Power not balanced

Recently various federal judges have issued orders stopping some presidential orders.

This post is not intended as a discussion over whether we agree or disagree with the orders.

Unfortunately we have reached the point where a single federal judge can stop the president of the United States.

These judges are not elected.  They cannot be fired.  They do not answer to the citizens.

However they have the power to stop action initiated either by congress or the executive.  They have the power to order action that they feel should occur.

I don’t know what the right answer here is.

Maybe for the time being congress should set up a requirement that in cases where local judges issue orders like these the cases are heard for appeal more quickly.

Otherwise presidents and congresses  from all portions of the political spectrum are subject to being paralyzed by a single judge.

We deserve better

Brutus

19 Responses to Power not balanced

  1. HS Freshman says:

    Love how the cadre of old right wing conspiracy nuts who live on the local blogs jump at the opportunity to spew their old and very tired bigoted gibberish. (Yes, Jerry and Dugan, you are bigots and you’re also laughable fools.). Now they’re constitutional law experts? The amusement never ceases! It’s why the so-called progressives win: they’re smart, they work hard at achieving clear objectives and they’re NOT crazy.

    Like

    • Reality Checker says:

      HS Freshman,

      Your response pained me.

      If you want to try to help end bigotry, start with your own words and actions. To quote Gandhi, “Be the change you wish to see in the world (or others).

      When you denigrate people because of their age and when you call them “laughable fools,” you are part of the problem, not part of the solution. You prove that young people can be (but don’t have to be) just as bigoted and mean-spirited as some of the adults who disparage one another in this forum.

      Perhaps bigotry is a word you picked up from friends or from one of the talking heads in the media, but not taken the time to study for yourself. Bigotry is defined as an intolerance toward those who hold different opinions from oneself. A bigot is person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; for example, one who regards or treats the members of a racial or ethnic (or age) group with hatred and intolerance.

      Read those definitions carefully. Consider your own thoughts, actions, and words, including your words directed at Jerry and John. Then make sure you become a different person than some of the mean-spirited, intolerant people who post toxic comments here.

      Work on being a kind person, not just a smart person. You have the advantage of youth. Now is the time to decide what kind of person you truly want to be and start becoming that person. It becomes increasingly harder to change as you get older. If you’re not careful, you might just end up being the kind of person you now hold in contempt.

      I wish you all the best in your future. It’s already started.

      Like

  2. Old Gringo Guy says:

    Maybe it is time that President Trump request the resignation of all sitting Federal judges and starts from scratch. “A new broom sweeps clean.”

    Like

  3. Gnossos says:

    Jerry K is a fool who obviously gets his information from FOX rather than from an education in civics, the constitution or history. There is a difference between Iranians or Iraqis and Muslims. A difference between citizenship and religion. The Constitution protects us from our government favoring or disfavoring any specific religion and since that was clearly the reason behind Trump’s ban the courts will continue to deny it. It was determined so again this week in a 10 to 3 appellate court ruling made by judges who do have the proper education and knowledge of the Constitution. Trump cannot defend his justification based on claiming all Muslims are a threat. If you defend Trump on this you are a bigot. Even if you don’t like that label the word has an accepted definition and you fit it. And if you don’t defend the Constitution then lets see if next it is whatever religion you follow which is condemned and restricted.

    Like

    • Anonymous says:

      Typical liberal response Gnossos. If we don’t agree with your establishment beliefs we are a bigot, racist, homophob or xenophob. Conservatives have no right to free speech in your Liberal double standard world. Only the self-appointed Holier than Thou Libs are allowed to have an opinion.

      It’s not about religion or race. It’s about the protection of our country. Islamic extremism is a reality and we have to protect ourselves. Bleeding heart Liberals like you are literally killing our country.

      Like

    • Anonymous says:

      Ask the families of the Manchester bombing how they feel about banning travel from Libya right now. One of the countries that Mr. Trump is trying to protect us from is blowing people up! You call it bigotry, I call it protecting our country from people who HATE US!

      Like

    • ManintheMoon says:

      Gnossos
      You are the one being foolish even Obama had policies in policies limiting immigration from some majority Muslim nations. Which was his right as president. It is funny how some on the left want to split hair real fine when it comes to who they support!
      Show us one legal precedent up until now where the courts have restrained this right of the president to set such visa requirements. You can’t!
      Then again we see the left wanting to throw open the doors of our nation to those who have openly stated intent to destroy our nation by subversion or direct attack. What the left and you advocate is societal suicide in the name of being PC,inclusive and diversity with out any regards to out comes and any possible negative effects to our nation. Nothing short of lunatic fringe thinking!

      Like

    • Chico says:

      Hell ya … Gnossos. It’s those damn Republicans in Austin. They ruined our judicial system.

      Like

  4. Reality Checker says:

    The problem is that both parties have politicized the courts by competing to appoint judges who will support party ideology rather than making objective rulings based on law. Neither party will admit that their appointments are politically and ideologically driven. Both parties want judges who will INTERPRET the Constitution and laws to fit their wants/needs. And when a judge breaks with the party and makes a ruling that is inconsistent with the party agenda, the judge gets slaughtered and goes overnight from being a great choice to being literally hated by the party that appointed him. Face it, the courts have become tools and weapons of the partisan ideologues. That isn’t going to change anytime soon.

    Like

  5. abandon hope says:

    Give Brutus a break. The Constitution does not give judges the right to impose their own opinion into rulings. They are supposed to base rulings on the Constitution and on law. Of course there are many interpretations of both and that is where the problem occurs. Unfortunately, it’s become common for the president to issue executive orders. That’s been going on for many years. In my opinion, that’s where the problem starts.

    Like

  6. Anonymous says:

    You’re wrong John. This is nothing more than liberals being cry babies because they lost. We are still trying to recover from the 8 year Obama tyranny that we barely survived. Americas voted to take our country back and make it safe again. Make it Great again. Instead the sore loser liberals are using every unethical, illegal, untruthful and/or underhanded tactic they can to undermine the ELECTED President. ISIS is coming for us and when they do, every one of these “judges” should be held PERSONALLY responsible for every death and injury that occurs.

    Like

    • Well, mr/ms/miss/mrs Anonymous, why do you suppose ISIS exists? What created that organization, in the first place? Has is not occurred to you that maybe, just maybe, if the U. S. had NOT invaded Iraq and Afghanistan, there would be no reason for so much hate directed towards us? As for your ridiculous claim that “we barely survived” under Mr. Obama, name just one way in which you, or any other American, suffered while he was President (without mention of the ridiculous endless wars started by other Presidents). OK? Just one.

      Like

      • Anonymous says:

        Let’s see. My insurance rates have skyrocketed to beyond being affordable for one reason ……Obama. Minimum wage is also depleting my bank account bc everything is going up bc every bleeding heart liberal wants a living wage for a job meant to be ENTRY level. Another Obama socialist program. Threats…..lets talk about threats. By those who knew I didn’t vote for Obama and now by those who know I did vote for Trump. My son got punched by a kid at school only bc they knew his dad was a Trump supporter. If I said 1/4 about Obama what people are saying about Trump I would have be called a racist and a bigot and everythng else and could have lost my job if I openly talked about it. Obama started that hate NOT Trump. YES THAT IS HAPPENING. I LIVE IT!!!! I do however agree with you about staying out of other countries business. Let them fend for themselves and stay out of our country. Oh and for the record, ISiS exists bc Obama didnt finish the job in Iraq and ISIS came in and filled the void that was left by our absence. We shouldnt have been there in the first place but needed to finish what we started.

        Like

  7. Thank Gawd we have those judges. In case y’all haven’t noticed, we are in new territory with this current administration, a GOP SCOTUS, and a GOP Congress. Those judges are apparently all that is left between us and a dictatorship.

    Like

  8. Learned that in 5th Grade says:

    That is what is commonly referred to as “The Constitution.” That is why we have three branches of government, so that “a president cannot simply impose his racist/xenophobic will on an entire country.

    Brutus, you know better than that. Do you think these unelected judges just spring up from the ground like stalks of corn? No, they are nominated by the Executive branch and are confirmed by the legislative branch.

    Perhaps a quick watch of various “schoolhouse Rock” episodes will clear your mind here.

    Like

    • JerryK says:

      I read the law that allows the president to block immigrants from countries or really for any reason he deems a threat. It’s been around a long time and Carter blocked Iranians and Bush blocked Iraqis using the same law. It is simple and clear language except for federal judges.

      I hope that i live to see term limits for federal and SCOTUS judges. Goes double for Congress.

      Like

  9. HS Freshman says:

    Um, the Constitution. Perhaps you might consider studying it as diligently as local political gossip and conspiracy theories– or ask your local EPISD HSkid if you can borrow her government book.

    Like

    • Brutus says:

      Article. III.

      Section. 1. The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.

      The way I read this the powers of the district judges and circuit courts can be controlled by congress.

      Like

    • Chico says:

      Or, ask your local middle schooler to read about the constitution on their free IPad with unlimited wifi.

      Like

Leave a Reply -- you do not have to enter your email address

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: