(Poll) JD Vance: judges cannot "tell the American people they’re not allowed to have what they voted for"

[AZRWinger]

The facts have been explained to you. You keep repeating hilariously ignorant nonsense.

FEDERAL judges ruling on FEDERAL laws apply FEDERALLY, which is nationwide. This is basic civics.

Excerpt from the SCOTUS order dismissing the case of 5 detainees held in Texas forum shopped to the DC DISTRICT court.

"The detainees are confined in Texas, so venue is improper in the District of Columbia. As a result, the Government is likely to succeed on the merits of this action…."

Supreme Court Vacates Judge Boasberg's TROs As To Tren de Aragua Under Alien Enemies Act

Holds venue was improper in DC District Court, case needs to go to Texas, where the TdA members are being held pending removal. But confirms they do get some due process to contest whether they are gang members subject to summary removal.

legalinsurrection.com

Of course to the Orange Man Bad lynch mob any puffed up Federal judge in any district can override the duely elected President.

 

[ColdHardTruth]

People need to be sufficiently alarmed at what people like Vance are saying, which is basically laying down the pretext for ignoring the courts.

Vance has long needed to be stripped of his jobbed and deported back to Ohio.

 

[Noodlegawd]

As long as California's STATE law does not conflic with federal law, they don't have to change a thing. If their ban does in fact conflict, then yes, they have to come into compliance with federal law. It has ALWAYS been this way.
Jeez, dude! Take a basic civics course.

Speaking of basic civics: The Constitution IS federal law. Jeez, dude!

 

[Stealers Wheel]

Speaking of basic civics: The Constitution IS federal law. Jeez, dude!

Which means when a Federal judge makes a ruling, that ruling applies to the whole country, not just a portion of the country. That means EVERYBODY, including the president is obligated to obey the ruling.

 

[rahl]

Excerpt from the SCOTUS order dismissing the case of 5 detainees held in Texas forum shopped to the DC DISTRICT court.

"The detainees are confined in Texas, so venue is improper in the District of Columbia. As a result, the Government is likely to succeed on the merits of this action…."

Supreme Court Vacates Judge Boasberg's TROs As To Tren de Aragua Under Alien Enemies Act

Holds venue was improper in DC District Court, case needs to go to Texas, where the TdA members are being held pending removal. But confirms they do get some due process to contest whether they are gang members subject to summary removal.

legalinsurrection.com

Of course to the Orange Man Bad lynch mob any puffed up Federal judge in any district can override the duely elected President.

You need to actually read the ruling. Nothing here contradicted a single word in my post.

 

[AZRWinger]

You need to actually read the ruling. Nothing here contradicted a single word in my post.

From your post #159

"FEDERAL judges ruling on FEDERAL laws apply FEDERALLY, which is nationwide. This is basic civics."

Emphasis added.

The SCOTUS decision struck down a TRO issued by a DC district court judge for detainees held in Texas because the case was not filed in the appropriate venue. That directly contradicts your claim. Read carefully

 

[rahl]

From your post #159

"FEDERAL judges ruling on FEDERAL laws apply FEDERALLY, which is nationwide. This is basic civics."

Emphasis added.

The SCOTUS decision struck down a TRO issued by a DC district court judge for detainees held in Texas because the case was not filed in the appropriate venue. That directly contradicts your claim. Read carefully

You need to read the ruling. That isn’t what SCOTUS ruled.

Meanwhile, federal district rulings apply nationwide regarding federal law. This is basic stuff. Please take a middle school civics class.

 

[devildavid]

Yes, federal courts deal with federal issues but that isn't the real issue at hand is it? The real issue is politicization of the system through judge shopping.

The real issue is with you moving the goalposts.

Trump is politicizing the system by using it to go after his enemies.

 

[Noodlegawd]

Which means when a Federal judge makes a ruling, that ruling applies to the whole country, not just a portion of the country. That means EVERYBODY, including the president is obligated to obey the ruling.

Around and around we go.

 

[Stealers Wheel]

Around and around we go.

Take it up on appeal! That's how the system works.

 

[Noodlegawd]

Take it up on appeal! That's how the system works.

You're contradicting yourself.

 

[Stealers Wheel]

You're contradicting yourself.

Because YOU say so? That's rich.

Obey the order. Appeal the order. Get it to SCOTUS. They will set those leftist commie pinko Trump hating judges straight. Ain't thatr right, NG?

 

[Noodlegawd]

Because YOU say so? That's rich.

Obey the order. Appeal the order. Get it to SCOTUS. They will set those leftist commie pinko Trump hating judges straight. Ain't thatr right, NG?

What am I saying that's not a fact? Do or do you not you think that CA should obey the ruling of a Texas federal judge that laws banning 11-round magazines or assault weapons are unconstitutional?

 

[Grogu]

Somebody ought to grab JD Vance and let him know that instead of going after judges for doing their jobs, he ought to be going after his Republican buddies and pals down in the Missouri legislature. They are working right now to override voter approved ballot measures on abortion and paid sick leave and minimum wages.

Talk about a sham. The people spoke through their votes, and the jackals in the legislature are just going to ignore the measures because they want to.

Welcome to Missouri, where the vote of the people is never safe • Missouri Independent

Maybe you collected signatures last year so that Missourians could vote to overturn the state’s abortion ban. Maybe you walked door to door asking voters to support paid sick leave benefits for lower-wage workers. Maybe you were one of millions of people who successfully voted to pass those...

missouriindependent.com

 

[StillBallin75]

Lol these fascist **** bags will be in for a real rude awakening when they realize they don't have the mandate they think they have.

In fact, doing all kinds of tyrannical, fascist nonsense while ALSO simultaneously screwing the masses economically seems to me like they intend to speedrun the French Revolution arc.

 

[Bonnot]

What the VP is saying is that he promotes a dictatorship rule of the majority. Too bad he never read the Federalist Papers.

Fascits don't care.


Every time this couch ****er opens his mouth I understand why his father didn't bother with him and his mother loved pills more.

 

[Lovebug]

Plaintiffs can join in a class action if they feel wronged. District judges are operating out of their constitutional lane when they order nationwide injunctions. It is not sustainable to require unanimous consent from 674 or so appointed judges for every decision

What that the question?

 

[Lovebug]

Americans specifically did not vote for Project 2025.

Sorry, but here we are.

 

[Lovebug]

The U.S. Constitution vests the power to create laws in the Congress, not the President,. This power is specifically mentioned in Article I, Section 1 of the Constitution. The Congress is responsible for enacting laws that are necessary to carry out the powers granted to the federal government, including the power to raise revenue, declare war, and organize the executive and judicial branches.

BUT...the current Congress is being neutered by...?
Not legally but here we are, we are being governed by buffoons.

 

[Stealers Wheel]

What am I saying that's not a fact? Do or do you not you think that CA should obey the ruling of a Texas federal judge that laws banning 11-round magazines or assault weapons are unconstitutional?

I already answered the question, but I'll endulge you once again. EVERYONE has to obey a federal court order. No exceptions. Not you, not me, not California, not president Trump. No exceptions.

What part of EVERYONE do you not understand?

 

[Noodlegawd]

I already answered the question, but I'll endulge you once again. EVERYONE has to obey a federal court order. No exceptions. Not you, not me, not California, not president Trump. No exceptions.

What part of EVERYONE do you not understand?

That's not even remotely close to being true, which is no surprise. What I don't understand is (1) why you're suddenly complaining about it now, and (2) why you think individual judges should have so much power.

 

[jaypatriot]

Simple yes/no basic civics question.

A basic premise of the Constitution is that there are some things the government cannot do even with the support of a majority of voters. The VP swore an oath to uphold the constitutional rights of all people, which are superior to any legislation or executive action. Judges have final authority to interpret the Constitution. It is disturbing he does not understand this.

A qualified NO vote.
If the only thing Leftist partisan judges do is thwart Trump every time the president tries to do something beneficial, then they should not

"tell the American people they're not allowed to have what they voted for"​

 

[Stealers Wheel]

That's not even remotely close to being true, which is no surprise. What I don't understand is (1) why you're suddenly complaining about it now, and (2) why you think individual judges should have so much power.

Believe me, there's a whole lot more you don't understand.

There are two more levels of courts ABOVE a federal district judge. All you have to do is employ the appellate system and get at least one of those higher courts to overrule the federal judge. In the meantime, we obey the court orders. The system is designed SPECIFICALLY to limit the power of individual judges. So where is the 'so much power' you mentioned?

 

[jaypatriot]

Do you really believe there should be 1770 federal judges having the power to prevent the president from exercising presidential power in this country?

======================================
The United States federal courts are the system of courts organized under the United States Constitution and federal law. The federal courts decide disputes involving the Constitution and laws passed by Congress.

Altogether, there are nearly 1,770 judgeships authorized across the 209 courts in the federal court system. About half of the judges sitting on federal courts are appointed by the president of the United States for life terms. The remaining judges are selected by judges sitting on circuit or district courts for terms of defined lengths.

United States federal courts

Ballotpedia: The Encyclopedia of American Politics

ballotpedia.org

 

[Atomic Kid]

A qualified NO vote.
If the only thing Leftist partisan judges do is thwart Trump every time the president tries to do something beneficial, then they should not

"tell the American people they're not allowed to have what they voted for"​

The American people voted for scrapping the Constitution and the rule of law. Is that what they voted for?