Tag: Trump attack on the rule of law

Trump seeks to limit judges’ powers on injunctions after legal blows

President Trump is looking to stop lower courts from being able to issue wide-ranging injunctions in a move that could dramatically limit the authority of judges.

The plan comes as groups opposed to Trump have been able to get several of his policies, including those seeking to limit immigration, put on hold by nationwide orders issued by lower courts in battles that were eventually decided by the Supreme Court.

Advocacy groups that have pushed judges to issue nationwide injunctions say they are necessary to protect people from policies they see as harmful, and some legal experts agree, arguing that the right to issue such actions is protected under the Constitution.

View the complete May 11 article by Jacqueline Thomse on The Hill website here.

Trump’s Face-Saving Way Out of Crisis Raises Fears Over Rule of Law

Credit: Samuel Corum, The New York Times

WASHINGTON — The White House’s announcement Thursday that President Trump would claim emergency powers to build his border wall without congressional approval was a way out of the political crisis he created over shutting down the government. But while the move means the country will avoid another protracted shutdown, legal specialists warned that the long-term costs to American democracy could be steep.

As a matter of political reality, such a declaration permits Mr. Trump to keep the government open without losing face with his core supporters by surrendering to congressional Democrats on his signature issue. As a matter of legal reality, the proposal is likely to be bogged down in a court challenge, leaving any actual construction work based on emergency powers spending an uncertain and, at best, distant prospect.

But no matter what else happens, Mr. Trump’s willingness to invoke emergency powers to circumvent Congress is likely to go down as an extraordinary violation of constitutional norms — setting a precedent that future presidents of both parties may emulate to unilaterally achieve their own policy goals.

View the complete February 14 article by Charlie Savage on The New York Times website here.

Trump wants Mueller to investigate ‘the other side.’ There’s just one problem.

Wasn’t Trump just complaining that Mueller’s investigation was too broad?

President Donald Trump lashed out yet again on Thursday morning at Special Counsel Robert Mueller and his investigation into collusion between Vladimir Putin’s regime and the president’s 2016 campaign. In addition to Trump’s usual gripes about witch hunts, angry prosecutors, and “no collusion,” this time he criticized the investigators for not exceeding their legal mandate.

Donald J. Trump

✔@realDonaldTrump

The inner workings of the Mueller investigation are a total mess. They have found no collusion and have gone absolutely nuts. They are screaming and shouting at people, horribly threatening them to come up with the answers they want. They are a disgrace to our Nation and don’t…

110K

Twitter Ads info and privacy

71.8K people are talking about this

Twitter Ads info and privacy

Donald J. Trump

✔@realDonaldTrump

….care how many lives the ruin. These are Angry People, including the highly conflicted Bob Mueller, who worked for Obama for 8 years. They won’t even look at all of the bad acts and crimes on the other side. A TOTAL WITCH HUNT LIKE NO OTHER IN AMERICAN HISTORY!

114K

Twitter Ads info and privacy

82.4K people are talking about this

The complaint that the “won’t even look at all of the bad acts and crimes on the other side” seems to flatly contradict Trump’s main argument — which is that the investigation has overstepped its legal mandate. He has argued in the past that the investigation is somehow illegal (it’s not), so it’s odd that he would now want an illegal investigation into his political enemies. He has previously demanded via Twitter that his Department of Justice open an investigation into whether his campaign was illegally surveilled and baselessly accused Hillary Clinton’s campaign of colluding with Russia, but having such a probe done by a prosecutor he believes lacks legal standing would no doubt undermine such an effort.

FBI fires Strzok after anti-Trump texts

The following article by Olivia Beavers was posted on the Hill website August 13, 2018:

Peter Strzok Credit: Jack Gruber, USA Today Network

The FBI has fired Peter Strzok, the counterintelligence agent who came under fire for sending disparaging text messages about President Trump and other political figures during the 2016 election.

Strzok’s lawyer, Aitan Goelman, confirmed the firing, which took place on Friday. He blasted the decision in a statement, saying the “Deputy Director of the FBI overruled the FBI’s Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) and departed from established precedent by firing 21-year FBI veteran Peter Strzok.”

“The decision to fire Special Agent Strzok is not only a departure from typical Bureau practice, but also contradicts Director [Christopher] Wray’s testimony to Congress and his assurances that the FBI intended to follow its regular process in this and all personnel matters,” Goelman continued in the statement.

View the complete article here.