By FRANK MIELE | REAL CLEAR WIRE
Thursday, April 24, was a day like any other day – the sun came up, the sun went down, and Donald Trump was hit with at least three nationwide injunctions by federal district court judges.
That’s just the way it goes if you are a president who wants to take back America from the entrenched left-wing bureaucracy and restore common sense to government before it is too late.
The danger of the bureaucracy was predicted by Julien Benda in his 1927 book “The Treason of the Clerks,” which warned of the danger of the intellectual class adopting political passions that had previously been the sole domain of the masses. We see this most distinctly today in the federal bureaucracy, which I dare say has the greatest concentration of degree-holders from Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Columbia (and the like) of any sector in the nation, other than the incestuous universities themselves.
The treason that Benda described was the loss of independence of thought and dispassionate reason by intellectuals, and the accompanying subservience of intellect to political passions. During Trump’s first term, I wrote a column describing the danger that Benda had foreseen:
“Benda wrote at the beginning of the age of mass communication, and yet he already saw that political passions have attained a universality never before known. … Thanks to the progress of communication and, still more, to the group spirit, it is clear that the holders of the same political hatred now form a compact impassioned mass, every individual of which feels himself in touch with the infinite number of others, whereas a century ago such people were comparatively out of touch with each other and hated in a scattered way.”
It seems that we are now living out Benda’s worst nightmare — an age of manipulation of the masses by those who think they know better — whether you call them the “deep state,” the “opposition party,” “the national elite,” “the entrenched bureaucracy,” or just “the establishment.”
And for the past 10 years, they have turned their hatred on Donald Trump. Without rhyme or reason, they fight him on every reform and arm themselves with invented scandal and fake news.
Now, in Trump’s second term, we see that the bureaucracy has a close ally in the judiciary – not one judge, but multitudes that aim to preserve the status quo of liberal governance. If that wasn’t clear before April 24, there was no room for doubt after the day was filled with one court ruling after another telling Trump to “stand back and stand by” rather than to exercise his lawful power as president.
Here’s what tumbled out of the judicial branch that day:
– A federal district court judge in California blocked Trump’s executive order that would have denied federal funds to so-called sanctuary cities that limit or forbid cooperation with federal immigration authorities.
– A Washington, D.C., judge blocked the Trump administration from following through on the president’s executive order requiring that voters in federal elections show proof of citizenship when registering.
– A district judge in New Hampshire blocked efforts to defund public schools that utilize diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives. Not to be outdone, judges in Maryland and Washington, D.C., essentially issued the same order, giving added protection to one of the least popular programs ever shoved down the throat of American citizens.
At the time, those were the latest of more than a dozen nationwide injunctions issued by unelected federal judges who appeared more interested in preserving and protecting left-wing shibboleths than the Constitution.
Also in courts across the nation that week were attempts by judges to reject Trump’s authority as commander in chief to ban transgender participation in the military, to deny Trump the right to strip security clearances from law firms that he says put national security interests second to political partisanship, and stop the administration’s efforts to eliminate federal news services such as Voice of America that engage in anti-American propaganda.
Those are all in addition to the several injunctions issued relative to Trump’s promised reform of the immigration system to expedite deportation of illegal immigrants, especially those who have a criminal history or are members of international gangs.
If that seems normal, it isn’t. There were only six nationwide injunctions during the eight years of the George W. Bush presidency, and only 12 during the Obama presidency. That increased to 14 under President Biden, which was surpassed by President Trump in the first nine weeks of his second term when 15 such injunctions were issued. Of course, Trump should be accustomed to such judicial abuse. In his first term, there were 64 injunctions against his policies, a staggering 92.2% issued by Democrat-appointed judges. Julien Benda would have clearly recognized the “political passions” that had supplanted the disinterested intellectual rigor we once expected of our judges.
Yet because of our habituated respect for the separation of powers, none dare call it the treason of the judiciary.
That of course is a reference to the 1960s tract “None Dare Call It Treason” by John A. Stormer. Stormer took on the country’s intellectual elites, blaming them for working against the interests of the nation by tolerating or quietly promoting communism. The left-wing elites of the day laughed it off as another right-wing conspiracy theory, but as time has passed it’s become clear that there was indeed a long-range effort to corrupt our institutions with Communism 101 – reducing social acceptance of religion, turning education into indoctrination, and infiltrating government with the intelligentsia that thinks American values are outdated.
Now, at long last, we can see the fruit of the corrupt tree sprouting in our court system, where judges help illegal immigrants escape through the back door of the courtroom, where other judges demand the return of deported gang members or halt the deportation of antisemitic radicals, and where every effort to put America first is ruled unconstitutional.
Fighting back against the overreach of the judiciary must be Donald Trump’s No. 1 priority as he seeks to restore sanity to the federal government. Because the most important principle of constitutional law that is being decided in the next few months is whether the president is truly the chief executive or whether he serves at the pleasure of left-wing judges who put political passion ahead of national interests.
In the ultimate irony, the case must be decided by nine men and women in black robes, the justices of the Supreme Court of the United States. The fate of the nation’s future hinges on whether they will seek justice impartially or be swayed by partisan rancor.
Unfortunately, it’s an open question.
This article was originally published by RealClearPolitics and made available via RealClearWire.
Excellent well-constructed article. Highest marks.
Agreed- great article! Politics equals religion to the left. If you eliminate God, after all, what else is ‘left?’
The Constitution determined that the judicial branch would be the weakest of the three branches of government, being utterly dependent on its ability to persuade the other branches of its wisdom. In the words of the Founders, it controlled neither the sword nor the purse, and could offer opinion only (and that opinion has, at times, been utterly ignored).
John Jay, the first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, resigned and declined to be reappointed as Chief Justice (even after his appointment had been confirmed by the senate) explaining that the judiciary was “defective” and lacked “energy”.
Contrast this with the current doctrine of Judicial Supremacy, which declares that judges are to reign over the public officials who have actually been elected by the people because judges are “not political”.
In this current episode of the Twilight Zone, justices rewrite the Constitution at will, and in doing so they declare their superiority to the citizens and their “politics”.
Our elected officials then ratify (or decline to ratify) the policies that issue forth from the unelected members of the judicial branch.
Men cry “impeachment, impeachment”, but the far easier approach afforded by the Constitution is simply for members of the elected branches of government to honor the oath they took to the Constitution and refuse to cater to the policies that issue forth from the judiciary. The judiciary is not elected in Alaska. It is not a policy-making branch of government.
When it attempts to act as one, it is up to the executive branch and the legislative branch to do their duty and tell the appointed members of the judiciary to “stay in your lane.”
Impeachment is fine too, as far as it goes, but its function is simply to formalize what has already taken place, when elected officials stand their ground and invite judges to run for office if they want to get in on crafting state public policy.
As the branch now exercising the greatest power over our lives, the judicial branch of government has become manifestly more political than either of the other two branches of government. Whatever reason there may have been to defer to their political impartiality no longer exists.
Glad your a former representative.
Go for Governor!
We need a consensus builder like you, with bright ideas.
And some who is good as his word, an oath keeper, so to speak.
John Jay quit to run for office – Governor of New York and later for President. The 1800 election featured Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, Aaron Burr, and John Jay. By 1803 Marburv Vs. Madison, passed down during Jefferson’s term, changed the “lack of energy” you describe. Judicial review has been an important part of our democracy since that decision during our nation’s infancy.
Marbury v. Madison has nothing on the current effort to prop up judicial supremacy.
Under the constitutional model, the members of all three branches take an oath, not to judicial fiat, but to the Constitution itself and are bound thereby.
Our self-styled priests in black robes act today as though the oath was to their vacillating opinions, no matter how temporary those opinions are. It is actually the opposite of a constitutional system.
Be quiet Save, your opinion isn’t needed, go back to planning your next J6, talk about a traitor.
The problem with people like the author of this article is they see any pushback against Trump whatsoever as being tantamount to treason. The system of government as envisioned by the Founders is working. Lockstep blind obedience to the Executive should be worrisome to anyone that loves this country.
“……..The system of government as envisioned by the Founders is working………”
It’s working better than the society it governs. Let’s see if it can keep the mess together. My bet is no.
The judiciary, especially, should not be involved in the business of “pushback”. We elected the Chief Executive. We did not elect the judiciary.
The grievous problem with radical leftist conformist sheep like cman here is that they are consistently hypocrites. For all their bleating about “the rule of law” NOW, such concerns were nowhere to be heard from them under the lawless and woefully corrupt regime of the usurper PotatoHead.
Give dems what they wanted for 4 years, expand Supreme Court now! Cheers
For you “Constituional Scholars” on here… Does the government have the right to send a person to a prison in another country with no due process?
Article the sixth… The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Article the seventh… No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
If they are not a legal US citizen – ABSOLUTELY.
The US Constitution was to protect the God Given liberties of US Citizens – not ILLEGAL ALIENS that have committed multiple felonies coming into America illegally.
DEPORT all the illegal aliens – by any means necessary.
The 5th amendment disagrees with you. It’s says “no person shall….without due process of law.” It’s not limited to US citizens, and for good reason. I’m sure that’s inconvenient for you, but it is the reality of the business.
It’s an emergency. We are being invaded. We don’t have time for such niceties as forethought
Now due process is not a “nicety”.
‘…….Does the government have the right to send a person to a prison in another country with no due process?……..”
Yup. It sure does. If that “person” doesn’t like that fact, they need to stay in their own countries.
Again, the constitution disagrees with you.
Ho hum
It is appropriate to ask if due process rights exist in a given situation, but that is only the threshold issue, the next question that follows, and the one that the Supreme Court must address is: “What process is due?”. Unfortunately, recent behavior on the Supreme Court counsels a principled and polite approach. The Chief Justice notoriously displays a tilt toward statism and Justice Coney Barrett may be fashioning herself as a part of the “girls club” with the three left-leaning Justices. Prevailing on these issues requires that the Trump administration knows how to count. Alito, Thomas, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh (hopefully) make four. Five are necessary. The issues are too important to act foolishly.
Rule number four of Saul Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals” is “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules”. That is what is going on here with all the litigation. The objective is to win the war through well-planned and well-executed operations. The example should be Dwight Eisenhower, not Douglass MacArthur.
For starters your cause de jour had due process and was subject to deportation for being in illegal alien, he’s also a known wife beater, human trafficker, and gang member.
Rhe 14th Amendment says
“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
What is happening right now under Trump is really nothing less than a rolling, officially unacknowledged coup d’etat against him by the judiciary.
Spoken like a true MAGA quisling.
That’s a nice way of saying Un American Traitor.
Jefferson,
THIS president is not afraid to use his enormous executive power. The DOJ, and the FBI, will arrest any judge that breaks the law. Next up, will be articles of Impeachment against judges that further abuse the justice system. Anyone who wears a black robe at work should think very hard about tangling with Trump.
Russian say what. This is still America and when the honorable side gets back in power watch out.
Lick your masters’ boots!
I will never, EVER understand the craven and cowardly mentality of conformists and spineless followers like you.
Oh my!
It appears that comments here are now being blocked by the moderator
no they aren’t
Such nonsense.
The judiciary has been forced, very reluctantly, to address what every legal scholar acknowledges is the broadest attempt at expending the “Imperial Presidency” since FDR and in a manner and for purposes determined to be unconstitutional by a wide assortment of jurists of every age and persuasion (including numerous jurists appointed by Republican Presidents – including Trump).
The judicial responses have been extremely slow, deliberate, and measured. Even the Supreme Court (touted by Trump) felt compelled to order the Administration to facilitate return of those denied due process. And the Administration responded by finally admitting it could bring them back but have yet to ask.
Rep Eastmen, oblivious as always to fact and law froths at the mouth and suggests that the Courts have no real power and should be ignored as partisan hacks. What he ignores (and frankly the list of what he ignores is linger than this space allows) is that the power the Court wields is one of conscience; when the Courts are ignored the Republic is no more.
Perhaps all the bellowing ignorant madcaps claiming legal certitude should take a deep breath (or six) and reflect not on what they are being fed by Our Dear Leader, but on how a republic functions
Why not?
I call ‘em as I see ‘em
Dare?
🤣
Bullsh// is flying everywhere, Man.
Powerful odor of mendacity.
Regardless of what happens during this presidential term, when communist democrats regain power, they will, without question, engage in a totally rabid, ongoing campaign to put Trump in prison. We already know this. While I understand Trump is making every effort to come across as a “law and order” president, he should realize that he has absolutely nothing to lose by ignoring the opinions of these communist party judges. He needs to set that precedent.
You don’t seem to be a fan of living in a constitutional republic. North Korea would love people like you.
Look at the typical radical leftist extremist projecting his own sins, faults and insanity onto others.
My contempt for people like you could not be deeper. You are an un-American traitor and lunatic who does not deserve to live in civilized society, which your insane political and social(ist) agendas are going its best to destroy. I just don’t know what the sane among us will do, or be able to do. with deranged evil criminal like you.
As I have said before, you
must be a very sad and unhappy person to carry around such anger and claim I’m a traitor simply because I disagree with you. You have my deepest sympathies.
Trump could cure cancer and liberals would find a judge to rule it was unconstitutional.
When you elect chaos, the trolls come out of the woods
We can call it judicial insurrection. Rogue judges must be stopped from subverting our government, rule of law, and our Constitutional Republic.
The judiciary is supposed to to be impartial. These activist judges are anything but. They are betraying their oaths and need to be impeached.