Connect with us

Judiciary

Attorney General William Barr calls for end to nationwide injunctions

Published

on

Whenever the President initiates a policy through executive order or new rules through bureaucracy, activists hit the phones. They “shop” for activist judges who can be compelled to block the initiative through federal injunction. This has paralyzed the administration in many ways by allowing single judges in single districts universal power to prevent actions from the White House.

Attorney General William Barr penned an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal last week calling for an end to nationwide injunctions. In it, he detailed a very clear case to bring an end to the practice of blocking every action by the White House through progressive activism on the bench. The Supreme Court has essentially shared temporary power with every federal judge in the nation, leaving it wide open for opposition to block literally everything they try to do.

“It is indeed well past time for our judiciary to re-examine a practice that embitters the political life of the nation, flouts constitutional principles, and stultifies sound judicial administration, all at the cost of public confidence in our institutions,” Barr wrote.

Oppression from the bench keeps the President from doing his job and harms the American people by preventing sound policies from seeing the light of day. This supremacy from the bench must come to an abrupt, unceremonious end.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Advertisement

0

Immigration

Asylum agreement with El Salvador is silly

Published

on

Asylum agreement with El Salvador is silly

The Trump administration has come to an “asylum cooperative agreement” with El Salvador that means anyone who passes through the nation must have been rejected asylum there in order to apply for asylum in the United States. Acting Homeland Security Director Kevin McAleenan signed the agreement Friday.

Unlike similar agreements in the works with Mexico and Guatemala, this one makes no sense. To understand why, look at a map.

El Salvador

Keep in mind, migrants FROM El Salvador would not be affected by this agreement since it would be El Salvador from which they’re seeking asylum. This means the agreement will only apply to those who go out of their way to cut through El Salvador from Honduras, which will be effectively zero. Even those who do will claim they went through Honduras to Guatemala, so the agreement is meaningless.

But it’s actually worse than meaningless. Every move the administration makes to secure the border will be viewed through a critical judicial lens. By signing an agreement with El Salvador, a nation rife with violence, it makes other agreements vulnerable as well. We do not need to be wasting time in court battles over an agreement that will have no practical effects because doing so allows th activist judiciary another opportunity to strike at effective agreements such as the one in place with Mexico and the one in the works with Guatemala.

This was a symbolic effort, one that is not only unnecessary but also puts real efforts at risk. I back the President’s plays on the border the vast majority of the time, but this one makes absolutely no sense.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Judiciary

Judge slaps temporary injunction on California tax return law targeting President Trump

Published

on

Judge slaps temporary injunction on California tax return law targeting President Trump

A federal judge placed a temporary injunction on a California law requiring presidential candidates to release their tax returns in order to be on the election ballot. U.S. District Judge Morrison England Jr., a George W. Bush appointee on the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California, said he will make a full ruling before October 1, 2020.

The law, which clearly targets President Trump as the only candidate who has not released his tax returns, was heralded as a victory for progressive California. But 1st Amendment advocates as well as Constitutional scholars have argued this law would add unconstitutional requirements for American citizens to run for federal office. If the state wants to limit state candidates, so be it, but the argument that they could affect the results for the entire nation has been questioned.

This law would not change the results of the election under normal circumstances as California is safely in the Democrats’ pocket, but a separate effort to make the winner of the popular vote the winner of the electoral college vote would make California’s law extremely important if their efforts succeed.

Federal judge blocks California law requiring Trump tax returns

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/462234-federal-judge-blocks-california-law-requiring-trump-tax-returnsThe judge’s decision came after a hearing on Thursday in Sacramento on consolidated arguments made in five lawsuits over the California law. During the hearing, England focused on the issue of whether a federal financial disclosure law preempts states from imposing additional rules, the Times reported.

A lawyer for California argued that different states already have different rules for their primary elections, while a lawyer for Trump argued that the U.S. Constitution established rules for running for president that states cannot alter, according to the Times.

Opinion

This is a symbolic victory for not only President Trump but for the office of the president in general. States’ rights are important to protect, but when protecting a state’s right affects other states so harshly, it can no longer be classified as federalism. California sought to sway the election in favor of Democrats with their law combined with efforts by those supporting the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.

In such a scenario, President Trump would have zero chance of winning reelection. The Democrats know this, which is why they’re attempting to subvert half of the electorate in an effort to tilt this game unfairly in their favor.

Quote

“It remains our position that the law is unconstitutional because states are not permitted to add additional requirements for candidates for president, and that the law violated citizens’ 1st Amendment right of association.” – Jay Sekulow

Final Thoughts

The Democrats are trying every avenue, from impeachment to keeping President Trump off the ballot, because they realize their field of candidates have nobody who is capable of beating him in a free and fair election.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Guns and Crime

How the FISA Report will further dampen the Mueller Report

Published

on

How the FISA Report will further dampen the Mueller Report

The hopes and dreams of Democrats around the country were systematically shattered over the last few months as the Mueller investigation into Russian hacking of the 2016 election yielded very little fruit. That hasn’t stopped the House Democrats from fishing for more information than the two-year investigation produced in hopes of hanging President Trump with an impeachment.

But the initial draft of the Department of Justice’s inspector general Michael Horowitz’s report has been given to the Attorney General for classification and markup, meaning the public will soon have access to the sordid details surrounding the Steele Dossier and other measures used to secure FISA warrants against the Trump campaign.

Meanwhile, former Deputy Attorney General Andrew McCabe has been recommended for charges after allegedly lying about an investigation into the Clinton Foundation around the same time period. And there’s still the U.S. Attorney John Durham’s investigation into illegal spying on the Trump campaign. All of this combines for a very rocky road ahead for Democrats and former DoJ personnel who may be held accountable for a fruitless investigation trumped up by false claims and shoddy sourcing.

It seems very likely the various “investigations of the investigators” will cause controversy at the very least while possibly leading to charges against multiple people. The seemingly coordinated effort to subvert the Trump campaign and to counter his victory in the then-unlikely scenario in which he wins jibes with the incessant pushing of the collusion narrative by Democrats and mainstream media. It wasn’t that they had anything of substance. They hopes what they had would have substance that would manifest in the Mueller report.

But now the Mueller investigation itself is in jeopardy of losing any remnants of credibility it still has as the premise behind it is being challenged by Attorney General William Barr and the various investigations he has commissioned. Horowitz’s report is the biggest so far, but may only be the tip of the iceberg compared to what Durham may find.

With all of the arrows pointing to foul play by Obama’s DoJ and the Mueller investigation, these reports are likely to unravel all hopes the Democrats have of stopping President Trump before the 2020 election. After he wins, their dreams will be quashed.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Facebook

Trending