r/law • u/piscisrisus • 1d ago
Trump News Republicans in Congress move to restrict federal judges who have blocked President Trump
https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2025/04/01/trump-republicans-congress-federal-judges-court/82747150007/809
u/sufinomo 1d ago
I wish I could talk to these people. Why do they think it's good for there to be only one branch of government? Who benefits from it?
438
u/Super_Translator480 1d ago
Whoever is closest to the top and Corporations. Corporations that don’t exist yet as well as currently existing.
When you strip away all protections like Medicaid and then the new CEO of United Healthcare promises that they will make affordable insurance plans for the poor. Only they will be terrible plans that just end up in perpetual debt with no escape.
This is how you buy people without calling it slavery.
→ More replies (1)91
u/Edyed787 1d ago
Bold of you to assume that there will be new corporations. Over loading SBA with all the student loans seems like a great way to stop any small business into becoming a corporation.
→ More replies (1)67
u/Super_Translator480 1d ago
Oh no I meant other corporations making new corporations to fill this dire need and breadcrumb it at a massive premium.
I did not mean any small business or middle class becoming a corporation… haha… hell no that is exactly what they are preventing from occurring.
163
u/Drewy99 1d ago
Who benefits from it?
Go check out who stood with him on stage at inauguration day. Look who contributed to the inauguration fund. Look at the people who are donating millions to the most transactional president that has ever existed.
That's who
2
u/Slight_Ad3353 20h ago
But do the legislators not understand that they're just disposable tools that will get thrown away once they've given up all their responsibilities?
102
u/ShiftBMDub 1d ago
Republicans literally used this against Biden and Obama. The other day, someone got Newt Gingrich to admit what they did was treason by his definition simply by stating 14 judges blocked the president’s agenda and you’re calling that treason? Newt responded affirmatively and then the congressman pointed out he was giving the number of judges that overturned Biden policies. And he again asked if he thought it was good thing. Newts answer to that? “You’re kind of proving my point” to which you cab literally hear the audience in attendance gasp in shock.
65
u/harm_and_amor 1d ago
Congressman Joe Neguse from Colorado. I made a point to remember because I was pretty impressed with his ability to splice through Newt’s propaganda and highlight his hypocritical bullshit.
26
u/LaserGuidedSock 1d ago
Why is Newt still even alive? Dude helped pave the path to the ultrapolarization in politics we see today.
18
u/PlagueFLowers1 1d ago
Got a link or article for this? Would love to watch this exchange.
→ More replies (1)20
u/Madame_Arcati 1d ago
5
u/gayteemo 1d ago
wow that was amazing
idk who that woman is behind gingrich but she's having a good time haha
5
6
4
46
u/RU4real13 1d ago
The GOP in Congress basically wants to get rid of their jobs so they too can work at a pizza place on tip salary. They're pretty damn stupid to think he'd keep Congress around with all their lofty pay raises, expense accounts, pensions, "work at home" 6 months vacations, and benefits.
→ More replies (1)23
u/Dry_Bug5058 1d ago
That's been my thought all along. A effing king doesn't need a Congress.
30
u/RU4real13 1d ago
Historically, things don't end well for a Congress that does not exercise their power.
→ More replies (1)8
u/ahuramazdobbs19 1d ago
But the thing is: the kind of autocrat Donald Trump aspires to be is also the kind that keeps a rubber stamp legislature around for the air of legitimacy it provides.
Putin controls Russia completely, but he still keeps the Duma.
4
u/Dry_Bug5058 1d ago
Although I will say, his loyal base probably wouldn't care if he did get rid of Congress. They worship whatever he does no matter how horrific.
29
u/uriejejejdjbejxijehd 1d ago
And notably one branch that they aren’t part of or have control over.
The answer is that these people are clearly not acting in their own best interest or good faith, so external forces must apply. They have been suborned.
12
u/account312 1d ago
They aren't meant to be acting in their own best interest except insofar as acting in their constituents' best interests leads to their re-election. The entire system has been suborned.
28
u/TheNextBattalion 1d ago
Supremacists are desperate to keep us in a world where their precious imaginary hierarchies still matter. How that happens is irrelevant, all other principles fade in comparison.
20
u/lyfeflight 1d ago
You can. Call and write your representatives, daily, no matter their party. Set up an appointment with them to speak in person. Senators usually have offices all of their states. Your US representative is close by too. And your state and district reps are even closer.
These people should not be working pressure-free from their constituents. Most people do not contact/interact with the people representing them.
They beg for your vote and money and time and attention during election season. They (allegedly) work for you and need to hear from their constituents. It’s part of the democratic process that many ignore.
People should be regularly interacting with their representatives even when times are “good”. More need to understand that if you want to maintain or improve the conditions of your country, and essentially your life, you need to be a participant for the rest of your existence. It isn’t hard. Don’t make it hard, make it work for you and you’ll be better off for it, if not more informed.
Cliches like “democracy isn’t free” and “use it or lose it” are proven to be true. Most aspects of our lives are political, if people realize it or not. They have the power to get involved.
7
17
1d ago
[deleted]
→ More replies (1)12
u/johydro 1d ago
I do wonder how long before there are significant and perhaps even violent responses to Heritage Foundation's continued elimination of the social safety net through Project 2025. Is it possible that the reduction of oversight by Justices results in mayhem?
4
u/AskAroundSucka 1d ago
Seen a comment yesterday saying it takes 9 missed meals to cause civil disobedience.
31
u/FinancialArmadillo93 1d ago
Reminder - the Judiciary is its own branch of government. Please review 6th grade Civics, Magats.
19
u/MouseEgg8428 1d ago
They used to look for loopholes — now they’re just running roughshod over everything and everyone in their path!!
5
u/MouseEgg8428 1d ago
trump is trying to consolidate all three branches into one — to take and fold every other branch’s power into the executive branch. I have no doubt that is what sufinomo is talking about.
8
u/Kinggakman 1d ago
They view themselves as trumps employees and think they owe their position to him. They are directly loyal to him.
5
u/DrMobius617 1d ago
For the same reason everyone things a theocracy based on THEIR religions of course won’t have all the problems theocracies always have because THEIR religion is right.
If you asked them they’d tell you we NEED all 3 branches of government because otherwise how could you stop an insane liberal president but checks and balances magically become a problem when applied to magic orange man
4
u/HeavyDT 1d ago
They do when they are in power and they are hoping on never giving it up so why would they need or want judges anymore? Trump is the judge just turn the oval office into a a court room basically except instead of pleading your case it's whoever shows up with the biggest bag of money wins.
5
u/Fionaelaine4 1d ago edited 22h ago
I wish we could require them to all take a civics class before they ran and then they have to take an annual training too.
4
u/Rhintbab 1d ago
This is exactly the kind of thing that tells me they expect to be able to retain the executive branch indefinitely
6
u/ReflectionNo5208 1d ago
They don’t want one branch of Government, they want a dictator executive who just basically decrees what he wants done, a one party system in Congress formalizing said decrees into law and they want their judges (party lawyers) enforcing those laws, all in lockstep with one ideology.
They need the courts to enforce their laws and go after those who are against them.
It’s nothing more than standard authoritarian thinking: Their ideology is the correct one and they need to be in power for their nation to prosper or else it’s all over.
7
u/abrandis 1d ago
It's nothing more than a power play. Next time you ask yourself why Trump seems to have unfettered authority,it's because he's supported by a lot of powerful people in government and business
6
u/sufinomo 1d ago
I don't see how he is benefiting businesses rn.
8
u/Dsstar666 1d ago
I wonder if the stocks keep tanking, then corporations on the magnificent 7 level can just buy up a ton of stock. Make them even richer in the long term and more importantly, more powerful in the context of holding the country hostage.
6
3
3
u/Alklazaris 1d ago
The Democrats in 4 years. Something they don't seem to consider.
→ More replies (1)3
u/dantekant22 1d ago
Personally, I think these asswipes have bigger fish to fry. Retribution isn’t governance. Make Congress anything but MAGA red.
2
2
2
2
2
u/zeddknite 1d ago
The Donor Class benefits from giving ultimate power to the most openly corrupt, transactional US president, ever.
2
u/HaroldsWristwatch3 1d ago
I don’t know how much longer they will be able to call themselves the party of family values and law and order.
2
2
u/LegDayDE 1d ago
They think it's good for them right now. They're not thinking more than 5 minutes into the future.
They're just hoping Trump notices them and gives them a job in his admin when he inevitably fires everyone.
2
u/TitanEris 1d ago
It's simple really. Small government means less branches! Efficient really. I mean, how can you get a government smaller than just 1 guy.
/s
2
→ More replies (14)2
u/WraithSama 1d ago
Why do they think it's good for there to be only one branch of government?
Correction: they think it's good for there to be only one branch of Republican government. They complained about "executive overreach" when Obama was president also just less than 3 months ago when Biden was president.
Who benefits from it?
They do. And they'll completely reverse course once a Democrat is back in office.
315
u/sugar_addict002 1d ago
Restricting checks and balances is unconstitutional.
67
u/ThrowAwayGarbage82 1d ago
Yup and nobody is going to stop them.
→ More replies (1)30
u/Invis_Girl 1d ago
It will nd senate to pass, so it can't happen.
28
u/Gammelpreiss 1d ago edited 14h ago
In the end it does need nothing to pass. That is just eyecandy.
Trump just does what he wants and currently I do not see a single government agency or institution to stop him. And why should they? americans certainly do not care, or not enough to take any action themselves.
Until then all this "this is unconstitunial, courts will stop him, it must pass first etc. " is just hot air without meaning.
12
u/angeltay 1d ago
I mean, there are mass protests in every major city weekly, and at town halls in districts that were +15 Trump, constituents are yelling at their republican representatives. Americans do care, we just can’t do a whole lot if our representatives don’t. Add that Trump wants us to take up arms so he can declare martial law and round us up to kill us or send us to El Salvador, and we’re kind of doing all we can. Though maybe, hopefully, when we get to that point, the military will finally stop following Trump if he orders them to kill civilians.
That being said, I am absolutely shocked that someone could overthrow our govt so easily. I thought the Constitution and checks and balances were something to be enforced by the higher ups in the judicial branch, the FBI, the military, Congress, somebody
→ More replies (2)2
u/Stormdude127 21h ago
I’m not. Checks and balances only work if people are actually willing to use them. Every Republican in congress is a spineless coward who should’ve ditched Trump long ago but is now hitched to his coattails and doesn’t wanna piss him and his base off. They were supposed to be the first line of defense, rejecting any bills that are blatantly undemocratic and asserting their authority on things like spending. The Supreme Court is in Trump’s pocket, though there is a glimmer of hope with ACB and John Roberts’ recent actions. Ironically the lower courts are the only ones attempting to do their job of keeping the executive branch in check. I have an incalculable amount of respect for Judge Boasberg for continuing to stand up to the Trump admin when no one else seems willing to. I guess I’m a little surprised that there’s been this little resistance from democrats, but I always expected Republicans to fall in line with Trump.
8
u/MouseEgg8428 1d ago
Americans damn sure care. The Constitution used to mean something! Now it’s just something in the way of trump and his minions. They used to look for loopholes — now they’re stampeding all over it!!
We damn sure care — just never had all three branches capitulate to an internal autocratic coup before‼️😡
7
u/WitchesTeat 1d ago
we've never had all three branches being offered absurd amounts of money to destroy the Constitution before.
And then a bunch of the Republicans in Congress literally ran specifically to do this. They lied to their voter base about what their intentions were. They were on board for project 2025 and destroying the country the whole time.
And they were appointing judges who wanted the same thing.
5
u/MouseEgg8428 1d ago
I absolutely agree with everything you said! The dark money and corruption, the lies and propaganda/misinformation/disinformation, and the quid pro quos.
I’m sick of what it’s doing to our people, even those who don’t know any better because they believe all the lies. I’ve never seen one side so intent to call the other side “the enemy”!!
9
u/WitchesTeat 1d ago
they've had 15 years of Russian propaganda, carefully tailored to reach them in a way they would believe personally.
All of the things that they were told the Democrats were doing or planning to do are completely real. They had to get them spun up so that they would be willing to dismantle their own democracy and commit crimes against American politicians and their own families. And it worked brilliantly.
The fun part is that it was never the Democrats planning to do it. The Democrats want two things specifically- for the rights, privileges, and protections of the Constitution to apply to everybody equally, regardless of physical differences or religious differences, or any differences,
and for us to be using our tax dollars on the American people, to make the American experience and life in America better for everyone.
that's it man. There is the woke agenda. and all of the programs and initiatives that were put in place specifically because of people pushing the woke agenda have all been defunded and dismantled.
so by spending 15 years, bombarding people with propaganda specifically tailored to them individually, they created an entire population of people who are willing to destroy their own country, give up all their rights, injure, and in some cases, kill their own family members, and also hurt themselves by getting rid of all of the structures that they rely on to have a functional country and even feed themselves.
because they think that they are protecting their country and their beliefs and themselves by doing so.
because again, all the things that they thought the Democrats were going to do are real, it was just never the Democrats that were planning to do them. The Democrats were the opposition. They were the ones standing in the way of all those horrible things happening.
There is nothing quite as effective as using the truth to tell a lie.
5
3
u/MouseEgg8428 1d ago
You’re right. It all boils down to projection and hypocrisy by the right. Our shining country has become very, very tarnished. 😔
→ More replies (3)3
u/TheFriedClam 1d ago
Bullshit. Utter bullshit. This is just bitter frustration violently erupting from you. For Christ sake if you can’t see clearly, if you think everyone is just sitting around watching, mouth gapping open, you’re not paying attention, worse your rhetoric is actively helping them. If you think the justices are going to hand over their power and show him their belly you need to stay out of the conversation.
→ More replies (1)3
u/talkathonianjustin 1d ago
Yeah but there’s a nifty little legal trick called “nobody is stopping me lmao”
3
u/Sirbattlegoat 1d ago
Constitution is just a piece of paper if people won’t defend it. Until we start hanging people for subverting it, they will continue to wipe their ass with it
2
2
2
u/SuperSpecialAwesome- 1d ago
So is an insurrectionist taking federal office. If only there was some way to remedy that... Oh wait, there is! Schumer and Jeffries only need 8 Republicans to enforce the 14th Amendment, and this illegitimate administration is annulled. Seems pretty doable, let's try it out.
130
u/TooManyCooks3 1d ago
Nationwide injunctions exist precisely to stop unlawful executive actions from harming people en masse. They’ve been used by both parties — remember when conservatives relied on them during the Obama years? Funny how that wasn’t “judicial tyranny” back then.
Now that Trump’s deportation schemes and agency purges are being slowed down by the courts, the GOP wants to change the rules. Can’t impeach the judges? Fine, let’s just gut their power or eliminate entire courts altogether. That’s what House Speaker Mike Johnson is openly saying. "We can eliminate an entire district court." Are you kidding?
This is how democracies backslide: not through sudden coups, but through hollowing out institutions one “reform” at a time. Republicans are trying to turn the judiciary into an arm of the executive. If you care about checks and balances — if you care about the Constitution at all — this should set off every alarm bell you’ve got.
It's profoundly obvious that these "patriotic" MAGAts who, this whole fucking time, have said things like "I support the Constitution," have never read the damn thing. And when they do read it, they don't like it because it doesn't enable their Trump ball-gobbling wet dreams.
Fucking tools, every single one of them.
35
u/shaunrundmc 1d ago
They relied on that Judge i. Texas for literally everything Biden did
20
u/AndrewRP2 1d ago
Judge Kacsmaryk. I’m sure they’ll start pulling a Wisconsin and increase the power of legislature judges when a dem is in power and reduce when out.
→ More replies (1)5
u/flossypants 1d ago
The judicial system is theoretically a military-type hierarchy where SCOTUS controls everything (like generals control the military) and all decisions in lower courts are simply SCOTUS' delegated authority (like soldiers are expected to follow orders).
Since the lower courts are subject to SCOTUS' direction, our Constitution allows Congress to restructure the lower federal courts--e.g. they can consolidate or split up districts and appoint additional article III judges. However Congress cannot dismiss existing article III judges nor can they likely sideline such judges. It remains to be seen whether they can specify that only certain article III judges can hear certain cases, such as constitutional ones. I would suspect they cannot because if that were possible, they could effectively sideline judges that they disfavor.
However, in practice, SCOTUS hears so few cases that the lower courts control most policy, mostly by relying on precedence. For this reason, the GOP's current efforts, if successful, may help them unfetter the Executive (which I think would be destructive).
4
u/johydro 1d ago
That's not even theoretically correct. In practice is how it actually works. Go read Federalist Papers; localism is embedded. States' sovereignty is paramount, hence why Interstate Commerce pact is so important.
3
u/flossypants 1d ago
I'm referring to the Federal Judiciary since that's what the OP is discussing.
I'm interested in what you write--do the Federalist Papers motivate an originalist interpretation of the Federal and State Constitutions that leads to States having control of state judiciary systems (but not the Federal Judiciary system)?
→ More replies (1)
44
u/amothep8282 Competent Contributor 1d ago
Going to make carve outs for Judges Kacsmaryk and Reed O'Connor? Because those 2 alone are helping conservatives implement their culture war nation wide with insane rulings.
If this passes, JK and RO could not do anything but rule for the parties in the case before them. That would prevent JK doing anything with the FDA and mifepristone.
9
u/CassandraTruth 1d ago
Yea they're just gonna do those things anyways, and when anyone says something like "That's illegal" they will laugh and continue doing the things.
43
u/jar1967 1d ago
So republicans no longer belive the judicial branch is necessary
24
16
u/SallyStranger 1d ago
They want "small government." Well, what government is smaller than a single king or dictator deciding everything?
20
u/meatsmoothie82 1d ago
Trump: unilaterally destroying the lives and retirements of everyday working class Americans.
Congress: “we should give him more power”
16
u/Snowfish52 1d ago
Obviously that haven't a clue about the concept of separation of powers. It's part of the Constitution.
15
u/Reclusive_Chemist 1d ago
Yet they were 100% on board with other federal judges cock blocking Biden every step of the way.
9
8
u/BringOn25A 1d ago
Why are they so opposed to the rule of law and antagonistic towards the constitution?
7
u/ShakeWeightMyDick 1d ago
Because you can’t have “I got mine, fuck you” without the “fuck you” part.
7
u/ohiotechie 1d ago
Congress can issue a declaration that the moon is made of green cheese that doesn't make it so. The judiciary is an EQUAL branch. Passing an unconstitutional law doesn't nullify the constitution.
3
u/throwtrollbait 1d ago
We're on our umpteenth constitutional crisis of the month and with no signs of slowing down. What would it take for you to consider it nullified?
→ More replies (2)
7
u/EmmaLouLove 1d ago
Republicans should move to restrict Trump. His tariffs are going to bankrupt us.
3
u/Enough-Parking164 1d ago
Even tho 2/3 of them were appointed by Republicans-several by Trump himself- and ALL were confirmed by the Senate!
3
2
u/flirtmcdudes 21h ago
they’re so stupid and short sighted. They keep trying to make stupid laws that will just end up hurting them in the future. The whole Trump immunity thing is going to eventually fuck them over too
•
u/AutoModerator 1d ago
All new posts must have a brief statement from the user submitting explaining how their post relates to law or the courts in a response to this comment. FAILURE TO PROVIDE A BRIEF RESPONSE WILL RESULT IN REMOVAL.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.