Lawfare

New Jersey federal judges sideline Alina Habba as top prosecutor, Trump’s DOJ ousts her replacement– www.cbsnews.com
Source Link
Excerpt:

Federal judges in New Jersey invoked a rarely used judiciary power to sideline interim U.S. Attorney Alina Habba, installing her top assistant as the state’s top federal prosecutor — but hours later, the Trump administration responded by ousting Habba’s deputy.

President Trump installed Habba, who had served as his personal attorney, on March 24 in an interim capacity. An appointee can lead a U.S. attorney’s office for up to 120 days pending Senate confirmation. Habba was not formally nominated for the role until July 1 and has not been confirmed.

The state’s district judges voted to replace her. Chief Judge Renée Bumb wrote in an order Tuesday that they appointed Habba’s first assistant, longtime prosecutor Desiree Leigh Grace, to the role.

Hours later, Attorney General Pam Bondi said the Justice Department had “removed” Grace, accusing “rogue judges” of “threatening” the president’s constitutional powers.

A Justice Department official told CBS News that Grace is no longer with the department.

Source Link
Excerpt:

An appellate court ruled the Trump administration can move forward with ending temporary deportation protections for thousands of Afghan and Cameroonian nationals.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is allowed to end the Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for roughly 10,000 Afghans and Cameroonians while a court challenge against the move continues to play out in court, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Monday. The court determined that while CASA — an immigration advocacy group suing DHS — has a plausible case, there is not enough evidence to block the TPS phaseout while the court challenge continues.

“We agree with the district court that CASA, Inc. has stated a plausible claim for relief with regard to the alleged ‘preordained’ decision to terminate temporary protected status (TPS) for Afghanistan and Cameroon, and that the balance of the equities and the public interest weigh in favor of CASA, Inc,” the court stated, according to court documents.

“At this procedural posture, however, there is insufficient evidence to warrant the extraordinary remedy of a postponement of agency action pending appeal,” the ruling continued.

Source Link
Excerpt:

Tuesday on MSNBC’s “The Last Word,” Sen. Adam Schiff (D-CA) said President Donald Trump “abused” the National Guard for a “political show” when he deployed them to Los Angeles.

Host Lawrence O’Donnell said,  “I want to get your reaction to the news from Los Angeles tonight. The L.A. Times reporting that 4000 National Guard soldiers who’d been deployed in Los Angeles by Donald Trump are being released from that duty finally. Something you’ve been saying was something that duty they never should have had, but certainly they could have been released from an awful long time ago.”

Schiff said, “They should have been released, frankly, they should never have been called up. This was a political show, a political parade from the very beginning by Donald Trump over the wishes of the governor and of the mayor to militarize an already tense situation in Los Angeles, just made matters worse.

He added, “Trump feeds on that chaos. So this was by his design. To see the Guard so misused in that way, the trust that Californians have for the Guard abused in that way was just awful. Plus those Guard members that he took off their ordinary duties it meant at present, when we’re already dealing with fires breaking out in California, they were understaffed because we rely on our Guard in case of fire and other emergency. So I think they had to cut them loose sooner or later. This was way too late, but I’m glad that this is finally happening. I hope it means the release of all of those who were deployed, not just the Guard, but also the Marines, an even worse abuse.”

Source Link
Excerpt:

U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer will proceed with evaluating Gov. Gavin Newsom‘s (D-CA) claims that President Donald Trump‘s use of the National Guard in Los Angeles violated a federal law preventing troops from being used for regular law enforcement activities, despite an appeals court ruling that Breyer could not pause the use of the troops.

Last week, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit blocked Breyer’s previous pause on Trump’s federalization of the National Guard after Breyer said the president unlawfully took over it.

After the appeals court took jurisdiction over those claims, Breyer requested briefs from California officials and the Justice Department on whether they believed he could still rule on Newsom’s claims that the deployed troops violated the Posse Comitatus Act by engaging in civilian law enforcement activities. In an order filed late Wednesday evening in California, Breyer ruled that he has that authority and ordered some discovery to be permitted in the case.

“Both parties posit that the Court does retain that jurisdiction,” Breyer wrote in his order. “Upon review, the Court agrees. The Court may proceed with the case, including by hearing arguments on the propriety of a preliminary injunction on Posse Comitatus Act grounds and by allowing discovery.”

Breyer said he would consider a preliminary injunction on Newsom’s allegations that the Trump administration violated the Posse Comitatus Act following a timeline requested by California officials. Their briefing requested responses and depositions be completed by July 11 and a supplemental briefing be filed by July 15.

Source Link
Excerpt:

The U.S. Supreme Court is preparing to hand down a pivotal decision that could finally put an end to one of the Left’s favorite judicial tricks: nationwide injunctions designed to paralyze conservative executive action.

According to George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley, a looming Supreme Court decision on nationwide injunctions could have “enormous” impacts on the Trump administration.

Turley said Tuesday that the high court will likely crack down on rogue activist judges.

The SCOTUS is poised to decide on the practice by federal judges that can currently halt executive branch policies affecting the entire country.

Conservatives have argued that injunctions have been strategically sought in left-wing jurisdictions.

The moves are part of a strategy to undermine the Trump administration’s agenda on immigration enforcement and deportations.

“It’s going to be an enormous decision potentially,” Turley explained.

The legal scholar noted that a decision may come on Thursday.

“For the administration in the immigration areas, as well as other areas, the court could very well say, ‘Enough. We’re not going to have individual judges freezing the entire United States government on critical programs like this.”

Turley said that many of the injunctions are brought in “favorable” jurisdictions in front of “favorable” judges.

Those activist judges issue the injunctions that are favorable to Democrats and stop the president’s policies in their tracks.

Source Link
Excerpt:

A federal judge in California blocked President Donald Trump‘s executive order aimed at ending collective bargaining for federal workers across various federal agencies.

Judge James Donato of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, an Obama appointee, issued a preliminary injunction on Tuesday blocking Trump’s order stripping collective bargaining rights from 21 agencies, which the president said he could do under the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978, citing national security concerns.

Donato sided with the American Federation of Government Employees, the AFL-CIO, and other unions who said the order was unlawful retaliation and violated their First Amendment speech rights.

“Plaintiffs have demonstrated a serious question under the First Amendment that warrants preserving the status quo pending further litigation. The court need not take up plaintiffs’ other claims as a potential ground for an injunction,” Donato said.

Donato pointed to a fact sheet released by the White House, which said Trump would “not tolerate mass obstruction that jeopardizes his ability to manage agencies with vital national security missions,” as part of his concerns about First Amendment violations.

The judge said the fact sheet “expressed a clear point of view that is hostile to federal labor unions and their First Amendment activities.”

Source Link
Excerpt:

A so-called judge has once again subverted the rule of law and potentially endangered the public due to hatred of President Trump.

As The New York Times reported, a federal judge ordered the Trump administration on Friday to release pro-Hamas student activist Mahmoud Khalil on bail. At this time, he is the only ‘major’ anti-Israel agitator demonstrator in America remaining in confinement.

U.S. District Judge Michael Farbiarz, an appointee of Joe Biden, issued the ruling.

The Gateway Pundit previously reported that Farbiarz ruled that the Trump administration could not deport Mahmoud Khalil, who was a graduate student at Columbia University before being detained.

Back in March, The Gateway Pundit reported that Trump’s ICE agents arrested Khalil, who led anti-Israel protests at Columbia and Barnard College.

He was set to be deported after being detained and taken into custody by ICE. The State Department had also issued an edict revoking his student visa and green card.

But U.S. District Judge Jesse M. Furman, an Obama appointee, slammed the brakes on the Trump administration’s efforts to deport Khalil.

Source Link
Excerpt:

Colorado likes to brand itself as the “gold standard” of elections and democracy. But scratch the surface, and you’ll find something rotten. The same state that tried to bar President Trump from the 2024 ballot—only to be rebuked unanimously by the Supreme Court—is now under scrutiny for far more than election antics. Colorado has become ground zero for judicial tyranny, a place where whistleblowers are crushed, innocent men are financially destroyed, and courtrooms operate more like cartel headquarters than halls of justice.

The case of Tina Peters, the Mesa County clerk-turned-election integrity advocate, is finally drawing attention from the Department of Justice. After years of political persecution, Peters’ case has shifted from the DOJ Civil Division to the Criminal Division, with officials asking if her prosecution was less about justice and more about inflicting political pain. That’s a generous way to describe what happened. Jena Griswold, Colorado’s secretary of State, publicly posted hundreds of active election passwords, blocked expert witness Clay Parikh—one of the nation’s top cyber forensics specialists—from testifying, and weaponized the courts to silence Peters. The state’s judiciary went along with it, ruling that “nothing was compromised,” while the public saw the truth unfold in real time.

But Tina’s case isn’t an outlier—it’s a symptom of a far larger disease infecting Colorado’s judiciary. In a stunning exposé published in the Boston Broadside, the story of “John Doe”—a Colorado father who had more than $656,000 garnished from him without notice, hearing, or even proof of service—has exposed the state’s family court system as a lawless racket. The article, titled “The Family Court Fleecing of a John Doe — It Could Happen to You!”, details how John Sarina  (his real name, known to many familiar with the case) was railroaded by a court that allowed perjury by his ex-wife to go unpunished. Despite his repeated attempts to notify the court that he had not been served, Arapahoe County Court and Magistrate Moschetti allowed the financial carnage to proceed unabated. Constitutional rights were treated like an inconvenience. Due process was entirely absent.

Source Link
Excerpt:

This April, the acting director of the Executive Office for Immigration Review issued a memo clarifying the requirement of immigration judges to effectively manage their crushing caseloads by dismissing legally insufficient applications for protection from removal or for asylum.

This is the most significant action taken by any administration to give immigration judges the tools that all other judges have in their tool kit to dismiss meritless cases on their existing dockets and swat away specious claims in the future.

Take the fact that there are over four million pending cases on immigration review docket, and the fact that, in 2022, about 68% of removal and deportation cases resulted in removal orders, and only about 14% of asylum claims were granted. Based on my conversations with immigration chief judges, if immigration judges do their duty, they could trim the existing dockets by up to 70% and could dismiss over 2.8 million cases.

For over six years, we have been urging the Department of Justice and administrations across both parties to give immigration judges the same tools that all state and federal judges have to manage their dockets. The three tools are summary judgment authority, the ability to dismiss a clearly non-meritorious case based on the pleadings (the written paperwork filed with the court), and contempt authority. See here, here, here and here.

Source Link
Excerpt:

Not a week seems to go by without a rogue lower court judge issuing yet another overreaching edict designed to subvert the will of the American people.

On Monday, an Obama-appointed district court judge attempted to block parts of President Trump’s executive orders ending subsidization of programs promoting DEI and radical gender ideology. On June 5, a different Obama-appointed judge handed down an injunction aiming to halt the Trump administration’s prohibition on international students attending Harvard. A week before that, yet another Obama-appointed judge sought to prevent the president from ending a Biden-era “parole” program for foreign nationals living in the United States.

While these “judges” certainly deserve criticism for rubber-stamping leftists’ lawfare, there’s one individual who deserves primary blame for this concentrated effort to cripple Trump’s presidency via a judicial coup: Chief Justice John Roberts.

Over the past five months, rogue lower courts have issued nearly 200 overreaching injunctions and temporary restraining orders attempting to prevent Trump from fulfilling his Article II obligation to execute the nation’s laws. And yet, despite this egregious usurpation of constitutional authority, the Supreme Court’s leading justice has done nothing substantive to stop it.

Source Link
Excerpt:

Real constitutional crises are relatively rare in American history. In 1803, Chief Justice John Marshall could have sparked one with his decision in Marbury v. Madison. In it, he deftly asserted that the Supreme Court had the power to invalidate laws or actions it saw as unconstitutional. That assertion didn’t cause a crisis in the fledgling nation mainly because it came in a decision that supported the Jefferson administration, and as such the president was not inclined to protest.

Then of course there was President Franklin Roosevelt’s court-packing scheme in 1937. In 1936, in the face of continuing 5-4 decisions going against his New Deal legislation, FDR’s Attorney General Homer Cummings proffered an idea penned by one of his predecessors in 1914, James Clark McReynolds: for every justice older than 70, a new justice should be appointed. Ironically, in 1936 McReynolds was a 75-year-old associate justice.

FDR’s legislation died in committee, but it would likely not have survived even if it had made it out of committee as it faced a great deal of bipartisan opposition. But it didn’t really matter because Justice Owen Roberts, who had been a thorn in the side of much of the New Deal legislation, joined the leftists in upholding West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish in 1937 and became a relatively reliable New Deal supporter going forward.

Source Link
Excerpt:

California Governor Gavin Newsom, LA Mayor Karen Bass and the entire extremist California progressive class have egg on their faces Monday evening as the Los Angeles anti-ICE protests were neutered by the president’s shaming of Golden State officials to take action, his decision to send in the National Guard and the Marines, and his refusal to tolerate violence.

Bass, Sen. Adam Schiff, former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, former vice president and failed presidential candidate Kamala Harris, and the whole Marxist gang decried Trump’s decisions—yet, as we’ve seen before, they had no interest in stopping the rampage and look pathetic now that the president is showing how things are actually done.

It’s similar to the border crisis: he shut down that garbage almost overnight. The commander-in-chief summed that up when addressing a joint session of Congress in March:

One of Trump’s standout lines during his speech was when he said, “It turned out that all we really needed was a new president” in response to how former President Joe Biden and Democrats complained they needed legislation to tackle soaring illegal immigration.

Last month, the Border Patrol recorded 8,450 migrants who crossed the southern border illegally – the lowest level in at least 25 years. For perspective, most months during the Biden administration had well over 100,000 border encounters.

Source Link
Excerpt:

It’s riot season again in America. Well, at least in the Democrat run cities, where progressive billionaires fund their progressive activism through progressive NGOs, knowing that a progressive media lacks any self-respect to report honestly. Out in real America (aka the suburbs), we kick back and enjoy the content. Like this Dallas video, where a cop tries to have a conversation with a masked protester. SPOILER: The protester is an imbecile.

Everyone has their favorite genre of content. Some people prefer the outrage over seeing foreign flags flying over a gathering meant to affect American policy. Others go with the looting, where city folks show how much they care about marginalized communities by stealing sneakers made by slave labor from those marginalized communities. We here at the Louder with Crowder Dot Com website? It’s all about what epic failures at life those cosplaying on the ground are.

Kudos to this police sergeant who attempted to reason with Chester the Protester. Chester’s parents should request a refund for his college tuition.

Chester: As long as you feel ok with capitalism, racist, imperialist state.
Sarge: Do you even know what that means?
Chester: Yes b*tch, I’m in college.

Source Link
Excerpt:

On Wednesday, the Trump administration announced it was processing the family of Mohamed Soliman — the radical Islamist who allegedly set Jewish demonstrators ablaze in Boulder on Sunday — for removal from the country. Then came the order from a rogue judge blocking the administration.

Judge Gordon Gallagher’s two-page order halting the removal of Soliman’s wife and five children — all illegal aliens, according to Stephen Miller — isn’t merely a misapplication of justice. It is a direct assault on the executive branch’s constitutional authority. And if President Donald Trump continues to treat these rogue judicial decrees as legitimate, he not only cedes national security to ideological partisans in black robes — he permits a full-blown constitutional crisis to fester unchecked.

On Wednesday, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem announced that DHS and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) “have taken the family of suspected Boulder, Colorado terrorist, and illegal alien, Mohamed Soliman, into ICE custody.”

But within hours, Gallagher issued an order stating the Trump administration “SHALL NOT REMOVE Hayem El Gamal and her five children from the District of Colorado or the United States unless or until this Court or the Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit vacates this Order.”

Source Link
Excerpt:

A federal judge on Thursday blocked the Trump administration from deporting the family of Mohamad Soliman, the individual suspected of firebombing a gathering of Israel supporters in Boulder, Colorado, on Sunday.

Judge Gordon P. Gallagher’s ruling stated that the administration cannot remove Soliman’s wife and five children from the District of Colorado or the United States pending a ruling from the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals. “[T]he Court finds that deportation without process could work irreparable harm and an order must issue without notice due to the urgency this situation presents,” the judge wrote.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) arrested the family earlier this week and was preparing to deport them before the judge’s ruling, The Hill reported.

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is preparing to deport the family of Boulder, Colo., attacker Mohamed Soliman’s wife and five children.

Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem said Tuesday that the family had been detained in connection with the investigation, saying they would face questioning over whether they had any knowledge of the attack.

But according to a DHS statement Wednesday, ICE was said to be “processing them for removal.”

The statement sheds new light on a White House social media post Tuesday that said the family “could be deported by tonight.”

“Six One-Way Tickets for Mohamed’s Wife and Five Kids. Final Boarding Call Coming Soon,” the White House’s post said, along with an emoji of an airplane.

Source Link
Excerpt:

A federal judge on Wednesday blocked President Trump from deporting the family of the Egyptian terrorist who firebombed Jews in Boulder, Colorado.

US District Judge, Gordon Gallagher, a Biden appointee temporarily blocked the deportation of Mohamed Sabry Soliman’s wife and five children.

As reported by CNN:

A federal judge issued an order Wednesday to prevent the deportation of the wife and five children of an Egyptian man charged in the firebomb attack in Boulder, Colorado.

U.S. District Judge Gordon P. Gallagher granted a request from the family of Mohamed Sabry Soliman to halt deportation proceedings of his wife and five children who were taken into federal custody Tuesday by U.S. immigration officials.

On Sunday June 1, 2025, Mohamed Soliman, a 45-year-old Egyptian national, attacked a pro-Israel demonstration in Boulder, Colorado.