The Tyranny of the Judiciary and What to Do about It

By Jon N. Hall

Almost from Day One of his presidency, Donald Trump has been stymied by judges on lower federal courts issuing restraining orders to stop his executive orders and bring his agenda to a screeching halt.

On November 10, National Review ran "Obama's Judges Continue Thwarting Trump," a fine analysis by Andrew C. McCarthy, who explains what's really going on with the injunctions issued by these "rogue" judges:

You may have been under the impression that Trump won the election, and that choosing among competing policies is what elections are about. That is how it is supposed to work in our free, constitutional republic. But day by day, the space for free choice is shrinking. To the Lawyer Left, elections represent a policy choice only when Democrats win. The rest of the time, the courts are there to consolidate the Left's gains, to repel democratically driven policy shifts.

McCarthy demonstrates that, contrary to Chief Justice John Roberts, at least some of our federal courts have become politicized. It's simply not the case that "[w]e do not have Obama judges or Trump judges, Bush judges or Clinton judges," as Roberts alleges. Perhaps Roberts is confused about what should be and what is. McCarthy touches on the judicial overrides of Trump's decisions on DACA and the Keystone Pipeline. And let's not forget the travel ban, key provisions of which SCOTUS reinstated. McCarthy began his article by predicting that the president's new policy on asylum claims would soon be stopped:............. To Read More