For a long time, the conduct (or better misconduct) of many in the federal judiciary was an important political issue. Democrats who could not win in Congress or at the ballot box used judges to get their way no matter what the law said. Then came President Trump and the GOP senate and a big chunk of the judiciary was moved towards judges who respect the Constitution and the laws rather than rewriting them to suite the political aims of the Dems. Two new Supreme Court justices have solidified a conservative control of the Supreme Court. 82 other judges have been appointed by Trump and confirmed by the Senate. Fully one in six federal judges are now Trump appointees. More than another 80 are awaiting confirmation. It seemed as if the issue would recede.
Then we get a decision like yesterday's regarding the rules for granting asylum. Under the law, the President is authorized to set rules for where, when and how asylum requests are to be processed. There is no lack of clarity in the law; the president has that authority. A few weeks ago, the Trump administration announced rules that all asylum requests must be made at a port of entry into the USA. Those who enter the country illegally will no longer be allowed to request asylum if apprehended. It's a perfectly reasonable rule governing asylum requests. But a federal judge in San Francisco decided yesterday that it was beyond the president's authority and he enjoined the government from following the rule.
The new decision will ultimately be reversed on appeal. It may have to go to the Supreme Court for that to happen because, not surprisingly, the ACLU brought the action in the Ninth Circuit which is an out of control leftist court. Nevertheless, it will be reversed. Still, what the court did yesterday was to remind those who care about the rule of law that many in the judiciary are still out of control. The need to complete the nomination process for the rest of the Trump appointees and for the President to continue to appoint more remains. It gives new life to the whole issue of the federal judiciary.
Then we get a decision like yesterday's regarding the rules for granting asylum. Under the law, the President is authorized to set rules for where, when and how asylum requests are to be processed. There is no lack of clarity in the law; the president has that authority. A few weeks ago, the Trump administration announced rules that all asylum requests must be made at a port of entry into the USA. Those who enter the country illegally will no longer be allowed to request asylum if apprehended. It's a perfectly reasonable rule governing asylum requests. But a federal judge in San Francisco decided yesterday that it was beyond the president's authority and he enjoined the government from following the rule.
The new decision will ultimately be reversed on appeal. It may have to go to the Supreme Court for that to happen because, not surprisingly, the ACLU brought the action in the Ninth Circuit which is an out of control leftist court. Nevertheless, it will be reversed. Still, what the court did yesterday was to remind those who care about the rule of law that many in the judiciary are still out of control. The need to complete the nomination process for the rest of the Trump appointees and for the President to continue to appoint more remains. It gives new life to the whole issue of the federal judiciary.
No comments:
Post a Comment