Category: Attack the Judiciary

Trump Quotes Critical Blog to Attack 9th Circuit Judges Over His Muslim Ban

Leave a comment

President Trump on Friday morning ripped into an appeals court’s decision to uphold a temporary restraining order on his immigration executive order, calling it “disgraceful.”

Citing a legal blog called Lawfare, Trump tweeted: “LAWFARE: ‘Remarkably, in the entire opinion, the panel did not bother even to cite this (the) statute.’ A disgraceful decision!”

The blog post on Lawfare that Trump quoted, while critical of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reasoning, said the court made the right decision in the end.

“The Ninth Circuit is correct to leave the [temporary restraining order] in place, in my view, for the simple reason that there is no cause to plunge the country into turmoil again while the courts address the merits of these matters over the next few weeks,” the post says.

It adds that the judicial system will eventually have to confront the clash between the president’s powers and “the incompetent malevolence with which this order was promulgated.”

Trump’s tweet came moments after MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” quoted the exact same passage from Lawfare’s blog post on TV.

Benjamin Wittes, the blog post’s author, reacted in Twitter, writing: “You decide whether the POTUS is quoting me in context. Here’s the article. For the record, I support the decision.”

The court ruled Thursday that a nationwide restraining order against Trump’s temporary travel ban may continue while a federal judge considers a lawsuit over the policy.

“We hold that the government has not shown a likelihood of success on the merits of its appeal, nor has it shown that failure to enter a stay would cause irreparable injury, and we therefore deny its emergency motion for a stay,” the court said.

The three-judge panel hearing the case included Judges William C. Canby Jr., a Jimmy Carter appointee; Richard R. Clifton, a George W. Bush appointee; and Michelle T. Friedland, a Barack Obama appointee.

The decision is narrowly focused on the question of whether the ban should be blocked while the courts consider its lawfulness — but the three-judge panel nevertheless issued a scathing takedown of almost all of the government’s arguments.

Trump immediately fired back on the ruling, tweeting: “SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!”

 

 

Trump Attacks Federal Judges Weighing Travel Ban

Leave a comment

President Trump on Wednesday went after a panel of federal judges weighing whether a court order blocking his travel ban should be lifted.

Speaking to a gathering of law enforcement officials, Trump argued the judges should immediately reinstate the executive order in the name of national security.

“I don’t want to call a court biased, so I won’t call it biased,” the president said at a gathering of the Major Cities Chiefs Association in Washington. “Courts seem to be so political and it would be so great for our justice system if they could read a statement and do what’s right.”

He vented his frustration at the legal arguments made by judges and attorneys on both sides of the case, even reading aloud a portion of immigration law he believes backs up his executive order barring the intake of refugees and people from seven Muslim-majority countries.

Trump argued the law gives him broad powers to control who enters and leaves the U.S.

“A bad high school student would understand this. Anybody would understand this,” he said.

“They were talking about things that just had nothing to do this,” he said of the judges.

“But I have to be honest that if these judges wanted to, in my opinion, help the court in terms of respect for the court, they do what they should be doing,” he added. “It’s so sad.”

It’s highly unusual for presidents to publicly comment on court cases dealing with their policy proposals — particularly as a court is weighing a case. But Trump has repeatedly proven he’s willing to break longstanding political norms.

Trump said on Tuesday evening that he watched the oral arguments in front of a three-judge panel of the San Francisco-based 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, which was broadcast live on cable news.

The judges aggressively questioned a Justice Department lawyer about the evidence Trump was using to bar people from the countries included in the executive order and the national security powers of the president.

The solicitor general of Washington state, which is suing to block the order, was also grilled over whether the nationwide temporary restraining order handed down by a lower court was too broad and whether his contention the ban amounted to religious discrimination.

Trump appeared to take issue with media coverage of the hearing, which centered on the government lawyer’s struggle to make the administration’s case, as well as any skepticism of the order itself.

“I listened to a bunch of stuff on television last night that was disgraceful,” he said.

Trump argued that the country is in danger of being attacked by terrorists as long as the order is on hold.

“I think it’s sad, I think it’s a sad day,” he said. “I think our security is at risk today. And it will be at risk until such time that we are entitled and get what we are entitled to as citizens of this country. We want security.”

(h/t The Hill)

Media

 

Trump Resumes Twitter Attacks on Federal Judge

Leave a comment

President Donald Trump on Sunday resumed tweeting against the judge who blocked his executive order on immigration, blaming the court system “if something happens” that could put the U.S. in “peril.”

“Just cannot believe a judge would put our country in such peril. If something happens blame him and court system. People pouring in. Bad!” he tweeted Sunday afternoon in reference to Judge James Robart, a district court judge based in Washington state.

A few minutes later, he tweeted again: “I have instructed Homeland Security to check people coming into our country VERY CAREFULLY. The courts are making the job very difficult!”

Trump’s tweets came after an appeal filed by the Justice Department was turned down. The appeal would have lifted a ruling that is currently halting Trump’s immigration order.

On Friday, Robart put a halt on Trump’s immigration order, which restricts travel to the U.S. from seven Muslim-majority countries — Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Yemen and Syria — and stopped admittance of Syrian refugees to the United States.

The Justice Department filed an appeal late Saturday to the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, asking for Robart’s order to be put on hold while the appeals court considers an open-ended stay of the ruling. The appeal court reject that request Sunday morning.

The president fired off a batch of four tweets Saturday, starting with: “What is our country coming to when a judge can halt a Homeland Security travel ban and anyone, even with bad intentions, can come into U.S.?”

(h/t Politico)

Trump Attacks ‘So-Called Judge’ Over Travel Ban Ruling

Leave a comment

President Trump on Saturday issued a new defense of his controversial travel and refugee restrictions, defending the “ban” from the “so-called judge” who halted the order on Friday.

Federal Judge James Robart, appointed by former President George W. Bush and approved by a 99-0 Senate vote in 2004, issued an immediate nationwide restraining order against Trump’s action, which had cut off citizens from seven Muslim-majority nations from entering the U.S.

Civil liberties groups applauded the ruling, but Trump vowed it would be overturned.

Despite the White House insisting this week the Trump order did not constitute a travel ban, Trump defended it as such on Saturday morning:

It’s not the first time Trump has publicly attacked a judge with whom he disagreed.

During last year’s presidential campaign, Trump was criticized by both Republicans and Democrats for citing the “Mexican heritage” of Indiana-born Judge Gonzalo Curiel as a reason he should recuse himself from lawsuits regarding Trump University.

(h/t The Hill)

 

 

 

Trump Campaign: Female Judges Could Be Biased, Too

Leave a comment

Donald Trump’s national spokeswoman on Monday suggested that Trump’s own sister, a judge on the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, could be biased as a result of her gender.

“If somebody were to say to her she was biased in regard to some case because she’s a woman, that would be awful, wouldn’t it?” CNN’s Wolf Blitzer asked Katrina Pierson of Trump’s sister, Federal Judge Maryanne Trump Barry.

“Well, it would depend on her past and decisions she made as a judge,” Pierson replied. “There is no question that there are activist judges in this country.”

Trump has pushed this stance heavily in the last few weeks, arguing that U.S. District Judge Gonzalo Curiel, who is overseeing a fraud case involving the now-defunct Trump University, is “biased” against him because of his “Mexican” heritage. The presumptive GOP nominee took this identity-based argument for unfair treatment further on Monday, arguing that a Muslim judge could “absolutely” be biased against him, too, because of his proposal to temporarily ban Muslim immigration to the United States.

As Blitzer pointed out, many of Trump’s fiercest supporters urged him to drop the racial attacks, which they say alienate minority voters and undermine the independence of the judiciary.

Pierson said Trump had no plan to “start saying and doing what everybody else says to say and do.”

“He is not backing down because the media wants to pressure, call him names, call him racist,” Pierson said. “Doesn’t matter which GOP individual comes out, they’re not there and they don’t have the facts. That’s why Mr. Trump is the nominee.”

(h/t Talking Points Memo)

Reality

We don’t want to say we called it but… we called it. Apparently we were not the only one.

Republicans have jumped on Donald Trump for attacking the integrity of the judiciary. Some current and former leaders include House Speaker Paul Ryan, who said Trump’s criticism was a ‘textbook definition of a racist comment,’ and ethically-challenged former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said it was ‘inappropriate.’

So let’s follow Donald Trump’s “common sense” logic that only people who he has not offended can fairly evaluate a case against him.

  • An American judge with Mexican heritage is unable to preside over any of his cases because of his plan to build a wall with the United States and Mexico.
  • An American judge who is of the Islamic faith is unable to preside over any of his cases because of his plan to ban all Muslims entering into the United States and to have a database of every Muslim person living here.
  • An American female judge is unable to preside over any of his cases (unless she’s a ’10’) because of his repeated sexist and misogynist comments towards women.
  • An American judge with African heritage is unable to preside over any of his cases because of his racist tweets and calling black protesters “not people.”
  • An American judge who has disabilities is unable to preside over any of his cases because of how he mocked a reporter with disabilities.

Trump: ‘It’s Possible’ a Muslim Judge May Not Be Able To Fairly Evaluate a Case Against Me

Leave a comment

Donald Trump on Sunday hinted at a broader argument that judges of specific religious and ethnic backgrounds may not be fit to hear cases against him.

Last week, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee suggested that Indiana-born Judge Gonzalo Curiel — whose parents are Mexican — should not preside over fraud lawsuits against Trump University, a for-profit university formerly owned by Trump.

In a Sunday interview on “Face The Nation,” Trump also suggested a Muslim judge would not be able to hear a case against him because of Trump’s plan to bar Muslims from entering the US.

“If it were a Muslim judge, do you also feel that they wouldn’t be able to treat you fairly because of that policy of yours?” host John Dickerson asked.

“It’s possible, yes,” Trump replied. “That would be possible, absolutely.”

Dickerson pushed Trump, asking whether the real-estate magnate was unfairly discrediting judges because of their ethnic background.

“Isn’t there sort of a tradition though in America that we don’t judge people by who their parents were and where they came from?” Dickerson asked.

“I’m not talking about tradition — I’m talking about common sense,” Trump said.

Trump’s assertion that Curiel is not qualified to fairly hear Trump’s case because of the judge’s parents’ nationality has ignited a firestorm of criticism from the real-estate mogul’s political opponents.

In a Saturday speech in California, Democratic presidential frontrunner Hillary Clinton slammed Trump’s “prejudiced, bigoted attack” on Curiel.

“This is not just another outlandish, insulting comment from Donald Trump, and it is not normal politics. This is something much, much more dangerous,” Clinton said.

She continued: “Judge Curiel is as much of an American as I am, and he’s as much of an American as Donald Trump is. But he has Mexican roots. So to Donald Trump, that means he can’t do his job. Well, Donald Trump’s not just wrong about Judge Curiel. He’s wrong about America. He’s wrong about what makes this country great.”

(h/t Business Insider)

Reality

So let’s follow Donald Trump’s “common sense” logic that only people who he has not offended can fairly evaluate a case against him.

  • An American judge with Mexican heritage is unable to preside over any of his cases because of his plan to build a wall with the United States and Mexico.
  • An American judge who is of the Islamic faith is unable to preside over any of his cases because of his plan to ban all Muslims entering into the United States and to have a database of every Muslim person living here.
  • An American female judge is unable to preside over any of his cases because of his repeated sexist and misogynist comments towards women.
  • An American judge with African heritage is unable to preside over any of his cases because of his racist tweets and calling black protesters “not people.”
  • An American judge who has disabilities is unable to preside over any of his cases because of how he mocked a reporter with disabilities.

Then according to Donald Trump, only white Christian male judges can be “unbiased” enough for him? Explain how this is not racist and intolerant.

Media

Trump Defends Criticism of Judge with Mexican Heritage

Leave a comment

There’s persistent … and then there’s Jake Tapper.

The CNN anchor posed the following question to Donald Trump on Friday:

Let me ask you about comments you made about the judge in the Trump University case. You said that you thought it was a conflict of interest that he was the judge because he is of Mexican heritage, even though he is from Indiana. Hillary Clinton said that that is a racist attack on a federal judge.

Trump deflected to talk about his border wall and Clinton’s emails, among other things. So Tapper tried to steer the conversation back to whether Trump’s complaint about U.S. District Judge Gonzalo Curiel was racist. Trump deflected again. Tapper tried again. And again. In all, Tapper made an astounding 23 follow-up attempts.

Tapper’s relentlessness ultimately paid off. He finally got a straight answer out of the presumptive Republican presidential nominee.

TAPPER: If you are saying he cannot do his job because of his race, is that not the definition of racism?

 

TRUMP: No, I don’t think so at all.

Tapper refused to drop the subject until Trump offered a yes-or-no answer. It was clearly an exhausting effort. But it showed that even Donald J. Trump can be worn down by a journalist who never gives up.

(h/t Washington Post)

Reality

As House Speaker Paul Ryan explained, Donald Trump’s recent remarks saying a judge presiding over a lawsuit involving his business was biased solely because of his Mexican heritage is “the textbook definition of a racist comment.”

1 … 3 4 5