If Justice Kagan Wants Respect From Lower Courts, She Should Shut Down Their Judicial Coup
Kagan's refusal to shut down the tyrannical behavior of the lower judiciary has emboldened rogue judges to usurp SCOTUS's power.Kagan's refusal to shut down the tyrannical behavior of the lower judiciary has emboldened rogue judges to usurp SCOTUS's power.Supreme Court Ruling Is A Greenlight For Parents Who Want To Take Back Public Education
Whether through Supreme Court precedent, statutes, or even constitutional amendments, ours is a parental rights moment that demands action to allow parents the right to do their duty and raise their children.SCOTUS Ruling Against Universal Injunctions Didn’t Go Far Enough
Unless the Supreme Court reins in lower-court judges or Congress asserts its power over the courts it established, judicial tyranny may persist.Trump fighting 'unconstitutional power grab' by Obama judge who reopened the floodgates
President Donald Trump determined on his first day back in office that the "current situation at the southern border qualifies as an invasion under Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution."
He then proclaimed, pursuant to the Immigration and Nationality Act, that migrants stealing into the homeland would henceforth be restricted from claiming asylum until the invasion was over. Those who failed to provide federal officials with sufficient personal information at legal ports of entry would similarly be restricted in making asylum claims.
Of course, this proclamation enraged all the usual suspects on the left, including the American Civil Liberties Union, which challenged the asylum ban in February on behalf of three radical activist groups and a handful of foreigners denied asylum.
'An appeal to necessity cannot fill that void.'
According to the activist groups' complaint, the proclamation was "as unlawful as it is unprecedented," and "immigration — even at elevated levels — is not an 'invasion.'"
On Wednesday, an Obama judge weaseled around the U.S. Supreme Court's June 27 determination regarding nationwide injunctions in Trump v. CASA Inc. in order to universally bar the administration from expelling asylum seekers from the United States.
U.S. District Judge Randolph Moss said Trump had exceeded his executive authority in adopting "an alternative immigration system" and that his day-one proclamation was unlawful.
"Nothing in the INA or the Constitution grants the president or his delegees the sweeping authority asserted in the Proclamation and implementing guidance," wrote Moss. "An appeal to necessity cannot fill that void."
While the Supreme Court indicated last week that the national injunctions weaponized against the Trump administration by district court judges "likely exceed the equitable authority that Congress has given to federal courts," Justice Brett Kavanaugh recognized in his concurring opinion that district courts may still be able to "grant or deny the functional equivalent of a universal injunction — for example, by granting or denying a preliminary injunction to a putative nationwide class under Rule 23(b)(2)."
Moss embraced this "functional equivalent of a universal injunction" and certified all border-jumping asylum seekers "who are now or will be present in the United States" as a protected class.
'The American people see right through this.'
Moss did, however, stay his ruling two weeks pending an appeal from the Trump administration. Depending on how the appeal goes, the floodgates could be reopened to multitudes of foreign nationals seeking asylum.
"To try to circumvent the Supreme Court ruling on nationwide injunctions a marxist judge has declared that all potential FUTURE illegal aliens on foreign soil (eg a large portion of planet earth) are part of a protected global 'class' entitled to admission into the United States," wrote White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller.
Miller added, "The West will not survive if our sovereignty is not restored."
Department of Homeland Security spokeswoman Tricia McLaughlin similarly underscored the gravity of Moss' ruling, noting in a statement obtained by CNN, "The President secured the border in historic fashion by using every available legal tool provided by Congress. Today, a rogue district judge took those tools away, threatening the safety and security of Americans and ignoring a Supreme Court decision issued only days earlier admonishing district courts for granting nationwide injunctions."
RELATED: Alligator Alcatraz is a warning to illegal immigrants in the US: Leave now or end up here
While the White House did not comment on whether Trump might follow President Abraham Lincoln's example of taking actions that bypass or supersede the rulings of meddlesome judges, it indicated the administration expects to win on appeal.
"A local district court judge has no authority to stop President Trump and the United States from securing our border from the flood of aliens trying to enter illegally," White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson said in a statement to Blaze News. "The judge's decision — which contradicts the Supreme Court's ruling against granting universal relief — would allow entry into the United States of all aliens who may ever try to come in illegally."
"This is an attack on our Constitution, the laws Congress enacted, and our national sovereignty," continued Jackson. "We expect to be vindicated on appeal."
Attorney General Pam Bondi characterized Moss as a "rogue" judge "trying to circumvent the Supreme Court's recent ruling against nationwide injunctions."
"The American people see right through this," said Bondi. "Our attorneys ... will fight this unconstitutional power grab as [Trump] continues to secure our border."
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
In Latest Term, Supreme Court’s ‘Conservative Majority’ Plays By The Left’s Rules
The Supreme Court continues to grant legitimacy to the leftist revolution that has overtaken and transformed most aspects of our nation.Lawfare strikes again: Rogue judge ignores SCOTUS, shields 500,000 from Trump's immigration crackdown
Another district judge sought to block the Trump administration's mass deportation efforts by preventing the Department of Homeland Security from stripping Temporary Protected Status from over 500,000 immigrants, despite the administration's recent Supreme Court victory.
DHS Secretary Kristi Noem announced Friday that the agency would end TPS for Haiti on September 2, requiring more than half a million Haitian nationals in the U.S. to return to their home country. TPS was initially provided to Haitian nationals in 2010, and the federal government executed numerous redesignations extending the program through the Biden administration.
'Universal injunctions likely exceed the equitable authority that Congress has given to federal courts.'
Noem's DHS argued that "Haiti no longer continues to meet the conditions for designation for TPS," claiming that the Haitian government's lack of control has resulted in "direct consequences for U.S. public safety."
"Haitian gang members have already been identified among those who have entered the United States and, in some cases, have been apprehended by law enforcement for committing serious and violent crimes," the DHS stated.
RELATED: Noem prepares to deport 500,000 immigrants from one long-troubled island
Ira Mehlman with the Federation for American Immigration Reform told Blaze News, “TPS is designed to protect people from extraordinary and temporary conditions preventing the return of a country's nationals, provided that those foreign nationals remaining in the United States is not contrary to our national interest. Unfortunately, political instability in Haiti is neither extraordinary nor temporary. Moreover, Secretary Noem has made the determination that Haitian nationals remaining in the country is not in the national interest of the United States.”
The agency encouraged Haitian nationals to use the CBP Home app to return to their country of origin. The Trump administration has offered to provide immigrants a $1,000 exit bonus and to cover the cost of their return tickets.
On Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Brian Cogan in Brooklyn attempted to block the Trump administration's termination of TPS for Haitian nationals. He claimed that Noem "cannot reconsider Haiti's TPS designation in a way that takes effect before February 3, 2026, the expiration of the most recent previous extension."
"Plaintiffs are likely to (and, indeed, do) succeed on the merits. Secretary Noem's partial vacatur was in excess of her authority and was thus unlawful," Cogan wrote.
In response to Cogan's ruling, police analyst and Townhall columnist Phil Holloway noted that the "lawfare continues" against the Trump administration, which has faced numerous roadblocks from district judges.
RELATED: Massive Trump win! SCOTUS clears path to remove 500,000+ foreign nationals
Cogan's ruling followed President Donald Trump's Supreme Court victory last week, in which justices limited the scope of district courts' universal injunctions on executive action.
The Supreme Court wrote, "Universal injunctions likely exceed the equitable authority that Congress has given to federal courts."
Additionally, the high court in May granted the administration's emergency appeal to terminate the TPS designation for Venezuelan nationals.
DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin responded to the ruling, stating, "Today's SCOTUS decision is [a] win for the American people and the safety of our communities."
"The Trump administration is reinstituting integrity into our immigration system to keep our homeland and its people safe," she added.
The Supreme Court also cleared a path for the administration to revoke deportation protections for foreign nationals enrolled in the CHNV program, which, under former President Joe Biden's leadership, allowed 30,000 individuals per month from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela to immigrate to the U.S.
Mehlman told Blaze News, "SCOTUS has ruled the administration may proceed with revocation of TPS for Venezuelans, another country where there is political instability. And, just last week, SCOTUS ruled that universal injunctions from district court judges likely exceed their authority.”
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Ketanji Brown Jackson Was Appointed To Be A Political Activist, Not A Judge
For all the fallacies in her Trump v. CASA dissent, Jackson is fulfilling the job she was tasked with: advancing leftist ideology from the bench.Pornhub flees Texas after SCOTUS ruling, citing free speech and costs — but it's hiding the malevolent truth
On June 27, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a 6-3 decision, upheld a Texas law requiring pornography websites to verify users' ages to prevent minors from accessing explicit content, ruling it constitutional under the First Amendment. The dissenters were the expected radical left-wing trio: Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson.
They apparently “really want children to have access to porn,” scoffs Sara Gonzales, BlazeTV host of “Sara Gonzales Unfiltered.”
Leading the charge for Texas in Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton was Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, whom Sara loves for the long list of wins he’s racked up as the Lone Star State’s top cop. While Paxton’s time as AG is likely limited as he gears up to challenge John Cornyn in the 2026 Republican Senate primary, kids in Texas are now safer thanks to his unwavering commitment to conservative values and to ensuring that Texas remains a stronghold for protecting families and upholding moral standards.
While Sara and the “Unfiltered” panel, which includes Matthew Marsden and Eric July, are thrilled with SCOTUS’ ruling, the sad reality remains: The decision on whether or not to protect children from pornography had to be decided by the highest court in the country — a bleak picture of our nation’s waning morality and war on children.
“An age restriction or an age verification should be a bare minimum,” says Sara. The only reason adult content companies haven’t been implementing them is they’re either “too lazy or too evil.”
Pornhub, the leading adult content platform in the world, receiving billions of monthly visits, disabled its websites in Texas, complaining that the law infringed on adults' free-speech rights, posed privacy risks through mandatory ID verification, and was too costly to implement.
But if free-speech rights were really being jeopardized by implementing an age barrier, then why are there “age restrictions on every gun site?” asks Marsden. And as for the complaint that it’s too expensive, Eric July, who runs his own comics website, says that digital mechanisms like age verification are “automated” today, meaning it’s not nearly as expensive as Pornhub and its parent company, Aylo Global Entertainment, have made it out to be.
“What was expensive 10 years ago isn't any more, especially with regards to something like this,” he says. “Now it doesn't require a lot of money and resources.”
Marsden then brings up another excellent point: “Think about how big Texas is, and they're just like, ‘No, we're out.’ … Economically that's a crazy decision. So it’s not about the money.”
If it’s not about the money, and there are already age restrictions on websites that sell or promote adult content and products, then why is Pornhub leaving Texas over the requirement to implement age barriers that would protect children from harmful exposure?
To Sara, it’s obvious: “[They] want to get them while they're young.”
“If we get them while they're young, we've got a lifelong porn addict who's going to continue coming back to our website,” she sighs.
To hear more of the conversation, watch the episode above.
Want more from Sara Gonzales?
To enjoy more of Sara's no-holds-barred take to news and culture, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
Trump’s Effort To Remove Noncitizens From Census Would Affect Elections
If the second Trump administration fails to win court approval of its expected effort to exclude illegal migrants from the census, this time around, it will have backup.Today's top stories
thefederalist.com
www.theblaze.com