Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 40 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
It is beginning to appear that we no longer need the Executive and Legislative branches of government —
Here is an excerpt from an article in today’s Epoch Times.
A California district judge granted partial relief to some of the federal government’s recently terminated probationary employees who argued that their termination from various agencies was unlawfully ordered by the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) under the false cause of performance.
Senior District Judge William Alsup provided partial relief on Feb. 27 to the non-union organizational employees, ordering their immediate reinstatement to agencies including the National Parks Service, every agency within the Department of Veterans Affairs, the Bureau of Land Management, and the Small Business Bureau.
He also ordered that OPM’s request be stopped and rescinded, because of the possibility of more federal employees being let go under the request.
This is, to me at least, a typical and all too frequent example of judges, high and low, taking on the role of shaping our laws to fit their own political leanings. It seems foolish and dangerous when a local judge can overrule executive and legislative decisions without regard to the Constitution. It all started with Roe v. Wade when the Supreme Court found that abortion was a constitutional right under a never-before-discovered, invisible clause. One of the Justices used the terms “penumbra” and “emanations” to describe how the right to privacy was derived from other rights in the Bill of Rights. Using that standard, there seems to be no limit to what the courts can order or deny.
Here’s the link to the Epoch Times article.
Are we becoming a nation ruled by unelected (for the most part) men in robes seated above the common citizens?
Published in General
If Clarence Thomas was Chief Justice, this crap would not be happening.
There has been no check on rogue judges. Overturning isn’t a punishment.
These judges actually hate to be overturned, but hot heads will be hot heads. Congress could impeach them to a man, and should. They won’t make the 2/3rds vote to convict in the Senate, but an impeached judge has reduced prospects and reputation.
I bet there’s ways to prosecute them for some kind of misconduct, if someone looks into it enough. That doesn’t even require a House vote.
For example, that one judge whose wife is involved with some group that got a big chunk of money from USAID, I think it was.
I think they are so self involved that they do not care about reputation. And they know they have peaked but are secure for life. Meanwhile they can do things.
It was my understanding that federal probationary employees can be terminated, without recourse and without requiring any civil service processes, at any point in their probationary period, regardless of performance or other factors. Is this incorrect?
They may not care about being impeached, but they probably care about being prosecuted, and perhaps jailed for years. For official misconduct, corruption such as those with spouses etc who benefit from USAID money…
Trump will win this on appeal. The leftist district judges can only slow things down, which is unfortunate but expected.
How difficult is it to impeach a judge a remove them from the bench?
I know it doesnt happen very often, but there must be some cause to remove.
The impeachment is same as the President. And fact is, there’s basically no chance of getting 60 votes in the Senate at this point.
But as I pointed out before, prosecution for misconduct etc, doesn’t require a House OR Senate vote. And there seem to be a number of judges who had their hands in the USAID cookie jar, either directly or through a spouse, etc. As well as other possible options.
It seems to me that among the communists in the democrat party, this is an enhancement of reputation.
When I started working for DOE, I was a probationary employee. It’s not unusual. I understood that a probationary employee could be let go for any reason, so I didn’t run out and buy a house . . .
If there is a vacancy on those courts, refuse to fill it for three years.
The federal judicial districts can be reconstituted/reformed any which way at the whim of Congress. If a vacancy arises, the president can fill it with his own nominee.
A comment I made on another thread is relevant here too. We had a similar issue in the 1970s when some federal judges took over running school districts when the judges disagreed with how the elected school boards and school board appointed administrators ran things, mostly under the guise of alleged racial discrimination.
Yes, eventually fill it with his nominee, but down one leftie, the rest will have to work harder and none would dare retire.
That little court-packing stunt Schumer and Harris wanted to do at the Supreme Court works just as well on these lower courts. Not that I’m recommending that, just sayin’.