Show Notes:
Wall Street Journal: The Judicial Impeachment Distraction by William McGurn
It isn’t a new problem. In Trump v. Hawaii—the 2018 travel ban case—Justice Clarence Thomas said the court had a constitutional obligation to take on the federal judiciaries’ increasing resort to nationwide injunctions.
“These injunctions did not emerge until a century and a half after the founding,” Justice Thomas wrote. “And they appear to be inconsistent with longstanding limits on equitable relief and the power of Article III courts. If their popularity continues, this court must address their legality.”
More recently, Justice Samuel Alito wrote that he was “stunned” by his colleagues’ decision to reject the Trump administration’s request to force the restoration of foreign aid it had canceled.
“Does a single district-court judge,” he wrote, “who likely lacks jurisdiction have the unchecked power to compel the Government of the United States to pay out (and probably lose forever) 2 billion taxpayer dollars?” It’s still a good question.
A Supreme Court Remedy for Nationwide Injunctions by Elizabeth Price Foley
There is something the justices can do to rein in nationwide injunctions: exercise their authority under the Rules Enabling Act of 1934 to amend the federal rule on injunctions.
The recent outbreak of nationwide injunctions damages our constitutional system. They were almost unheard of before the 1960s. Only 12 were issued against George W. Bush and 19 against Barack Obama during each of their two terms. Joe Biden faced 28. Mr. Trump faced 86 during his first term, almost all issued by Democrat-appointed judges. Two months into his second term, more than 15 have already been issued.
“The Chief Justice can defend the court by overruling bad judges before the Executive and Legislative branches start acting against them.”
From the onset, Boasberg failed to recognize his court lacks the jurisdiction to hear this case. Why? The ACLU filed this case in the District of Columbia. The five Venezuelan plaintiffs represented by the ACLU are not detained in D.C., but in New York and Texas. The Supreme Court ruled in Rumsfeld v. Padilla that no court has jurisdiction over a habeas petition unless those filing the petition are detained in the district in which it was filed.
You don’t have to play with your kids! Your presence is what they want. By Leila M. Lawler
Prayers from the Ark & The Creatures’ Choir by Carmen Bernos de Gasztold, translated by Rumer Godden, Penguin Books — this is the copy we have.
It is out of print. You can find other editions with other illustrations as well, second hand. You can read it here on the Smithsonian site.
Don’t wish to take out a paid subscription just now? We understand!
How about this:
Share this post