Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

BumRushDaShow

(153,435 posts)
Tue Mar 18, 2025, 12:15 PM Mar 18

Roberts rejects Trump's call for impeaching judge who ruled against his deportation plans

Source: AP

Updated 12:10 PM EDT, March 18, 2025


WASHINGTON (AP) — In an extraordinary display of conflict between the executive and judiciary branches, Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts rejected calls for impeaching federal judges shortly after President Donald Trump demanded the removal of a judge who ruled against his deportation plans.

“For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision,” Roberts said in a rare statement. “The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose.”

In a Tuesday morning social media post, Trump described U.S. District Judge James E. Boasberg as an unelected “troublemaker and agitator.” Boasberg recently issued an order blocking deportation flights under wartime authorities from an 18th century law that Trump invoked to carry out his plans.

“HE DIDN’T WIN ANYTHING! I WON FOR MANY REASONS, IN AN OVERWHELMING MANDATE, BUT FIGHTING ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION MAY HAVE BEEN THE NUMBER ONE REASON FOR THIS HISTORIC VICTORY,” Trump wrote on his social media platform, Truth Social. “I’m just doing what the VOTERS wanted me to do. This judge, like many of the Crooked Judges’ I am forced to appear before, should be IMPEACHED!!!”

Read more: https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-federal-judges-impeachment-29da1153a9f82106748098a6606fec39



The COLLAPSE of the rule of law in the United States is on YOU Roberts.
73 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Roberts rejects Trump's call for impeaching judge who ruled against his deportation plans (Original Post) BumRushDaShow Mar 18 OP
Now thrump's nazi base will send death threats to Roberts, and no doubt the head nazi, trump will double down and JohnSJ Mar 18 #1
Yup, Roberts just put himself in the crosshairs. NotHardly Mar 18 #23
Wow...this is shocking. FUCK you TRUMP!! Bengus81 Mar 18 #35
Nice. DiamondShark Mar 18 #69
Jumpin' Johnny Roberts relying on judicial precedent bucolic_frolic Mar 18 #2
Wait, no cyclonefence Mar 18 #3
Yes, it is a good thing. Ocelot II Mar 18 #4
F*ck his soul--he doesn't have one. (sold it for his seat) lastlib Mar 18 #12
"Someone" (maybe the 3 liberal Justices) must have WOKEN his ass up in a meeting BumRushDaShow Mar 18 #6
Self-preservation. Jay25 Mar 18 #19
Exactly BumRushDaShow Mar 18 #22
Yes because when the King doesn't get his way, he will just say tavernier Mar 18 #58
Yup. BumRushDaShow Mar 18 #61
True BRDS DENVERPOPS Mar 18 #42
Yeah I have been monitoring Buffet BumRushDaShow Mar 18 #62
Great durablend Mar 18 #7
Hold the relevant Secretaries in contempt and 33taw Mar 18 #31
Hey Johnny do you want to revisit the immunity issue.............asking for a friend......... turbinetree Mar 18 #5
"I'm just doing what the VOTERS wanted me to do." William Seger Mar 18 #8
"I was only following orders" The Wizard Mar 18 #28
Where does he get this "OVERWHELMING MANDATE" from? William769 Mar 18 #9
From the same seemingly bottomless, foul pit from which the rest of his lies and hyperbole are foisted upon us. Harker Mar 18 #25
From his damn "reality show host" stupid propaganda for the stupids. nt Justice matters. Mar 18 #48
Roberts Statement LetMyPeopleVote Mar 18 #10
Slathering on the irony with a trowel there, Johnny---- lastlib Mar 18 #16
In Roberts' defense (I can't believe I'm saying this.), when he supported the immunity decision, maybe he couldn't generalbetrayus Mar 18 #29
Sorry..... DENVERPOPS Mar 18 #44
Finally! PortTack Mar 18 #11
Pretty anodyne, Johnny. maxsolomon Mar 18 #13
Krasnov is INSANE Joinfortmill Mar 18 #14
careful- you'll be et tu Mar 18 #32
By him and what army? orangecrush Mar 18 #43
By the US Army. Wednesdays Mar 18 #57
Guess I don't have to worry now orangecrush Mar 18 #59
r's are trying to pass et tu Mar 18 #64
One of them just got arrested orangecrush Mar 18 #65
Roberts may be standing up to trump. Time will tell LetMyPeopleVote Mar 18 #15
But like he has done the lower court judges BumRushDaShow Mar 18 #17
Please don't fall for this folks. Roberts is signaling Trump Mr.WeRP Mar 18 #18
The SCOTUS would dissolve BumRushDaShow Mar 18 #20
I'd love it if Roberts (and one or two other Justices) got fed up with the Trump bullshit and tired of the wasted time Martin68 Mar 18 #21
Operation Rogue Handmaid Blue Owl Mar 18 #66
Historic victory is right. boonecreek Mar 18 #24
The Smith report The Wizard Mar 18 #38
More people voting against you BOSSHOG Mar 18 #26
I can't understand why the SC justices, even the ones Orange Julius Caesar appointed, aren't standing up against him. generalbetrayus Mar 18 #27
Never forget Anti-democracy Rehnquist 5 put us on this path in 2000 GoreWon2000 Mar 18 #47
Well Well Well dawgdan Mar 18 #30
"troublemaker and agitator." Mr. Evil Mar 18 #33
He'll step down and then dump will appoint another 45-year-old maga-nat-zee wolfie001 Mar 18 #34
Wait..wasn't there an intimate exchange between Roberts and Trump at the state of the Union speech? BattleRow Mar 18 #36
Translation: "We'll take care of that on appeal, Your Highness." Marcuse Mar 18 #37
Amazing. Not a peep about destroying the country, but if you fuck with the judiciary Scalded Nun Mar 18 #39
Well, Roberts, you gave Trump immunity, so how are we going to force Trump to abide by the courts? SunSeeker Mar 18 #40
Yes. And on Merrick Garland. Justice matters. Mar 18 #41
Do you somehow think that Roberts would have acted or ruled any differently? BumRushDaShow Mar 18 #60
Then the dishonor would have been on him. Justice matters. Mar 18 #67
It will ALWAYS be on Roberts BumRushDaShow Mar 18 #68
Garland did not push hard enough to really investigate Trump from April 2021 on. Justice matters. Mar 18 #70
I have posted the multiple timelines over and over BumRushDaShow Mar 19 #71
And the end result of that bloathed separation of powers' justice system is... Justice matters. Mar 19 #72
That is why there has been a continual push for "criminal justice reform" BumRushDaShow Mar 19 #73
Collapse of the rule of law is on the Rehnquist 5 GoreWon2000 Mar 18 #45
Wht's extraordinary about defending the law? Marthe48 Mar 18 #46
The SCOTUS started this nightmare in 2000 GoreWon2000 Mar 18 #50
I'll never disagree with that statement of fact Marthe48 Mar 18 #51
Thank you. I totally agree with you. GoreWon2000 Mar 18 #53
TRUMP IS FUCKING INSANE AND CAN'T BE REMOVED FROM OFFICE SOON ENOUGH LymphocyteLover Mar 18 #49
It's way too late for Roberts to remember the US Constitution. NNadir Mar 18 #52
Guess who should be impeached, crazy traitor. Dave Bowman Mar 18 #54
Roberts is right, this one time Wednesdays Mar 18 #55
Elon 90-percent Mar 18 #56
MaddowBlog-Chief Justice John Roberts rebukes Trump over call for federal judge's impeachment LetMyPeopleVote Mar 18 #63

JohnSJ

(98,798 posts)
1. Now thrump's nazi base will send death threats to Roberts, and no doubt the head nazi, trump will double down and
Tue Mar 18, 2025, 12:18 PM
Mar 18

probably call for robert's impeachment.


bucolic_frolic

(50,594 posts)
2. Jumpin' Johnny Roberts relying on judicial precedent
Tue Mar 18, 2025, 12:19 PM
Mar 18

Can't believe my lyin' eyes and ears. Lord just never tires of manufacturing irony.

cyclonefence

(5,062 posts)
3. Wait, no
Tue Mar 18, 2025, 12:20 PM
Mar 18

this is a *good* thing--Roberts is upholding the rule of law. Isn't he? Did I misread this?

Ocelot II

(124,950 posts)
4. Yes, it is a good thing.
Tue Mar 18, 2025, 12:24 PM
Mar 18

And now I hope he does a little soul-searching about the mess he helped create.

lastlib

(25,986 posts)
12. F*ck his soul--he doesn't have one. (sold it for his seat)
Tue Mar 18, 2025, 01:15 PM
Mar 18

Maybe he'll search his mind--it's a much briefer exercise.

BumRushDaShow

(153,435 posts)
6. "Someone" (maybe the 3 liberal Justices) must have WOKEN his ass up in a meeting
Tue Mar 18, 2025, 12:38 PM
Mar 18

demanding that he *say something*.

Roberts will now be targeted and attacked by the MAGat mobs that he helped to enable with that bullshit "immunity" ruling.

Any criminal conduct that gets carried out by 45 and his cabal can (and probably will) be "pardoned" and there's nothing that Roberts can do about it.

Jay25

(422 posts)
19. Self-preservation.
Tue Mar 18, 2025, 01:25 PM
Mar 18

He realizes that even the Supreme Court will become obsolete under this creature in human form.

tavernier

(13,715 posts)
58. Yes because when the King doesn't get his way, he will just say
Tue Mar 18, 2025, 03:27 PM
Mar 18

“You don’t have the cards. Remember? You gave them all to me.”

DENVERPOPS

(12,370 posts)
42. True BRDS
Tue Mar 18, 2025, 02:19 PM
Mar 18

And they all are still trying to prevent and delay displaying what they are really up to, until they make more headway and ready for their last hurrah, slam dunk...........which in my opinion is the Trashing of the Stock Market and Investments, wiping out everyone's retirements and 401K investments........

(Did you note Warren Buffet quietly going to cash with his selling of several of his largest investments????? It appears that he, and many other UBER wealthy are slowly retracting, going to bonds, hoping no one notices, rather them doing it all at once......

You are THE most awesome of anyone on DU......always read your stuff first........Some days you are all I read !!!!

Nice Job BRDS

BumRushDaShow

(153,435 posts)
62. Yeah I have been monitoring Buffet
Tue Mar 18, 2025, 04:12 PM
Mar 18

and Berkshire Hathaway hoarding cash. Others like the Gates have been giving theirs away.

A lot of what Musk has is "on paper" wealth but not necessarily "real wealth". He is also dropping babies all around and it's only a matter of time before the baby-mamas start demanding their "share".

And thanks for the compliment!

turbinetree

(26,143 posts)
5. Hey Johnny do you want to revisit the immunity issue.............asking for a friend.........
Tue Mar 18, 2025, 12:37 PM
Mar 18

or did you finally look in the mirror...............

William Seger

(11,651 posts)
8. "I'm just doing what the VOTERS wanted me to do."
Tue Mar 18, 2025, 12:45 PM
Mar 18

That doesn't make it legal, asshole — the whole reason for the Bill of Rights is to protect individual rights, such as due process, against majoritarianism.

The Wizard

(13,171 posts)
28. "I was only following orders"
Tue Mar 18, 2025, 01:49 PM
Mar 18

was declared invalid in the Nuremberg war crimes trials. If it walks like a Nazi, talks like a Nazi and acts like a Nazi, it's a (fill in the blank).

Harker

(16,267 posts)
25. From the same seemingly bottomless, foul pit from which the rest of his lies and hyperbole are foisted upon us.
Tue Mar 18, 2025, 01:41 PM
Mar 18

It's astounding.

lastlib

(25,986 posts)
16. Slathering on the irony with a trowel there, Johnny----
Tue Mar 18, 2025, 01:20 PM
Mar 18

you don't suppose that immunity decision you gave the Crime Minister last year has somethin' to do with all this, do ya? Cuz if you hadn't given him that little gift, we wouldn't be having THIS conversation now, would we?

generalbetrayus

(939 posts)
29. In Roberts' defense (I can't believe I'm saying this.), when he supported the immunity decision, maybe he couldn't
Tue Mar 18, 2025, 01:50 PM
Mar 18

believe that Orange Julius Caesar would be reelected. (I like your "Crime Minister" )

DENVERPOPS

(12,370 posts)
44. Sorry.....
Tue Mar 18, 2025, 02:29 PM
Mar 18

they all have shown time and time again where their true hearts are.................

I am waiting for the Republican House members, the Republican Senators, and the Republican US Supreme Court to suddenly realize what is going on.......LOL

Just as how Trump is kicking all his voters to the curb and under the bus because they have outgrown their usefulness, the House and Senate Repubs and the USSC will soon wake up and realize that a Corporation driven TYRANNY, doesn't need a Legislative or Judicial Branch much longer.

maxsolomon

(36,573 posts)
13. Pretty anodyne, Johnny.
Tue Mar 18, 2025, 01:16 PM
Mar 18

I think the GOP Congress SHOULD impeach Boasberg. Go ahead and take the mask off.

et tu

(2,201 posts)
32. careful- you'll be
Tue Mar 18, 2025, 01:59 PM
Mar 18

branded with trump mental disorder syndrome
and be locked up- keys we dont need no stinking keys
you're here until ....

BumRushDaShow

(153,435 posts)
17. But like he has done the lower court judges
Tue Mar 18, 2025, 01:24 PM
Mar 18

he can just ignore him and have his foaming-at-the-mouth mobs start threatening him.

The only thing that may salvage the situation is perhaps his daughter.

Mr.WeRP

(813 posts)
18. Please don't fall for this folks. Roberts is signaling Trump
Tue Mar 18, 2025, 01:25 PM
Mar 18

That once SCOTUS gets the case, they will rule in Trump’s favor and all will be well. No need to waste time impeaching judges, as they are irrelevant. It’s not a rebuke, it is consoling.

BumRushDaShow

(153,435 posts)
20. The SCOTUS would dissolve
Tue Mar 18, 2025, 01:27 PM
Mar 18

Not sure if Roberts is there yet. But we know Thomas and Alito have been well taken care of.

Martin68

(25,851 posts)
21. I'd love it if Roberts (and one or two other Justices) got fed up with the Trump bullshit and tired of the wasted time
Tue Mar 18, 2025, 01:27 PM
Mar 18

and decided to stick to the Constitution for a change. Trump can get on anyone's nerves after a while.

The Wizard

(13,171 posts)
38. The Smith report
Tue Mar 18, 2025, 02:12 PM
Mar 18

purports That trump would have been indicted and found guilty based on the evidence. Had Garland done his job, assuming his family wasn't threatened, Trump could very well be making license plates.

BOSSHOG

(42,537 posts)
26. More people voting against you
Tue Mar 18, 2025, 01:45 PM
Mar 18

Than voting for you does not a mandate make

A Supreme Court Justice doesn’t have to win anything

Check back with us when it’s time to harvest the crops on your brilliant immigrant move

generalbetrayus

(939 posts)
27. I can't understand why the SC justices, even the ones Orange Julius Caesar appointed, aren't standing up against him.
Tue Mar 18, 2025, 01:46 PM
Mar 18

He is already telling the justice system that he doesn't give a Muskrat's ass if it rules against him. At some point this disdain will make it all the way up to the level of the Supreme Court. You can't tell me that the SC justices don't have huge egos. They should all, well, maybe except for long-term toadies like Thomas and Alito, have steam coming out of their ears over the current situation. They should be worried about becoming powerless fools very quickly under this administration.

BattleRow

(1,588 posts)
36. Wait..wasn't there an intimate exchange between Roberts and Trump at the state of the Union speech?
Tue Mar 18, 2025, 02:09 PM
Mar 18

"Thank you,thank you,I'll never forget,"said Trump.

May take on a whole new meaning now.

Scalded Nun

(1,404 posts)
39. Amazing. Not a peep about destroying the country, but if you fuck with the judiciary
Tue Mar 18, 2025, 02:14 PM
Mar 18

I will be unhappy.

Well, Mr. Chief Justice...You already told him that he can fuck with anything with impunity. That means he can fuck with you as well.

Like telling a 5-year old not to play with matches, but if he does, nothing bad will happen to him. Maybe to others, but not to him.

Your turn in the barrel (or under the bus...whichever) is on its way.

SunSeeker

(55,878 posts)
40. Well, Roberts, you gave Trump immunity, so how are we going to force Trump to abide by the courts?
Tue Mar 18, 2025, 02:17 PM
Mar 18

Justice matters.

(8,390 posts)
41. Yes. And on Merrick Garland.
Tue Mar 18, 2025, 02:19 PM
Mar 18

I wonder what he's doing these days. Hiding in a bunker somewhere? Scared, and with regrets of not doing something a lot faster than he did but surely could have done?

Same for turtleface

BumRushDaShow

(153,435 posts)
60. Do you somehow think that Roberts would have acted or ruled any differently?
Tue Mar 18, 2025, 04:02 PM
Mar 18

Seriously:?

If the cases had magically been through several levels of trial, WITHOUT any delays for bogus "Executive Privilege" claims and "total immunity", between January 6, 2021 and January 7, 2021 and landed on Roberts desk on January 8, 2021, he would have somehow ruled any differently than what he did with granting "qualified immunity"?

Justice matters.

(8,390 posts)
67. Then the dishonor would have been on him.
Tue Mar 18, 2025, 06:58 PM
Mar 18

For the History writers.

Not on the conservative feet-dragging protege of some here.

Brazil took care of their insurrectionists (not even classified-documents thief's) very, very quickly... but no, not the Land of the Free... The richest country in History...

BumRushDaShow

(153,435 posts)
68. It will ALWAYS be on Roberts
Tue Mar 18, 2025, 08:08 PM
Mar 18

People need to put the blame where it belongs.

Judge Chutkan was ready go before she got "the Roberts 'immunity' homework assignment" and that was the end of that.

I saw the same crap on DU done against Eric Holder and trashing him for not frog-marching Shrub and Darth and the BFEE.

Justice matters.

(8,390 posts)
70. Garland did not push hard enough to really investigate Trump from April 2021 on.
Tue Mar 18, 2025, 11:34 PM
Mar 18

He waited until Hutchinson's testimony in front of the J6 committee more than a full year later.

Now why did he not direct DOJ investigators to bring her in and all the people present in the White House to question them all in May 2021? Come on. There was a clear conspiracy to overthrow the result of the election VIOLENTLY but no... he waited for OTHERS to do HIS JOB. Had he done it competently, Judge Chutkan would have had the case against the criminal mob boss in her court at least a full year (if not more) before it did.

That's the harsh truth Garland defenders refuse to acknowledge, trying to change the subject as much as they can.

BumRushDaShow

(153,435 posts)
71. I have posted the multiple timelines over and over
Wed Mar 19, 2025, 06:17 AM
Mar 19

One of them -

Inside Garland’s Effort to Prosecute Trump


By Glenn Thrush and Adam Goldman

Reporting from Washington

Published March 22, 2024 Updated March 27, 2024

After being sworn in as attorney general in March 2021, Merrick B. Garland gathered his closest aides to discuss a topic too sensitive to broach in bigger groups: the possibility that evidence from the far-ranging Jan. 6 investigation could quickly lead to former President Donald J. Trump and his inner circle. At the time, some in the Justice Department were pushing for the chance to look at ties between pro-Trump rioters who assaulted the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, his allies who had camped out at the Willard Hotel, and possibly Mr. Trump himself.

Mr. Garland said he would place no restrictions on their work, even if the “evidence leads to Trump,” according to people with knowledge of several conversations held over his first months in office. “Follow the connective tissue upward,” said Mr. Garland, adding a directive that would eventually lead to a dead end: “Follow the money.” With that, he set the course of a determined and methodical, if at times dysfunctional and maddeningly slow, investigation that would yield the indictment of Mr. Trump on four counts of election interference in August 2023.

(snip)

People around Mr. Garland, who like others interviewed for this article spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss Justice Department affairs, say there would be no case against Mr. Trump had Mr. Garland not acted decisively. And any perception that the department had made Mr. Trump a target from the outset, without exploring other avenues, would have doomed the investigation. “Don’t confuse thoughtful with unduly cautious,” said a former deputy attorney general, Jamie S. Gorelick, who sent Mr. Garland, then her top aide, to oversee the prosecution of the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing. “He was fearless. You could see it then, and you could see it when he authorized the search at Mar-a-Lago.”

Mr. Garland’s allies point to how, by the summer of 2021, the attorney general and his powerful deputy, Lisa O. Monaco, were so frustrated with the pace of the work that they created a team to investigate Trump allies who gathered at the Willard Hotel ahead of Jan. 6 — John Eastman, Boris Epshteyn, Rudolph W. Giuliani and Roger J. Stone Jr. — and possible connections to the Trump White House, according to former officials. That team would lay the groundwork for the investigation that Mr. Smith would take over as special counsel a year and a half later. But a host of factors, some in Mr. Garland’s control, others not, slowed things down.

(snip)

Much more... https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/22/us/politics/trump-jan-6-merrick-garland.html

No paywall (gift link)


And there continues to be complete ignorance on how DOJ operates and their direct connection as "the law firm for the regulatory agencies" (using local U.S. Attorneys). This concept seems to be alien and people refuse to accept this concept when told about it.

You also have the issue of people not understanding that per the Constitution, STATES are "in charge of elections". So when 45 violated state laws, the states sat there twiddling their thumbs waiting on the federal government to "do something" when there was no direct authority for them to do such. They eventually figured it out and finally started investigating the issue of "fake electors". THAT IS WHY CONGRESS PASSED A LAW - AFTER THE FACT - TO DEAL WITH THE ELECTORS ISSUE -

S.4573 - Electoral Count Reform and Presidential Transition Improvement Act of 2022

You also can't selectively eliminate the judiciary interventions when "the defendant" used it to delay. During the multiple grand jury periods, you had people like Mark Meadows insisting on withholding info based on "Executive Privilege" and there were whole periods of time when that argument had to go through the lower, appellate, and finally to the SCOTUS to resolve before moving on.

Judge says several Trump aides, including former chief of staff, must testify to Jan. 6 grand jury

Appeals court rejects Trump's motion to block Mark Meadows, former aides from testifying in special counsel probe

I also point out a scenario of what DUers have demanded - instant investigations - and that happened with the RICO case that Fulton County, GA D.A. Fani Willis did. HER timeline -

Timeline: Criminal probe into Trump's efforts to overturn Georgia election results

(snip)

Feb. 10, 2021

Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis notifies Kemp that her office has launched an investigation into efforts by Trump and his allies to overturn the results of the 2020 election, according to a letter obtained by ABC News.

The letter asked state officials to preserve any documents potentially related to the 2020 general election, "with particular care given to set aside and preserve those that may be evidence of attempts to influence the actions of persons who were administering" it, which would include Trump's phone call with Raffensperger.

Jan. 20, 2022

Willis requests to seat a special grand jury in her probe, according to a letter obtained by ABC News. In the letter to Fulton County Chief Judge Christopher Brasher, Willis wrote that the move is needed because "a significant number of witnesses and prospective witnesses have refused to cooperate with the investigation absent a subpoena requiring their testimony."

(snip)

July 11, 2023

Based on the findings of the special grand jury, Willis empanels a new grand jury to weight possible election-related charges against Trump.

(snip)


And one month after the above, on Aug. 15, 2023, Willis announced her indictments - Trump and 18 allies charged in Georgia election meddling as former president faces 4th criminal case


QUESTION

Today is March 19, 2025. Where is her case and why isn't 45 in state prison in Georgia?

ANSWER

The JUDGE tossed out some more charges (and now the whole thing is bogged down investigating HER instead of 45) - Judge tosses more counts against Trump and others in Georgia election case, 32 counts remain

So what happened?

Point being, the JUDICIARY was holding up ALL of the criminal cases - both federal and state (whether for trial or for sentencing). The only one that finally came to some sort of "conclusion" was the NY state one where the "sentencing" was basically non-existent (although the felonies remain).

I STILL see DUers insist that somehow, "charges were never brought", completely clueless about the fact that INDICTMENTS ARE CHARGES.

And don't try to "blend" what is a SEPARATION OF POWERS - Executive Branch vs Legislative Branch. That is another failure of the arguments. The way this system of a Constitutional Republic is *supposed to work* is that there are "checks and balances" and just because one party might have "control" over the Executive and Legislative, doesn't mean that they are always going to be "lock step" (although obviously 45 has decided that not only would he force such, but then he would decide to completely negate the Legislative Branch's role and go it alone).

This is apparently what DU wants Democrats to do.

Justice matters.

(8,390 posts)
72. And the end result of that bloathed separation of powers' justice system is...
Wed Mar 19, 2025, 12:10 PM
Mar 19

a two-tier system:

- one for the haves (resulting in justice denied)

- one for the have-nots (where stealing one classified document leads to five years in jail in a speed trial)

Bravo... (not)

As an aside, I hope Garland has fled the country already (for his own good) to an undisclosed location...

BumRushDaShow

(153,435 posts)
73. That is why there has been a continual push for "criminal justice reform"
Wed Mar 19, 2025, 12:48 PM
Mar 19

The wealthy can get the "best due process that money can buy".

Whenever info is posted about those reform efforts, the OPs get yawns.

But that has nothing to do with the revolving door of Presidential appointees that fill the various Department head/Cabinet slots.

Few on DU will talk about Bill Barr or Jeff Sessions, both of whom were 45's AGs during his first term. In fact, nothing at all is mentioned about Jeff Rosen who was "Acting AG" during the January 6 insurrection, and little is even mentioned about Pam Bondi today.

But they had a lot to say about Eric Holder who was AG under Obama for most of his 2 terms and probably would have gotten started on Loretta Lynch except that she was only serving out the remainder of Holder's term after he left, and before 45 got in.

I wonder why?

I worked for a HHS agency for over 30 years and served under 6 Presidents and 8 Secretaries of HHS. Federal employees don't fixate on and obsess over these figureheads. They are "here today, gone tomorrow... NEXT!"

 

GoreWon2000

(1,461 posts)
45. Collapse of the rule of law is on the Rehnquist 5
Tue Mar 18, 2025, 02:37 PM
Mar 18

Never forget that it was the Rehnquist 5 who started this nightmare in 2000 which created the Roberts court.

Marthe48

(20,704 posts)
46. Wht's extraordinary about defending the law?
Tue Mar 18, 2025, 02:40 PM
Mar 18

that the (formerly) scotus is raising it's biased fists against the fascists? Finally?

 

GoreWon2000

(1,461 posts)
50. The SCOTUS started this nightmare in 2000
Tue Mar 18, 2025, 02:46 PM
Mar 18

when they threw out the legal votes of millions of Americans in order to install their preferred, pro dictatorship candidate W.

Marthe48

(20,704 posts)
51. I'll never disagree with that statement of fact
Tue Mar 18, 2025, 02:48 PM
Mar 18

I've felt sick to my stomach every time I think of the travesty.

NNadir

(35,900 posts)
52. It's way too late for Roberts to remember the US Constitution.
Tue Mar 18, 2025, 02:50 PM
Mar 18

He managed to be an even worse Chief Justice than Roger Taney, no small feat.

Taney never sought to suspend the Constitution. In fact Taney defended the Constitution, albeit it's worst features as they existed in his time.

Robert's has held the Constitution in open contempt. History, should the discipline continue to exist, will hold him in contempt.

LetMyPeopleVote

(163,818 posts)
63. MaddowBlog-Chief Justice John Roberts rebukes Trump over call for federal judge's impeachment
Tue Mar 18, 2025, 04:18 PM
Mar 18

The White House has been engaged in an intense fight with the judiciary. By calling for a judge’s impeachment, Trump just took the fight to a new level.


Trump, last week: It's "totally illegal" to criticize a judge I like.

Trump, this week: A judge I don't like is a "Radical Left Lunatic" who "should be IMPEACHED!!!"



https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/trump-crosses-new-line-calls-judges-impeachment-escalating-fight-judic-rcna196882
Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts issued a highly unusual statement on Tuesday morning, for example, that read, "For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision. The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose.".....

Four days later, Politico reported on the president calling for a different federal district court judge’s impeachment.

President Donald Trump on Tuesday called for the impeachment of the federal judge who ordered a two-week halt to his efforts to remove Venezuelan migrants using extraordinary war powers that haven’t been invoked for decades. Trump’s call to remove U.S. District Judge James Boasberg — the chief judge of the federal district court in Washington, D.C. — is the first time since taking office for his second term that he’s asked Congress to seek a judge’s removal, joining increasingly pointed calls by his top donor and adviser Elon Musk and a segment of his MAGA base.


Apparently furious about Boasberg’s handling of the Alien Enemies Act litigation, the president published an especially enraged item to his social media platform, referring to the federal district court judge as a “Radical Left Lunatic,” a “troublemaker” and an “agitator.” After a series of all-caps claims about the fact that the jurist isn’t an elected official — in this country, federal judges aren’t chosen by voters — Trump concluded, “This judge, like many of the Crooked Judges’ I am forced to appear before, should be IMPEACHED!!!”.....

This campaign, however, has been largely relegated to the fringe. There are over 250 GOP lawmakers across the House and the Senate, and the total number of Republicans talking about impeaching federal judges is, as a quantitative matter, fairly small. Few, if any, credible observers have predicted that the impeachment push would ever be taken seriously on Capitol Hill.

But it’s against this backdrop that the sitting Republican president has decided to throw his weight behind an impeachment effort — not because Boasberg committed high crimes or abused his office, but because the judge is handling an important case in a way Trump doesn’t like.

The White House has been engaged in an intensifying fight with the judicial branch, and there’s been growing speculation about whether the administration might consider defying court rulings that the president doesn’t like. With his impeachment call, Trump just took that fight to a new level.
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Roberts rejects Trump's c...