{"id":16402,"date":"2025-02-09T16:14:02","date_gmt":"2025-02-09T16:14:02","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/?p=16402"},"modified":"2025-02-09T16:14:02","modified_gmt":"2025-02-09T16:14:02","slug":"bidens-doj-just-asked-the-supreme-court-to-do-a-huge-favor-for-donald-trump","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/?p=16402","title":{"rendered":"Biden\u2019s DOJ just asked the Supreme Court to do a huge favor for Donald Trump"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p>&#8220;The question of whether a single federal trial judge should have the power to halt a federal law or policy throughout the entire country is hotly contested. As Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote in a 2020 opinion&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.vox.com\/2020\/1\/29\/21094603\/supreme-court-decision-on-immigration-neil-gorsuch-democrats\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">arguing against nationwide injunctions<\/a>, \u201cthere are currently more than 1,000 active and senior district court judges, sitting across 94 judicial districts, and subject to review in 12 regional courts of appeal.\u201d If nationwide injunctions are allowed, any one of these district judges could potentially halt any federal law, even if every other judge in the country disagrees with them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The problem is particularly acute in Texas\u2019s federal courts (Mazzant sits in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas), where local rules often allow plaintiffs to&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.vox.com\/policy-and-politics\/2023\/2\/14\/23597741\/supreme-court-matthew-kascmaryk-judge-shopping-texas-utah-walsh-justice-department\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">choose which judge will hear their case<\/a>. During the Biden administration, Republicans often selected highly partisan judges to hear challenges to liberal federal policies \u2014 and those judges frequently rewarded this behavior by issuing nationwide injunctions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Such injunctions can potentially be lifted by a higher court, but the process of seeking relief from such a court can take weeks or even months \u2014 and that\u2019s assuming that the appeals court is inclined to follow the law. Federal cases out of Texas, for example, appeal to the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, which is&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.vox.com\/policy-and-politics\/2022\/12\/27\/23496264\/supreme-court-fifth-circuit-trump-court-immigration-housing-sexual-harrassment\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">dominated by far-right judges<\/a>&nbsp;who frequently defy Supreme Court precedents that are out of favor with the Republican Party.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Moreover, while some Republican judges such as Gorsuch expressed doubts about these nationwide injunctions, the GOP-controlled Supreme Court frequently let such injunctions against the Biden administration&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.vox.com\/policy-and-politics\/2022\/12\/29\/23530842\/supreme-court-arizona-mayorkas-title-42-mexican-border-immigration\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">remain in effect for many months<\/a>&nbsp;\u2014 even if a majority of the justices eventually concluded that the policies at issue in those cases, which&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.vox.com\/policy-and-politics\/2022\/12\/29\/23530842\/supreme-court-arizona-mayorkas-title-42-mexican-border-immigration\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">often involved disputes over immigration policy<\/a>, were legal. So the Court apparently did not view ending the practice of nationwide injunctions as a high priority so long as those injunctions thwarted Democratic policies.&#8221;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.vox.com\/scotus\/393540\/supreme-court-garland-texas-top-cop-shop-nationwide-injunction\">https:\/\/www.vox.com\/scotus\/393540\/supreme-court-garland-texas-top-cop-shop-nationwide-injunction<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>&#8220;The question of whether a single federal trial judge should have the power to halt a federal law or policy throughout the entire country is hotly contested. As Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote in a 2020 opinion arguing against nationwide injunctions, \u201cthere are currently more than 1,000 active and senior district court judges, sitting across 94 judicial districts, and subject to review in 12 regional courts of appeal.\u201d If nationwide injunctions are allowed, any one of these district judges could potentially halt any federal law, even if every other judge in the country disagrees with them.<br \/>\nThe problem is particularly acute in Texas\u2019s federal courts (Mazzant sits in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas), where local rules often allow plaintiffs to choose which judge will hear their case. During the Biden administration, Republicans often selected highly partisan judges to hear challenges to liberal federal policies \u2014 and those judges frequently rewarded this behavior by issuing nationwide injunctions.<\/p>\n<p>Such injunctions can potentially be lifted by a higher court, but the process of seeking relief from such a court can take weeks or even months \u2014 and that\u2019s assuming that the appeals court is inclined to follow the law. Federal cases out of Texas, for example, appeal to the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, which is dominated by far-right judges who frequently defy Supreme Court precedents that are out of favor with the Republican Party.<\/p>\n<p>Moreover, while some Republican judges such as Gorsuch expressed doubts about these nationwide injunctions, the GOP-controlled Supreme Court frequently let such injunctions against the Biden administration remain in effect for many months \u2014 even if a majority of the justices eventually concluded that the policies at issue in those cases, which often involved disputes over immigration policy, were legal. So the Court apparently did not view ending the practice of nationwide injunctions as a high priority so long as those injunctions thwarted Democratic policies.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>https:\/\/www.vox.com\/scotus\/393540\/supreme-court-garland-texas-top-cop-shop-nationwide-injunction<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[13],"tags":[375,790,221,780,1213,528,170],"class_list":["post-16402","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-article-share","tag-biden","tag-courts","tag-donald-trump","tag-joe-biden","tag-judiciary","tag-supreme-court","tag-trump"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16402","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=16402"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16402\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":16403,"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16402\/revisions\/16403"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=16402"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=16402"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=16402"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}