Latest news with #judicialreform
Yahoo
16 hours ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Trump hails 'monumental victory' after Supreme Court curbs nationwide injunctions that have slowed his agenda.
President Donald Trump hails a "monumental victory" after Supreme Court curbs nationwide injunctions that have slowed his agenda. The outcome was a victory for the Republican president, who has complained about judges throwing up obstacles to his agenda.
The Independent
16 hours ago
- Politics
- The Independent
‘I love you!' Trump gushes over reporter from MyPillow guy's network for lobbing softball at him
Donald Trump was ecstatic on Friday when a correspondent from MAGA-boosting MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell's media company tossed him a softball query about targeting 'rogue judges,' telling the reporter he loved her for the 'very nice question.' The president once again gushing over a right-wing media personality fawning over him came just moments after a cameraman shouted 'Trump 2028' following a question about plummeting border crossings, laying bare the changing dynamics of the White House press corps under the Trump administration. Taking a victory lap on Friday after the Supreme Court handed him a 'GIANT WIN' by curbing nationwide injunctions, which included federal judges blocking his executive order redefining 'birthright citizenship,' Trump held a hastily arranged news conference at the White House briefing room. 'Instead of merely ruling on the immediate cases before them, these judges have attempted to dictate the law for the entire nation ... this was a colossal abuse of power, which never occurred in American history prior to recent decades, and we've been hit with more nationwide injunctions than were issued in the entire 20th century,' Trump bellowed at the presser. While taking questions, he eventually pointed to Cara Castronuova, a former boxer and failed MAGA political candidate who now works as the White House correspondent for Lindell TV, the pro-Trump propaganda network that Lindell founded to help boost his 2020 election fraud conspiracies. 'On the 2020 election, is there any more information on the special prosecutor? So many Americans still have questions about the 2020 election,' she asked. 'And speaking of rogue judges, would you consider appointing somebody at the DOJ, maybe to investigate the judges that allowed for the political persecution of you, your family, and your supporters during the Biden Administration?' Immediately smitten, the president reacted: 'I love you! Who are you?' The president has taken to consistently asking reporters which outlet they work for, which then prompts him to decide whether he wants to engage with the journalist or insult them. 'I'm Cara from Lindell TV,' she replied. 'Well, it's a very nice question,' Trump continued, before preemptively denying that Castronuova was a plant due to the friendly nature of her question and the fact that she works for one of his most passionate supporters. 'And it's not a setup. I have no idea who you are, but I appreciate that question.' In true Trumpian fashion, the president unleashed a rambling answer in which he raged about the 2020 election being 'rigged and stolen' while also congratulating himself on his 2024 victory, eventually going on a tangent about murderous asylum-seekers coming to the United States. 'Look at what this lunatic did,' Trump exclaimed, referencing former President Joe Biden. 'Look at what he did. He opened our borders to people that were murderers!'Claiming that Biden let in people from 'mental institutions on steroids,' Trump then did 'The Weave' and started talking about how he should be credited with bringing peace around the world – which included a treaty between the Democratic Republic of Congo and Rwanda. 'The Congo, you know, we have a great press conference coming up later. And it's the Congo and Rwanda,' he declared. 'You know, they were fighting for years and it was machetes. It was vicious. It was as vicious – people's heads being chopped off.'After bouncing around on other disparate topics such as Russia, Iran and the ceasefire between India and Pakistan, which he once again falsely claimed he personally mediated, Trump turned back to Castronuava. 'But I appreciate that question,' he concluded. Shortly before the Lindell TV reporter drew the president's praise, a cameraman made the president's day. After a reporter noted that 'illegal crossings at the border are zero now,' Trump repeated the remark before exclaiming: 'Does everyone hear that? Zero!' 'Trump 2028!' an unknown camera operator shouted, prompting Trump to laugh: 'Who's that guy? He's pretty good. I like him.' Castronuova, meanwhile, had already made her presence felt in the White House before Thursday's news conference. During a press briefing in April, she asked White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt to share the president's secret 'fitness plan' because he looked 'healthier than ever before.' Part of a cohort of overtly MAGA 'journalists' whose job essentially entails lobbing softballs at Trump and his press team while doing the administration's bidding in order to maintain White House access, Castronuova and the rest of the 'new media' who have been elevated by Leavitt reveals just how this White House has reshaped press coverage. In recent months, the administration has sidelined Associated Press reporters because the wire service made the editorial decision to continue to call it the 'Gulf of Mexico' despite the president's executive order renaming the body of water. Leavitt has not only created the 'new media' seat in the briefing room and within the rotating press pool, which is predominantly but not exclusively reserved for friendly conservative outlets, but she's also held 'influencer' briefings that were stocked with MAGA social media personalities.
Daily Mail
17 hours ago
- Politics
- Daily Mail
Supreme Court limits ability of judges to stop Trump
An emboldened President Donald Trump celebrated a new bombshell Supreme Court ruling that clamped down on federal judges' ability to halt his policy moves by slamming federal judges who have confronted him in the past. Trump hailed the decision severely proscribing nationwide court injunctions as 'monumental' and took a victory lap in a nearly hour-long session in the White House briefing room. 'I think taking power away from these absolutely crazy radical left judges is a tremendous – this is such a big day,' Trump crowed. Throughout the frenetic start of his term, Trump has seen judges stop or stall some of his most consequential policies on immigration, deportations and birthright citizenship – as well as his moves to take on perceived rivals like law firms and universities and slash agency staff. He has signed 164 Executive Orders and counting. His administration has drawn legal challenges for deporting migrants to El Salvador, singling out individual law firms who have challenged him, and slashing grants to universities. By issuing a sweeping ruling against the use of universal injunctions that a District Court judge can impose nationwide, the Supreme Court took one more burden away from Trump as he seeks to impose his policy agenda even when a closely-divided Congress fails to act on an issue. 'It only takes bad power away from judges .. it takes bad power, sick power and unfair power, and it's really going to be, is a very monumental decision,' Trump said Friday soon after the ruling came down. The high court, where conservatives hold a 6-3 majority, issued the ruling about a year after handing Trump another big win, ruling that presidents enjoy immunity from prosecution for most of their official acts taken while in office. The ruling gave a big boost to Trump's campaign while he was facing four criminal charges – and allowed Trump more latitude when he took the oath for a second time in January. Trump, who railed against individual judges during his 2016 and 2020 campaigns, took on the general judicial power as a 'colossal abuse' – calling them a threat to his own authority. 'In recent months, we've seen a handful of radical left judges effectively try to overrule the rightful powers of the president to stop the American people from getting the policies that they voted for in record numbers that was a grave threat to democracy, frankly,' he said. He said the judges have attempted 'to dictate the law for the entire nation. In practice, this meant that if any one of the nearly 700 federal judges disagreed with the policy of a duly elected President of the United States, he or she could block that policy from going into effect, or at least delay it for many years, tie it up in the court system. 'This was a colossal abuse of power which never occurred in American history prior to recent decades, and we've been hit with more nationwide injunctions than were issued in the entire 20th century together.' His warning came in a term where Trump has met little resistance from House and Senate Republicans controlling Congress, even when his administration and DOGE slashed contracts and staff at agencies funded by the legislative branch. Blasting the court's ruling as a threat was Justice Sonia Sotomayor, writing for the trio of dissenting liberals. She accused the government of playing a 'different game' by asking the Court ' to hold that, no matter how illegal a law or policy, courts can never simply tell the Executive to stop enforcing it against anyone.' She said the government does not defend the legality of the Trump order ending birthright citizenship, and that a judge's ruling should apply only to the narrow group of people who brought suit. 'The gamesmanship in this request is apparent and the Government makes no attempt to hide it. Yet, shamefully, this Court plays along,' she wrote. 'No right is safe in the new legal regime the Court creates. Today, the threat is to birthright citizenship. Tomorrow, a different administration may try to seize firearms from lawabiding citizens or prevent people of certain faiths from gathering to worship.' She said it 'renders constitutional guarantees meaningful in name only for any individuals who are not parties to a lawsuit,' calling it a 'grave an attack on our system of law.' 'By stripping all federal courts, including itself, of that power, the Court kneecaps the Judiciary's authority to stop the Executive from enforcing even the most unconstitutional policies,' Sotomayor wrote. Also torching the ruling was Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson in her own dissent. 'Disaster looms,' she wrote. 'What I mean by this is that our rights-based legal system can only function properly if the Executive, and everyone else, is always bound by law. Today's decision is a seismic shock to that foundational norm. Allowing the Executive to violate the law at its prerogative with respect to anyone who has not yet sued carves out a huge exception—a gash in the basic tenets of our founding charter that could turn out to be a mortal wound,' she wrote. 'What is more, to me, requiring courts themselves to provide the dagger (by giving their imprimatur to the Executive Branch's intermittent lawlessness) makes a mockery of the Judiciary's solemn duty to safeguard the rule of law,' she added. 'This decision I think opens the door very widely to granting presidents ... essentially to get away with illegal activities for quite a while, and maybe forever' if Congress and the courts to serve as a check on President Trump, said Michael Gerhardt, a law professor at the University of North Carolina, in comments to CNN.
Daily Mail
17 hours ago
- Politics
- Daily Mail
Trump lays out his plot to take even more power in blistering attack on 'radicals' trying to stop him
An emboldened President Donald Trump celebrated a new bombshell Supreme Court ruling that clamped down on federal judges' ability to halt his policy moves by slamming federal judges who have confronted him in the past. Trump hailed the decision severely proscribing nationwide court injunctions as 'monumental' and took a victory lap in a nearly hour-long session in the White House briefing room. 'I think taking power away from these absolutely crazy radical left judges is a tremendous – this is such a big day,' Trump crowed. Throughout the frenetic start of his term, Trump has seen judges stop or stall some of his most consequential policies on immigration, deportations and birthright citizenship – as well as his moves to take on perceived rivals like law firms and universities and slash agency staff. He has signed 164 Executive Orders and counting. His administration has drawn legal challenges for deporting migrants to El Salvador, singling out individual law firms who have challenged him, and slashing grants to universities. By issuing a sweeping ruling against the use of universal injunctions that a District Court judge can impose nationwide, the Supreme Court took one more burden away from Trump as he seeks to impose his policy agenda even when a closely-divided Congress fails to act on an issue. 'It only takes bad power away from judges .. it takes bad power, sick power and unfair power, and it's really going to be, is a very monumental decision,' Trump said Friday soon after the ruling came down. The high court, where conservatives hold a 6-3 majority, issued the ruling about a year after handing Trump another big win, ruling that presidents enjoy immunity from prosecution for most of their official acts taken while in office. The ruling gave a big boost to Trump's campaign while he was facing four criminal charges – and allowed Trump more latitude when he took the oath for a second time in January. Trump, who railed against individual judges during his 2016 and 2020 campaigns, took on the general judicial power as a 'colossal abuse' – calling them a threat to his own authority. 'In recent months, we've seen a handful of radical left judges effectively try to overrule the rightful powers of the president to stop the American people from getting the policies that they voted for in record numbers that was a grave threat to democracy, frankly,' he said. He said the judges have attempted 'to dictate the law for the entire nation. In practice, this meant that if any one of the nearly 700 federal judges disagreed with the policy of a duly elected President of the United States, he or she could block that policy from going into effect, or at least delay it for many years, tie it up in the court system. 'This was a colossal abuse of power which never occurred in American history prior to recent decades, and we've been hit with more nationwide injunctions than were issued in the entire 20th century together.' His warning came in a term where Trump has met little resistance from House and Senate Republicans controlling Congress, even when his administration and DOGE slashed contracts and staff at agencies funded by the legislative branch. Blasting the court's ruling as a threat was Justice Sonia Sotomayor, writing for the trio of dissenting liberals. She accused the government of playing a 'different game' by asking the Court 'to hold that, no matter how illegal a law or policy, courts can never simply tell the Executive to stop enforcing it against anyone.' She said the government does not defend the legality of the Trump order ending birthright citizenship, and that a judge's ruling should apply only to the narrow group of people who brought suit. 'The gamesmanship in this request is apparent and the Government makes no attempt to hide it. Yet, shamefully, this Court plays along,' she wrote. 'No right is safe in the new legal regime the Court creates. Today, the threat is to birthright citizenship. Tomorrow, a different administration may try to seize firearms from lawabiding citizens or prevent people of certain faiths from gathering to worship.' She said it 'renders constitutional guarantees meaningful in name only for any individuals who are not parties to a lawsuit,' calling it a 'grave an attack on our system of law.' 'By stripping all federal courts, including itself, of that power, the Court kneecaps the Judiciary's authority to stop the Executive from enforcing even the most unconstitutional policies,' Sotomayor wrote. Also torching the ruling was Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson in her own dissent. 'Disaster looms,' she wrote. 'What I mean by this is that our rights-based legal system can only function properly if the Executive, and everyone else, is always bound by law. Today's decision is a seismic shock to that foundational norm. Allowing the Executive to violate the law at its prerogative with respect to anyone who has not yet sued carves out a huge exception—a gash in the basic tenets of our founding charter that could turn out to be a mortal wound,' she wrote. 'What is more, to me, requiring courts themselves to provide the dagger (by giving their imprimatur to the Executive Branch's intermittent lawlessness) makes a mockery of the Judiciary's solemn duty to safeguard the rule of law,' she added. 'This decision I think opens the door very widely to granting presidents ... essentially to get away with illegal activities for quite a while, and maybe forever' if Congress and the courts to serve as a check on President Trump, said Michael Gerhardt, a law professor at the University of North Carolina, in comments to CNN.
New York Times
15-06-2025
- Politics
- New York Times
In Mexico, Thousands Ran for Office, Few Voted and One Party Dominated It All
Justices aligned with Mexico's leftist governing party now dominate the Supreme Court. Party loyalists control a new tribunal with the power to fire judges and the court that decides federal election disputes. Leaders of the Morena party, which already holds the presidency and Congress, had insisted that their contentious judicial overhaul, among the most far-reaching ever tried by a large democracy, would not be a power grab. On the contrary, they said, it would make judges accountable to voters and begin to fix a system that most Mexicans say is marred by corruption, nepotism and widespread impunity for criminals. But Mexico's shift away from an appointment-based system to having voters elect judges has, at least for now, amounted to a crucial step in Morena's consolidation of power, according to election results made available on Sunday. Candidates with Morena's stamp of approval sailed to victories in Mexico's most powerful courts and in court circuits across the country, showcasing critics' fears that the election could eliminate the last major check on Morena's power. 'You now have an administration that controls the presidency, that controls the Congress with supermajorities in both chambers and that now controls the judges,' said María Emilia Molina, a circuit magistrate and president of the Mexican Association of Women Judges. She and 13 other judges have challenged the overhaul through an international human rights commission, filing a case that contends that it violates judicial independence and the rights of sitting judges. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
