Political judges endanger nation
We are entering a perilous time, a time when our most important institutions appear to be at war with President Donald Trump in what some on the political right are calling a silent coup.
Trump’s enemies in Congress, the news media and now some in the judiciary appear to be doing their best to undermine his presidency.
The most recent examples are federal judges’ rulings in several venues against Trump’s revised executive order on travel and refugees. Those rulings have sparked angry outcries from Republicans on Capitol Hill, who contend judges have overstepped the line to become political adversaries of the White House.
The Washington Times reports some judges even appear concerned about the tenor of recent rulings, saying it appears some of their colleagues are letting personal beliefs taint their legal reasoning.
“As tempting as it is to use the judicial power to balance those competing interests as we see fit, we cannot let our personal inclinations get ahead of important, overarching principles about who gets to make decisions in our democracy,” Judge Jay Bybee, of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, wrote in a dissent last week. He said his colleagues erred in not agreeing to rehear Mr. Trump’s defense of his original executive order.
After Trump rewrote his order to accommodate the 9th Circuit’s objections, an activist federal judge in Hawaii, U.S. District Judge Derrick Watson, said it was not enough.
Watson’s reasoning is nothing short of shocking. Unbelievably, he decided to issue a nationwide restraining order against the ban based not on the law or the Constitution, but on Trump’s harsh rhetoric about Muslims while he campaigned for president.
There are questions about whether any of the judges who have considered the bans in several different jurisdictions even bothered with the law.
“In none of those decisions did the judges actually discuss the legality or constitutionality of the federal immigration statute at issue,” Hans von Spakovsky, senior legal fellow at The Heritage Foundation, told the Washington Times. “This is an indication that the judges were looking at this as a policy question: Did they like or not like the policy?”
When the federal judiciary begins deciding cases on what it likes or dislikes instead of what the law and Constitution requires, we are looking at the end of this nation as we know it. Judicial decisions based on personal preference and whim are hallmarks of Third World cesspools, not great nations.
While Democrats and their henchmen in the media applaud the rogue judges as some sort of everyday heroes standing up to Trump, in our view, they endanger the judiciary and tear at the nation’s very fabric with decisions based on anything but the evidence and the law.
In the end, they cheapen the rule of law.