Throughout Donald Trump’s presidency, it seemed like any action he did was almost immediately challenged in the courts. Liberal groups filed lawsuits in jurisdictions with judges friendly to their causes and successfully managed to thwart Trump.
One of the most troublesome actions by the judiciary against Trump didn’t even involve one Democrat-nominated activist judge but the Supreme Court, when, in 2020, the high court actually blocked Trump from ending the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program—a program illegally created by Barack Obama via executive action after the DREAM Act failed to make it through Congress. Of course, we know it was illegal because Barack Obama, the self-described constitutional law professor, said it was.
“Now, I know some people want me to bypass Congress and change the laws on my own,” Obama said of immigration reform back in July of 2011. “Believe me, the idea of doing things on my own is very tempting. I promise you. Not just on immigration reform. But that’s not how—that’s not how our system works.”
Obama actually said he couldn’t change immigration laws multiple times before he ultimately did so.
Luckily, Trump left his mark and nominated a historically high number of judges to the judiciary—234, to be exact—who will stand up for the Constitution. One such example is the 35-year-old Kathryn Kimball Mizelle, who struck down Biden’s federal mask mandate on public transportation.
But other judges are making their mark too, and the liberal media is up in arms about it. And Axios seems to think these judges are simply showing off to “audition” for the Supreme Court.
One example highlighted by Axios was Judge James Ho, who sits on the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. He dared to call abortion a “moral tragedy” in a ruling.
Hmm … I wonder if Axios was triggered by the Obama-nominated U.S. District Judge Robert Pitman, who temporarily blocked the six-week abortion ban in Texas, claiming, “This Court will not sanction one more day of this offensive deprivation of such an important right.”
Another judge on the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, Judge Kyle Duncan, triggered Axios because he “willfully misgendered a trans woman.”
Oh, the horror of a judge who dares to acknowledge human biology over individual fantasies of changing genders! He must be angling for a Supreme Court nomination by the next Republican president!
Or maybe he just doesn’t buy into radical leftist gender theory — the same way most Americans don’t.
Related: The GOP’s Post-Roe Messaging Strategy on Abortion
Oh, but wait! Axios concedes that Democrat-appointed judges “aren’t immune to rhetorical flourishes,” either. The example cited came from the newly confirmed Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, when she wrote in a U.S. District Court ruling that Trump’s former White House counsel Don McGahn had to comply with the congressional subpoena by saying that “Presidents are not kings.”
Wow, that was the best example Sophia Cai, the author of the article, could come up with from the same woman who couldn’t define what a woman is? Has she never read any of Judge Pitman’s rulings?
Here’s a wild idea for Axios and other liberal media outlets to consider: Trump-appointed judges are simply doing their jobs, making rulings based on the Constitution. I know this is probably a radical concept for some to wrap their heads around, but I dare say that conservative judges are no more brazen in their rulings than liberal judges are.
