Trump Demands Supreme Court Rein In Lawless Leftwing Tyrants in Judge's Robes

[Flopper]

Issues in his district. (we're discussing district judges over-stepping their authority)

Criminal cases are tried in a federal district where the arrest occurred, however that is not written in stone. A civil case will be tried in the district in which the suit is filed. Since the judges ruling will be based of federal law, it can be filed in any federal district. The decision of the court will be based on federal law and thus it's scope is federal, not district.

 

[kyzr]

Criminal cases are tried in a federal district where the arrest occurred, however that is not written in stone. A civil case will be tried in the district in which the suit is filed. Since the judges ruling will be based of federal law, it can be filed in any federal district. The decision of the court will be based on federal law and thus it's scope is federal, not district.

Point being that the ACLU judge shops to liberal districts.
The deportations to El Salvadore were from TX, yet the suit was filed in DC not TX.
Districts that take "Lawfare" cases out of their district need to be defunded by congress.

 

[Flopper]

And what is the lane of federal judge?

I've heard of judge shopping but how does that work. The planiff does not get to pick the judge There are 94 federal districts and 677 judges. That averages out to about 7 judges per district. The chief judge of a district is responsible for assigning cases but standard procedure is assign the next judge that is free.

Picking or shopping for judges might have been possible, say in 1910 when there were only 78 federal courts and only 153 judges. Having about 2 judges per court and sometimes only 1, judge shopping might be easy but not today.

 

[kyzr]

I've heard of judge shopping but how does that work. The planiff does not get to pick the judge There are 94 federal districts and 677 judges. That's averages out to about 7 judges per district. The chief judge of a district is responsible for assigning cases but standard procedure is assign the next judge that is free.
Picking or shopping for judges might have benn possible in say 1910 when there were only 78 federal courts and only 153 judges. Having about 2 judges per court, judge shopping might be easy but not today.

A federal judge in Washington who has caught the ire of President Trump for his role in the case involving the deportation of alleged gang members will also preside over a case involving the administration's use of a messaging app to discuss military operations.

https://www.npr.org/2025/03/26/nx-s1-5341540/boasberg-trump-signal-national-security-atlantic-lawsuit

Federal judge who drew Trump's anger picks up new case against administration​

As the chief judge of a federal district court, Boasberg has dealt with legal matters involving Trump in the past. Notably, he ruled that former Vice President Mike Pence had to testify in front of a grand jury in the Justice Department's probe into the Jan. 6 Capitol riot.

So the Chief Judge can just take the cases he wants. Shoots your post #303 in the ass, huh?

 

[Flopper]

A federal judge in Washington who has caught the ire of President Trump for his role in the case involving the deportation of alleged gang members will also preside over a case involving the administration's use of a messaging app to discuss military operations.

https://www.npr.org/2025/03/26/nx-s1-5341540/boasberg-trump-signal-national-security-atlantic-lawsuit

Federal judge who drew Trump's anger picks up new case against administration​

As the chief judge of a federal district court, Boasberg has dealt with legal matters involving Trump in the past. Notably, he ruled that former Vice President Mike Pence had to testify in front of a grand jury in the Justice Department's probe into the Jan. 6 Capitol riot.

So the Chief Judge can just take the cases he wants. Shoots your post #303 in the ass, huh?

Cases are typical assigned base on availability. However the Chief Judge can take any case he chooses. Since Chief Judges are most often the most experience judges they often take high profile cases.

Boasberg is known as one of the least partisan judges on the federal bench and has had favorable ruling in cases involving the president, for example his lenient punishments of Jan 6th rioter. And in Trump’s first term, he released FISA court materials that exposed huge problems with the FBI’s probe into connections between Trump’s 2016 campaign and Russia’s election meddling. He also paved the way for conservative groups to obtain some of Hillary Clinton’s emails from her private server. Republicans were praising him and democrats were questioning his objectivity.

The head of the local bar association describe him as "A judge you knew when you went into court with him, that he was going to follow the rules. He is very predictable because he followed the law. He is not a rash judge at all."

Of all head judges, he has one the lowest rates of overturned cases.

‘Principled and fair’: Judge Boasberg had nonpartisan record before facing Trump’s fury

He’s a former law school roommate of Brett Kavanaugh and his personality has poked through his rulings with quirky references to Star Trek and Fugees lyrics.

www.yahoo.com

 

[Flopper]

Point being that the ACLU judge shops to liberal districts.
The deportations to El Salvadore were from TX, yet the suit was filed in DC not TX.
Districts that take "Lawfare" cases out of their district need to be defunded by congress.

I've heard of judge shopping but how does that work. The planiff does not get to pick the judge There are 94 federal districts and 677 judges. That averages out to about 7 judges per district. The chief judge of a district is responsible for assigning cases but standard procedure is assign the next judge that is free.

Picking or shopping for judges might have been possible, say in 1910 when there were only 78 federal courts and only 153 judges. Having about 2 judges per court and sometimes only 1, judge shopping might be easy but not today.

 

[kyzr]

Cases are typically assigned base on availability. However the Chief Judge can take any case he chooses. Since Chief Judges are most often the most experience judges they often take high profile cases.
Boasberg is known as one of the least partisan judges on the federal bench and has had favorable ruling in cases involving the president, for example his lenient punishments of Jan 6th rioter. And in Trump’s first term, he released FISA court materials that exposed huge problems with the FBI’s probe into connections between Trump’s 2016 campaign and Russia’s election meddling. He also paved the way for conservative groups to obtain some of Hillary Clinton’s emails from her private server. Republicans were praising him and democrats were questioning his objectivity.
The head of the local bar association describe him as "A judge you knew when you went into court with him, that he was going to follow the rules. He is very predictable because he followed the law. He is not a rash judge at all."
Of all head judges, he has one the lowest rates of overturned cases.

That is all well and good, but Boasberg is doing the country a disservice protecting violent criminal illegal gang-members from deportation, all because he wants to provide legal protections at the taxpayers' expense when the US has limited resources.
The USSC needs to step up and restore Constitutionality to the process, district judges cannot be allowed to thwart a president's Article 2 powers.

 

[Edgetho]

Our judicial system has a method of correcting such overreach by judges. A district judge's decision can always be overturned by a court of appeals and the court of appeals decision can be overturned by the Supreme Court. So most of these wild decision by district judges are corrected by a higher court.

By statute, the chief judge of each district court has the responsibility to enforce the court's rules and orders on case. In addition the chief judge makes all assignment of cases, court rooms, and other resources. He or she answers to the president of United States, probably indirectly through the DOJ. When selecting judges for promotion or moving to other districts, the chief judge's recommendation is very import.

Although a chief judge of a district does not officially have the power to discipline a wayward judge, he can make life for that judge pretty unpleasant. That judge could find himself doing nothing but bail hearings and handling federal misdemeanors.

You mean like Merchan and/or Engoron in New Yawk? Where the persecutor made up a law just to persecute OMB out of whole cloth? Totes made up. A never used, never heard of Law and the Judges did -- Nothing about it. Went along with it. Even the scumbags on SCOTUS let them sentence him -- On a Made-Up, never heard of, never used before Law.

For the first time in American History, a sitting President is sentenced by a Pip-Squeak, Horse Shit, Local-Yokel Judge.

And you're okay with that? As long as it's somebody else's Ox being gored, I'm sure you are. As usual

The Judiicial Branch is out of control. SCOTUS doesn't seem willing to bring them to heel so the next step is to limit or even destroy their power. Which they have too much of.

The Judicial Branch IS The Deep State. Lawyers are a major, major, MAJOR problem in this Country and they need to be de-fanged.

Dick The Butcher has always been my favorite Shakespearean character anyway.

 

[Edgetho]

That is all well and good, but Boasberg is doing the country a disservice protecting violent criminal illegal gang-members from deportation, all because he wants to provide legal protections at the taxpayers' expense when the US has limited resources.
The USSC needs to step up and restore Constitutionality to the process, district judges cannot be allowed to thwart a president's Article 2 powers.

Something people need to understand..... There is no honor in the Legal Profession. They will lie, mis-lead, withold evidence..... They only care about winning.

Lawyers have no friends other than other lawyers and the whole crew is a den of thieves. They know they can't trust each other because they'll back-stab their bestest buddy at the first chance and they know their BFF will do it to them if they get the chance.

I had a lot of Lawyers as clients in my business. States Attorneys, Plaintiffs Attorneys, Divorce Attorneys, Criminal Attorneys and the worst of the Lot -- Public Defenders.

We can't eliminate the profession. It is a necessary evil in a democracy. But make no mistake..... The emphasis is on the word 'evil'.

Lawyers are like Vultures; necessary in a healthy eco-system, but you don't want to invite them to dinner.

If a Country lets Lawyers get too much control, it is a sure sign of a Terminally Diseased society that is on its last leg.

Which is why many Countries strictly regulate the number of lawyers allowed to operate within its borders. And I'm not talking about totalitarian States. Japan comes to mind. And there are others.... I think India, maybe Spain and Germany.

Why do you think the biggest contributor, BY FAR, to the dimocrap scum Party is -- Lawyers? Does anybody think that's an accident??

We can get control of our Judicial system or we can watch our Country detoriate into a shithole.

Trump wants to but he's gonna need a lot of support.

 

[Flopper]

That is all well and good, but Boasberg is doing the country a disservice protecting violent criminal illegal gang-members from deportation, all because he wants to provide legal protections at the taxpayers' expense when the US has limited resources.
The USSC needs to step up and restore Constitutionality to the process, district judges cannot be allowed to thwart a president's Article 2 powers.

The fact is you don't know that any of what you have been told is true because everyone of those people were denied their constitution right of due process. No court herd their pleas of not being in any gang, not being guilty of any crime, having no outstanding warrants, and even the claims of not being the the person ICE claimed they were.

It may take years, but the truth will all come out, the governments fight to keep them away from loved ones and lawyers and finally the rush to get them out of the country before the courts could stop the flights. The Trump administration has now acknowledged in court that many of the men sent to El Salvador do not have U.S. criminal records.

An ‘administrative error’ sent a Maryland man to an El Salvador prison, ICE says​

Eventually it will all leak out just as it did in the NAZI death camps, the Japanese Interment Camps, the prison camps in the Boar War, and the Soviet Gulags.

It seems very likely the Supreme Court is going to agree with both lower courts and put an end to Trump violations of the constitution and US law. However, it's going to come too late for those who are innocent and already delivered to those hell holes they call prisons where no get's out alive.

 

[JohnDB]