Federal judge said prosecutors picked to replace Alina Habba repeated error of bypassing congressional approval
Three prosecutors installed by Donald Trump’s administration to lead the New Jersey attorney general’s office after the president’s former personal lawyer was disqualified from the role in December were also illegally appointed, a federal judge has ruled.
Pam Bondi, the US attorney general, handpicked the three to replace Alina Habba, who resigned after a succession of district and appeals court rulings that she was serving illegally because she never received Senate confirmation.
On Monday, federal judge Matthew Brann said Bondi’s actions repeated the same error of bypassing congressional approval for the appointments. He stopped short of ordering their removal pending a government appeal – but, in a blistering 130-page ruling, said overreach by the executive branch could jeopardise all of its cases before him.
deleted by creator
We’re not completely screwed until they replace enough judges. The ones in place are able to slow if not fully prevent many of these abuses, primarily ones where the government has to operate through the judicial branch.
deleted by creator
Oh god, yes. Still, between Habeas petitions, lawsuits against administration hirings and firings, and many others. The litigants are flooding the judiciary and the Supreme Court logistically can’t overrule everything.
deleted by creator
As someone inside of this mess, my point is that there are too many legal proceedings in too broad of a range of issues for SCOTUS to be given the opportunity to overturn all of them, barring SCOTUS giving POTUS the explicit power to fully ignore the Constitution and nullifying all state and regional courts and their decisions. Is this impossible? No. However if that doesn’t happen, a rickety frame of rulings and laws supporting the Constitution are likely to still exist in the U.S. when he passes from the mortal coil. The judiciary (SCOTUS and some circuit courts notwithstanding) and the citizens are the only entities who have consistently and successfully stood up to the administration, even if most of those wins have been small.
We are completely agreed on ICE/DHS.
Together with the executive and the legislature, that court served as a third means of what it’s called a system of checks-and-balances which by principle are supposed to limit the powers of either three, and that power is never invested in the person but in the office.
However, besides they’re holding the position for life, Supreme Court justices are chosen by the president and thus became heavily dependent on party alignment and some personal biases than impartiality.
Ha! Ha ha ha. We were screwed a ways back, a long ways.
Fair. Looking purely at 30k, we were already screwed, and this administration is mostly successful at speed running it. The judiciary is where we have a fighting chance, barring many people getting off their screens (self: guilty) and staying in the streets until we make structural change.*
*Defined by many different people in many different ways.
If there’s anything the American center-right party will do, it’s say that it’s “better for the nation to move on from this” while applying only the most minimal of consequences, which, of course, only ensures that it will happen again.
Some, including myself, already are of the opinion that the US is an autocracy because its billionaire class has effectively taken over the reigns. Whatever checks there are don’t actually balance out the billionaires with the rest of greater America.
deleted by creator
Isn’t that basically ICE and the selective enforcement of the law as demonstrated in Epstein?
Are you sure you haven’t been exposed to so much violence that you’ve been convinced to redefine it?
deleted by creator
Are you not afraid of your comments getting you put in a concentration camp? I am.
Self-immolation is always a choice, and in her case, in the public interest.