Trump's agenda hampered by troubling number of lower court injunctions, Barr says
Trump's agenda hampered by troubling number of lower court injunctions, Barr says
By Edmund DeMarche | Fox News
Published 2 hours ago
Attorney General William Barr on Tuesday said he has noticed a troubling trend of nationwide injunctions issued by lower courts that have taken their toll on President Trump’s agenda and threaten the political process for future administrations.
Barr, who has been accused by Democrats of protecting Trump after the release of the Mueller report, told the American Law Institute that there is a new trend of judicial "willingness" to review executive action, which injects courts into the political process.
He pointed to the district court in California that in January 2018 issued a temporary injunction to block the Trump administration from ending Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA.
DACA has protected about 800,000 people who were brought to the U.S. illegally as children or came with families who overstayed visas. The Obama-era program includes hundreds of thousands of college-age students.
U.S. District Judge William Alsup said at the time that lawyers in favor of DACA demonstrated that the immigrants “were likely to suffer serious, irreparable harm” without court action. The judge also said the lawyers have a strong chance of succeeding at trial.
The White House was swift to criticize these lower court injunctions and called this particular decision “outrageous.” Vice President Mike Pence recently said the administration will ask the Supreme Court to bar them.
"So what have these nationwide injunction wrought? Dreamers remain in limbo, the political process has been pre-empted, and we have had over a year of bitter political division that included a government shutdown of unprecedented length," Barr said.
Barr said nationwide injunctions violate the separation of powers. He said that since Trump took office, there have been 37 nationwide injunctions — more than one a month -- against his office and he said there is likely no end in sight. He said, by comparison, there were two instances where district courts issued an injunction in President Obama’s first two years.
The Associated Press wrote that this is “the latest example of Barr moving to embrace Trump’s political talking points.” Its report pointed out the Trump criticized these rulings at a rally earlier this month, saying, “activist judges who issue nationwide injunctions based on their personal beliefs, which undermine democracy and threaten the rule of law.”
Barr has brushed aside criticism from Democrats that he is in the president’s pocket. He told the Wall Street Journal in a recent interview that he is defending the presidency, not Trump.
“If you destroy the presidency and make it an errand boy for Congress, we’re going to be a much weaker and more divided nation,” he said.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/tru...ions-barr-says
Obama Judges Obstructing Justice: Nearly 40 Injunctions Against Trump After ONLY TWO
Obama Judges Obstructing Justice: Nearly 40 Injunctions Against Trump After ONLY TWO Against Obama
May 26, 2019
Joe Hoft
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/wp-...-1-600x319.jpg
Attorney General Barr last week ripped federal judges and their injunctions against President Trump. These judges are taking ‘unprecedented power’ over the Executive Branch.
The Washington Times reported last week –
Attorney General William P. Barr on Tuesday railed against federal courts issuing nationwide injunctions blocking President Trump from implementing his policies, saying they wield “unprecedented power.”
In a speech before the American Law Institute, Mr. Barr said such injunctions block politicians of all stripes from enacting the voters’ will.
“One judge can, in effect, cancel the policy with the stroke of the pen,” he said. “No official in the United States government can exercise that kind of nationwide power, with the sole exception of the president. And the Constitution subjects him to nationwide election, among other constitutional checks, as a prerequisite to wielding that power.”
Mr. Barr pointed the finger squarely at the American Law Institute for contributing to the problem. He blamed a 2010 commentary it published saying individual cases are the same as aggregate litigation because in both cases the relief would apply to one or several individuals.
That’s wrong, Mr. Barr said, because it ignores prior legal precedent.
The Times reports [emphasis added] –
Since Mr. Trump took office, federal courts have issued 37 nationwide injunctions against his policies, Mr. Barr said. During President Barack Obama’s first two years, the courts issued two injunctions and only 27 were issued during the 20th century, according to Justice Department data.
President Trump has complained about Obama selected judges who are responsible for many, if not all of these injunctions. Chief Justice Roberts decided to publicly rebuke the President for this line saying that in essence all judges are the same. This response was definitely uncalled for and out of line by the Chief Justice and President Trump responded.
Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump
Sorry Chief Justice John Roberts, but you do indeed have “Obama judges,” and they have a much different point of view than the people who are charged with the safety of our country. It would be great if the 9th Circuit was indeed an “independent judiciary,” but if it is why......
13:51 - 21 Nov 2018
This was back in 2018 and by the time of AG Barr’s presentation last week there were 37 injunctions against President Trump. This doesn’t count the injunctions since by an Obama judge aborting a Mississippi abortion law from being initiated last week and another Obama appointed judge preventing the President’s efforts to fund building the border wall which also happened last week.
We no longer have judges that judge, we have Obama judges that are activists. Obama clearly did all he could to destroy America in every way.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/201...against-obama/
