Federal judge said prosecutors picked to replace Alina Habba repeated error of bypassing congressional approval
Three prosecutors installed by Donald Trump’s administration to lead the New Jersey attorney general’s office after the president’s former personal lawyer was disqualified from the role in December were also illegally appointed, a federal judge has ruled.
Pam Bondi, the US attorney general, handpicked the three to replace Alina Habba, who resigned after a succession of district and appeals court rulings that she was serving illegally because she never received Senate confirmation.
On Monday, federal judge Matthew Brann said Bondi’s actions repeated the same error of bypassing congressional approval for the appointments. He stopped short of ordering their removal pending a government appeal – but, in a blistering 130-page ruling, said overreach by the executive branch could jeopardise all of its cases before him.
For the Attorney General, an incredible amount of what Bondi is doing is absolutely illegal.
As a lawyer, she is of course aware of this, but she does it anyway because she has no other choice anymore.
In a constitutional state, she would undoubtedly be sentenced to life imprisonment for all her crimes, because what she is doing is in fact high treason.
However, like the rest of this administration, she seems to assume that the rule of law no longer exists, which is indeed the case under this regime.
So I think: The blantant criminals who are in charge in the US not only will, but must establish an autocracy, following failed states like Russia, for example, because otherwise they will go to prison. This would be the logical consequence of a new, democratically elected government, even in a legal system as corrupt as that of the US – the people would quite rightly demand at least some consequences, and leaders like Bondi are not nearly influential enough to undermine the rule of law in the way that the current president is doing.
However, this is merely my assessment as a European - perhaps I am underestimating the degree to which the obviously absurdly corrupt political system in the US is undermining fundamental democratic functions. So maybe people like Bondi could somehow still get away with their crimes under new administration.
We’re not completely screwed until they replace enough judges. The ones in place are able to slow if not fully prevent many of these abuses, primarily ones where the government has to operate through the judicial branch.
I think the Supreme Court was just a means to an end. The establishment of an autocracy, however, will essentially be achieved through ICE, an agency that was introduced under Bush Jr. and now serves as a secret police force with exclusive loyalty to the head of the fascist conspiracy. To me this seems obvious by now, given that this agency operates beyond the law and even executes people in the open street. Another very obvious indication is its astronomical budget, which is equivalent to the military spending of a medium-sized country, or, in US terms, more than the cumulative budget of all other federal US-agencies such as the FBI, CIA, etc.
Please note: This is nothing more than my opinion as a reasonably interested observer from afar.
Oh god, yes. Still, between Habeas petitions, lawsuits against administration hirings and firings, and many others. The litigants are flooding the judiciary and the Supreme Court logistically can’t overrule everything.
What makes you think that a Supreme Court that has ruled that the US president is effectively above the law would make any decision that is compatible with a democratic constitution - this decision is certainly not compatible with any democratic constitution in any country that I am aware of.
The rest of what I describe has little to do with the legal system, because ICE already exists in the form described.
Again, I should point out that I am from Europe and this is merely my opinion, but against the backdrop of recent events, I cannot see how anyone can still have any faith left in the US legal system. To me, it seems more like an accomplice that enables organized crime on this absurd scale in the first place, rather than a system that serves the good of the people.
As someone inside of this mess, my point is that there are too many legal proceedings in too broad of a range of issues for SCOTUS to be given the opportunity to overturn all of them, barring SCOTUS giving POTUS the explicit power to fully ignore the Constitution and nullifying all state and regional courts and their decisions. Is this impossible? No. However if that doesn’t happen, a rickety frame of rulings and laws supporting the Constitution are likely to still exist in the U.S. when he passes from the mortal coil. The judiciary (SCOTUS and some circuit courts notwithstanding) and the citizens are the only entities who have consistently and successfully stood up to the administration, even if most of those wins have been small.
We are completely agreed on ICE/DHS.
Together with the executive and the legislature, that court served as a third means of what it’s called a system of checks-and-balances which by principle are supposed to limit the powers of either three, and that power is never invested in the person but in the office.
However, besides they’re holding the position for life, Supreme Court justices are chosen by the president and thus became heavily dependent on party alignment and some personal biases than impartiality.
If there’s anything the American center-right party will do, it’s say that it’s “better for the nation to move on from this” while applying only the most minimal of consequences, which, of course, only ensures that it will happen again.
Self-immolation is always a choice, and in her case, in the public interest.