Since President Donald Trump returned to the White House for his second term, he’s been trying to clean up the federal government, secure the border, cut expenses and spending, get rid of fraud, waste and even criminal activities.
For this, beneficiaries of that spending have sued, over and over. And over and over federal judges have declared they have the authority to determine the nation’s international policy, its border security, its funding and such.
Not surprisingly, such reach has resulted in criticism from Trump and his administration, including calls for impeachment for judges such as the one who demanded that deportation flights be turned around in the air so that illegal aliens could be returned to the U.S..
Now one member of the Supreme Court is complaining about the increasingly hostile rhetoric by using her own hostile rhetoric.
Justice Ketanji Jackson said at a conference in Puerto Rico, on criticisms of the judiciary, “The attacks are not random. They seem designed to intimidate those of us who serve in this critical capacity. The threats and harassment are attacks on our democracy, on our system of government. And they ultimately risk undermining our Constitution and the rule of law.”
A report from Politico pointed out she didn’t mention Trump by name, but instead addressed the “elephant in the room,” which the report said was “a clear reference to the belligerent language — and calls for impeachment — that Trump and some of his advisers have lobbed at federal judges who rule against his agenda.”
She said, to judges, “I urge you to keep going, keep doing what is right for our country, and I do believe that history will vindicate your service.”
The comments could reappear for her later, too, as the Supreme Court is expected to rule, eventually, on a number of the controversies that right now are at the lower levels of the federal court system.
Some already have been presented to the Supreme Court for review, but decisions have not been announced.
If Jackson has described the arguments on one side of any question as “intimidating,” her impartiality could be questioned.
The Trump administration, including the president and his appointees, repeatedly have criticized lower court judges for overreach when they presume to make decisions normally under the power of the Executive branch, on topics including firing workers, deportation actions, saving federal money and eliminating wasteful contracts.
Trump has, in fact, called U.S. District Judge James Boasberg, a radical lunatic and called for his impeachment after interfered in the president’s campaign to deport illegal aliens. Another judge ordered the government hand out an unnecessary $2 billion.
Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts said impeachment isn’t the “appropriate response” to disagreements.
Jackson, at her speech, insisted on calling out what she claimed are “the relentless attacks and disregard and disparagement that judges around the country and perhaps many of you are facing on a daily basis. It seems as though every time I read the news or turn on the television these days, I see the affronts.”
Jackson, appointed by Joe Biden, was the nominee who infamously said during her confirmation hearing that she could not define “woman.”
And she likened the judges opposing Trump as like those judges who made decisions during the Civil Rights Movement and during Watergate.
