOW will be tossed on appeal but, while in process, will impede the Executive. Those activist lawyers are being facilitated by activist judges and because of all this activism we now have a SCOTUS that's up to its eyeballs in litigation so they're making their opinions very brief out of necessity, not to **** over these crybaby judges that KNOW they're playing politics.
Click to expand...
More baseless bullshit.

Due process has always existed. The law requires a deportation hearing before it occurs.

Trump and his ball-juggling servants did not follow the law.

Stop defending lawlessness and corruption.
 
Bullseye said:
Appling the law rather than clinging to nonsensical LW garage is doing what they're appointed to do
Click to expand...
So you didnt read it.. got it
Luther is already trying this. Mayhe something different?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom