Judges were one of the big wins of President Donald Trump’s first term. His initial batch of nominees this term suggests he’s not tired of winning yet.
Last week, Trump named several judges for the district court in Missouri and the municipal court in Washington, D.C. And earlier this month, he <a href="https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/white-house-press-release-president-donald-j-trump-announces-judicial-candidate-1" target="_blank" rel="noopener">announced</a> Whitney Hermandorfer as his nominee for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.
All are strong picks, but Hermandorfer has garnered the most attention — and for good reason.
She’s Trump’s only court of appeals nominee so far. This is significant because the courts of appeals are one level below the Supreme Court in more ways than one. They resolve upwards of 99% of federal litigation, while the High Court rules on around 60 cases each year.
Moreover, the court of appeals is a common stepping stone to higher office. Eight of the nine sitting Supreme Court justices previously served on the court of appeals,
But perhaps most importantly, Hermandorfer’s nomination suggests that Trump will apply the same criteria we saw for his first-term judicial nominees: originalists who will uphold the rule of law and are not afraid of the opprobrium heaped on those who take on the Left’s sacred cows.
That’s what has the Left running scared.
As Hermandorfer’s current boss, Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti, <a href="https://www.tn.gov/attorneygeneral/news/2025/5/2/pr25-26.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">said</a> upon the announcement of her nomination, she is “an absolute rock star” and “perhaps the single most credentialed lawyer in America, having clerked for a full third of the justices on the Supreme Court.” He wasn’t exaggerating.
She graduated from Princeton University magna cum laude and was first in her class at the George Washington University Law School, where she was editor-in-chief of the George Washington University Law Review. Most lawyers would consider having clerked at the Supreme Court the gold standard for a nominee, but Hermandorfer went even further.
After clerking for Judge Richard Leon of the D.C. district court, she served then-Judge Brett Kavanaugh on the D.C. Circuit before clerking on the Supreme Court for Justices Samuel Alito and Amy Coney Barrett. That’s a trifecta of every type of federal clerkship possible, plus an extraordinary double Supreme Court clerkship. As Trump put it in his Truth Social <a href="https://x.com/TruthTrumpPosts/status/1918151975453245946" target="_blank" rel="noopener">announcement</a>, Hermandorfer “has a long history of working for Judges and Justices who respect the RULE OF LAW.”
Hermandorfer has long been part of the conservative legal movement, and in recent years has played an integral role in the successful Tennessee Attorney General’s office, where she has served under <a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/tennessee-ag-jonathan-skrmetti-is-the-real-deal/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Skrmetti</a> as director of the Strategic Litigation Unit. State attorneys general were the tip of the spear defending constitutional limits under the Biden administration, and Hermandorfer played an important role by leading two successful multi-state coalitions <a href="https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/25/02/242249P.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">challenging</a> Biden’s Title IX regulations mandating that boys be allowed to play girls’ sports and use girls’ facilities in schools and <a href="https://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/25a0150n-06.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">arguing</a> against his attempts to rewrite Pregnant Workers Fairness Act regulations to circumvent pro-life state laws.
Of course, Hermandorfer’s stellar resume won’t guarantee her a smooth confirmation. Leftist groups, including the Alliance for Justice, have already come out <a href="https://afj.org/article/trumps-first-judicial-nominee-has-disturbing-extremist-record/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">attacking</a> her for embracing Trump’s “discriminatory authoritarian agenda” and said Trump nominees do “not deserve the benefit of the doubt…when we already have 234 examples of his judges causing harm on the bench.”
Indeed, the 234 Article III judges Trump <a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/judicial-nominations-update-64/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">appointed</a> during his first term are among the highest four-year totals in history. And the quality of those picks was even more impressive than the quantity, course-correcting the Supreme Court and much of the rest of the federal judiciary after years of rootless activism.
Because Trump begins this term with far fewer judicial <a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/judicial-nominations-update-73/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">vacancies</a> than he faced eight years ago, his second-term totals are unlikely to match those of his first, but he is nonetheless <a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/the-judicial-appointment-train-is-leaving-the-station/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">on track</a> to close out eight years with more judicial appointments than any other president. Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah) recently <a href="https://www.dailysignal.com/2025/05/07/confirming-trumps-court-nominees-is-priority-judiciary-committee-sen-lee-says/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">noted</a> that judicial nominations will be a “big priority” for the Judiciary Committee, which suggests the senators also recognize how key judges are, and time is of the essence to confirm as many judges as possible while Republicans control the Senate.
Hermandorfer’s hearing before the committee will be <a href="https://www.axios.com/2025/05/13/grassley-senate-republicans-trump-judges" target="_blank" rel="noopener">scheduled</a> for June 4th, setting her up for potential confirmation before the August recess.
Liberal dark money groups like the Alliance for Justice know very well that a president’s judicial appointments have an impact that lasts much longer than his term. While presidents come and go, federal judges serve for life. President Trump has the opportunity to bolster what could be his most enduring legacy with his second-term judicial appointments. He’s off to a great start.
Carrie Severino is the president of JCN and co-author of the bestselling book Justice on Trial: The Kavanaugh Confirmation and the Future of the Court.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

TOPSHOT-US-POLITICS-TRUMP

Trump Is Off To a Great Start On Judicial Nominees

Brett Kavanaugh

Donald Trump

Judges

Judiciary

Supreme Court

A French court has now banned Marine Le Pen, who is highly likely to win the next election in France, from seeking public office for five years. The court convicted her of misusing European Union funds.
&#8220;The court ruled that Le Pen and other members of her party illegally used 4.4 million euros, equivalent to $4.8 million, in EU funding that was earmarked for assistants helping lawmakers in the European Parliament with their work,&#8221; The Wall Street Journal <a href="https://www.wsj.com/world/europe/frances-marine-le-pen-found-guilty-of-embezzlement-b8c42dac" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reported</a>. &#8220;Monday’s sentence bars Le Pen from seeking public office for the next five years, thrusting her far-right party into limbo. Le Pen also received a four-year prison sentence. Half of that term was suspended, judges said, adding that she could serve the remaining two years by using an electronic bracelet or other alternatives to jail time. The ruling takes Le Pen out of contention for the 2027 race, unless she can win a swift appeal. Le Pen had been expected to enter that contest as a front-runner as President Emmanuel Macron will be term limited and other prominent contenders have yet to emerge.&#8221;
This is crazy — but this is part and parcel of the broader attempt by Left-wing judiciary activists across the globe to stop “populist politicians” from being able to run.
We saw it with President Trump, where the DOJ went after him for supposed crimes, the same crimes for which they let Joe Biden off the hook. We saw it in New York, where a New York attorney general filed a civil fraud lawsuit in an attempt to stop then-candidate Trump.
We have seen it in Brazil, where the entire judicial apparatus has been brought down on the head of Jair Bolsonaro, the former president of Brazil, in favor of Lula da Silva, who was then freed by that same exact judiciary.
We&#8217;ve seen it in Romania, where Cǎlin Georgescu won the election in 2024 and then the judiciary decided the election had been rigged by the Russians and annulled it. 
We have seen it in Israel, where the attorney general of Israel has been targeting Benjamin Netanyahu on specious charges for literally years, and the judiciary keep saying that Netanyahu can&#8217;t perform the basic functions of an executive, such as fire his attorney general or fire anyone in the executive branch.
And now we are seeing it in France.
<h3><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/bss-ep-2169-member-exclusive" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: The Ben Shapiro Show</a></h3>
It is absolutely amazing to watch these unelected officials going out of their way to thwart the will of the people in supposed democracies. It&#8217;s really insane.
You want to talk about undermining democracy itself? This undermines democracy because the reaction to this is, “Okay, what if we just overthrow the judicial institutions?”
Why do I feel like this is a put-up job? Because it takes effect immediately. The point is to get her out of the elections. Thus they&#8217;re suspending her jail sentence but they are not suspending her ban from running.
Le Pen had denied the charges, “testifying in court that it was appropriate for the assistants to perform other party-related work because they were political aides, not direct employees of the European Parliament,” the Journal noted.
In other words, if the European Parliament didn’t want them focused solely on party-related tasks, perhaps it should have hired them directly, rather than paying the party to handle some of its work. That sounds like a strong defense.
Is the idea here that Marine Le Pen desperately needed a couple of million euros in order to pay off her political party? I feel like she probably could have raised it. Her party&#8217;s pretty big in France.
This is just the latest NATO member to reject a populist candidate by some sort of judicial intervention.
If you want to talk about undermining the argument that democracy must flourish in Europe, this would be a great way to do it.

FRANCE-POLITICS-JUSTICE-TRIAL-RN

Marine Le Pen Banned From Running

Ben Shapiro

Conservatives

Corruption

Europe

European Union

France

Leftists

Marine Le Pen

Opinion

Parliament

Populism

Prison

Another foreign company brings business back to the United States, accidental texts reveal confidential conversations between cabinet members, a federal judge continues to stand in the way of Trump’s deportation agenda, and Disney’s newest live-action remake could become its biggest flop of all.
It’s Tuesday, March 25th, and this is the news you need to know to start your day. If you’d rather listen to your news, today’s edition of the Morning Wire podcast can be heard below:
<iframe style="width: 100%; max-width: 660px; overflow: hidden; border-radius: 10px;" src="https://embed.podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/car-maker-invests-big-snow-white-bombs-3-25-25/id1576594336?i=1000700724795" height="175" frameborder="0" sandbox="allow-forms allow-popups allow-same-origin allow-scripts allow-storage-access-by-user-activation allow-top-navigation-by-user-activation"></iframe>
<h2>You Win Some</h2>
<div id="attachment_897097" style="width: 874px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-897097" class="size-large wp-image-897097" src="https://www.dailywire.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/Trump-Hyundai-864x576.jpg" alt="" width="864" height="576" srcset="https://www.dailywire.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/Trump-Hyundai-864x576.jpg 864w, https://www.dailywire.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/Trump-Hyundai-300x200.jpg 300w, https://www.dailywire.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/Trump-Hyundai-768x512.jpg 768w" sizes="(max-width: 864px) 100vw, 864px" />(Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images)</div>
Topline: South Korean car manufacturer Hyundai announced Monday that it would invest more than $20 billion in the United States to build new steel and auto plants. Meanwhile, senior Trump officials accidentally included a left-wing journalist in classified military discussions.
Hyundai has joined the long list of companies pouring billions of dollars into American manufacturing. On Monday, the South Korean car giant announced a nearly $21 billion investment in the United States — for context, that’s equal to the total amount they’ve invested here since 1986. As part of that effort, it will build a $6 billion steel plant in Louisiana that will employ more than 1,400 Americans. The company currently has two major auto plants on American soil — now it will open a third in Georgia, which will create another 8,000 jobs.
“With your leadership, Mr. President, Hyundai Motor Group is proud to be a stronger partner in America’s industrial future,” Hyundai’s Executive Chair Euisun Chung said at a White House press conference.
The president’s tariff policies had a significant influence on Hyundai’s decision to onshore jobs. As Hyundai Motor CEO Jose Munoz put it, “The best way for [Hyundai] to navigate tariffs is to increase localization.”
Monday’s announcement is only the latest in a series of investment pledges since Trump took office. Apple announced it was pouring $500 billion into new American manufacturing projects over the next four years. Before that, Japan’s SoftBank announced a hundred billion dollar investment in American AI infrastructure. Asian chip manufacturer Taiwan Semiconductor is pouring a hundred billion dollars to build high-tech chips in America. The United Arab Emirates announced a ten-year, $1.4 trillion investment in high-tech manufacturing. According to the president, there have been up to $4 trillion worth of new investments in the United States since Inauguration Day.
“This investment is a clear demonstration that tariffs very strongly work,” President Trump said. “And I hope other things also, but the tariffs are bringing them in at levels that have not been witnessed.&#8221;
<h3>You Lose Some&#8230;</h3>
<div id="attachment_897093" style="width: 874px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-897093" class="size-large wp-image-897093" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/Signal-864x576.jpg" alt="" width="864" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/Signal-864x576.jpg 864w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/Signal-300x200.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/Signal-768x512.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/Signal-1536x1024.jpg 1536w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/Signal-2048x1365.jpg 2048w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/Signal-1800x1200.jpg 1800w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/Signal-1200x800.jpg 1200w" sizes="(max-width: 864px) 100vw, 864px" />(Photo by Matthias Balk/picture alliance via Getty Images)</div>
On Monday, The Atlantic&#8217;s editor-in-chief, Jeffrey Goldberg, published a report entitled “The Trump Administration Accidentally Texted Me Its War Plans.” That is exactly what happened.
Two weeks ago, Goldberg was mistakenly added to a group chat on the unclassified messaging app Signal. The chat included Vice President JD Vance, SecDef Pete Hegseth, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, National Security Adviser Mike Waltz, along with the heads of the CIA, DNI, etc. Over the course of multiple days, the group debated whether or not to launch airstrikes against Houthi terrorists in Yemen who’ve been attacking ships in the Suez Canal for years.
Goldberg published a number of those messages — in one, VP Vance weighs the potential risks of airstrikes, writing, “3 percent of US trade runs through the suez. 40 percent of European trade does. There is a real risk that the public doesn’t understand this or why it’s necessary. The strongest reason to do this is, as POTUS said, to send a message.” Later, Vance said he “hate[s] bailing Europe out again” but would support the strikes if the team was in agreement. Ultimately, the group, led by Hegseth, opted to push for the strikes, which were carried out on March 15.
“This appears to be an authentic message chain, and we are reviewing how an inadvertent number was added to the chain,” said National Security Council spokesman Brian Hughes.
While no incriminating messages were published, it’s certainly an embarrassing mishap for the administration, and there could be consequences. A number of prominent Democrats on the Hill have called for heads to roll and vowed to investigate why sensitive national security conversations were being held in such a manner. The White House <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/white-house-acknowledges-journalist-was-inadvertently-added-to-high-level-chat-on-houthi-strikes?topStoryPosition=undefined">confirmed</a> the legitimacy of the group chat, telling our own Mary Margaret Olohan, “We are reviewing how an inadvertent number was added to the chain,” while adding, “The thread is a demonstration of the deep and thoughtful policy coordination between senior officials.”
<h2>Immigration Court Case Continues</h2>
<div id="attachment_897091" style="width: 874px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-897091" class="size-large wp-image-897091" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/Darth-Boasberg-864x576.jpg" alt="" width="864" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/Darth-Boasberg-864x576.jpg 864w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/Darth-Boasberg-300x200.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/Darth-Boasberg-768x512.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/Darth-Boasberg-1536x1024.jpg 1536w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/Darth-Boasberg-2048x1365.jpg 2048w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/Darth-Boasberg-1800x1200.jpg 1800w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/Darth-Boasberg-1200x800.jpg 1200w" sizes="(max-width: 864px) 100vw, 864px" />(Photo by Valerie Plesch/Bloomberg via Getty Images)</div>
Topline: The Trump administration has been blocked again from deporting aliens under a 1798 invasion law.
On Monday, federal district court Judge James Boasberg decided not to lift a temporary restraining order he placed on the Trump administration to block its use of the 1798 Alien Enemies Act. The administration used it to move illegal aliens with alleged Venezuelan gang ties to El Salvador &#8212; the United States struck a deal with El Salvador’s president, Nayib Bukele, earlier this year to hold illegal aliens in its modern prison system. The judge said the administration misapplied the law and violated the due process rights of dozens of the illegal aliens flown to El Salvador.
Boasberg believes that shipping the aliens to El Salvador without a court hearing violated their due process rights. He also said that the administration’s use of the act to move the alleged gang members is likely an abuse of the law because, in his interpretation, it’s only applicable in wartime. The administration’s interpretation is a bit different. Trump’s team points out that the text of the law says that it can be used in wartime or when “any invasion or predatory incursion is perpetrated … against the territory of the United States.”
Critics of Boasberg and other lower court judges who have blocked elements of the president’s agenda have accused them of judicial activism and say their decisions are clearly politically biased rather than reflecting an impartial reading of the Constitution.
Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-LA) observed on <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5uVJCRXMGvQ">Fox News</a> over the weekend that “62% of the federal injunctions, for example, that have been handed down in the last century have been handed down against President Trump, and 92% of those were done by partisan Democrat-appointed judges.”
Republicans in Congress are <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/jim-jordan-says-house-may-soon-pass-bill-targeting-nationwide-injunctions">currently exploring</a> options for reigning in the power of the lower courts to issue nationwide injunctions.
<h2>“Magic Mirror on the Wall, What’s the Biggest Flop of All?”</h2>
<div id="attachment_897089" style="width: 880px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-897089" class="size-large wp-image-897089" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/Poisoned-Apple-870x576.jpg" alt="" width="870" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/Poisoned-Apple-870x576.jpg 870w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/Poisoned-Apple-300x199.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/Poisoned-Apple-768x509.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/Poisoned-Apple-1536x1017.jpg 1536w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/Poisoned-Apple-2048x1357.jpg 2048w" sizes="(max-width: 870px) 100vw, 870px" />(Photo by MDBrockmann via Getty Images)</div>
Topline: After a year of delays, Disney’s latest live-action remake, &#8220;Snow White,&#8221; <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/snow-white-bombs-with-one-of-disneys-lowest-opening-weekends-for-a-remake">tanked</a> at the box office on its opening weekend. The film, once poised to be a crown jewel in Disney’s lineup, has instead become a cautionary tale.
&#8220;Snow White&#8221; opened to a dismal $43 million domestically and $87 million worldwide against a reported $270 million budget. While the exact numbers are still being finalized, that means the reimagining of the beloved 1937 classic had one of the worst openings for a Disney live-action remake ever.
Many critics attribute the cool reception of the film to its deliberate inversion of the source material: Disney took a classic tale of romance and true love and turned it into one of self-empowerment.
Rachel Zegler, a Hispanic actress who played the titular character, has been a lightning rod for controversy – initially because she wasn’t a physical match for the princess whose “skin was white as snow” and later because of her caustic comments about the quality of the original film.
“The original cartoon came out in 1937 and very evidently so,” Zegler said in 2023. &#8220;There is a big focus on her love story with a guy who literally stalks her &#8212; weird, weird. So we didn&#8217;t do that this time.”
Other political controversies also grabbed headlines in the lead-up to the film’s release, including dueling stances from Zegler and co-star Gal Gadot on the war between Israel and Hamas. Zegler is a <a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/03/21/disney-tried-rein-in-snow-white-star-free-palestine-tweet/">vocal supporter</a> of the Palestinians, while Gadot is an Israeli Jew who served in the IDF and has spoken out in defense of her country’s ongoing war effort, leading to <a href="https://www.timesofisrael.com/snow-white-film-faces-anti-israel-boycott-calls-targeting-gal-gadot/">backlash</a> from people on both <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/film/article/2024/aug/25/snow-white-israel-gaza-rachel-zegler-gal-gadot">sides of the issue</a>. Zegler also made waves when she told Trump voters she “didn’t need their business” in the lead-up to the election, and then afterward stated that she hopes Trump supporters never know peace &#8212; she would <a href="https://cbsaustin.com/news/nation-world/disney-actress-apologizes-for-wishing-no-peace-on-trump-supporters-negative-discourse-rachel-zegler-live-action-snow-white-presidential-election-kamala">later</a> attempt to walk that statement back.
But politics may not have been the driving force behind the film’s disappointing returns &#8212; it performed about as well in red counties as it did in blue counties, and the consensus among those who have seen the film is that it isn’t very good: even critics were generally sour on it, and the film is certified rotten on rating website <a href="https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/disneys_snow_white">Rotten Tomatoes</a>, with a 43% critic score and a 22% approval rating by all audiences. Perhaps there’s general fatigue with the Disney remakes, which have generally been soulless, shallow, cynical cash-grab simulacra of some of the most beloved films of all time.
International receipts and a second life on Disney+ could help &#8220;Snow White&#8221; break even, but the reputational damage of a domestic flop could have a major impact on Disney&#8217;s brand.

Trump Hails Hyundai Plan For US Expansion As Vindicating Tariffs

Morning Brief: Trump Tariff Win, Accidental Texts, & Snow White’s Poisoned Box Office

Disney

House Judiciary Committee

Immigration

Morning Wire

Snow White

The Atlantic

Trump Administration

Democrats find themselves facing angry voters as a massive rift opens up between the far-Left and the party’s more moderate members. President Donald Trump and his top donor, Elon Musk, draw national attention to what could prove to be a pivotal battle for control of Wisconsin’s Supreme Court. And Trump revokes the security clearances of a number of Biden allies, while ICE and the IRS prepare to team up.
It’s Monday, and this is the news you need to know to start your week. If you’d rather listen to your news, today’s edition of the Morning Wire podcast can be heard below:
<iframe style="width: 100%; max-width: 660px; overflow: hidden; border-radius: 10px;" src="https://embed.podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/democratic-infighting-grows-wisconsins-judicial-showdown/id1576594336?i=1000700568389" height="175" frameborder="0" sandbox="allow-forms allow-popups allow-same-origin allow-scripts allow-storage-access-by-user-activation allow-top-navigation-by-user-activation"></iframe>
<h2>Democrats’ Downward Spiral</h2>
<div id="attachment_896267" style="width: 841px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-896267" class="wp-image-896267 size-large" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/Dueling-Dems-831x576.jpg" alt="" width="831" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/Dueling-Dems-831x576.jpg 831w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/Dueling-Dems-300x208.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/Dueling-Dems-768x532.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/Dueling-Dems-1536x1064.jpg 1536w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/Dueling-Dems-2048x1419.jpg 2048w" sizes="(max-width: 831px) 100vw, 831px" />(Photo by wildpixel via Getty Images)</div>
Topline: Democratic lawmakers have found themselves confronted by angry constituents as the party searches for a unifying message amid rampant infighting. Meanwhile, new polling shows Democrats continue to be less popular than ever before.
Historically, there’s often a sort of buyer&#8217;s remorse with voters, where a president’s approval ratings will start to decline quickly, and the opposition party will become more popular &#8212; but that has not happened. Trump’s approval ratings have held steady at around 48% — well above where he stood during his first term — and Democratic popularity has only plummeted since Election Day. Last week, CNN found that just 29% of Americans view the party favorably — that’s a 20-point drop from 2021. And over the weekend, things got even worse.
A new <a href="https://poll.qu.edu/poll-release?releaseid=3919">Quinnipiac</a> poll showed that just 21% of Americans approve of Democrats’ job performance in Congress &#8212; the lowest mark in the poll&#8217;s history &#8212; and only 40% of Democrats approve of the job their leaders are doing in Congress. By contrast, Congressional Republicans are more popular today than ever, with a 40% approval rating.
Democrats appear torn between two differing visions of the party’s strategy going forward.
There are those who say the party needs to listen to its left-wing base and double down on their opposition to Trump, doing everything possible to prevent his agenda from being implemented. In that camp is Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), who kicked off a “Fighting Oligarchy” tour last week with Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), hitting Tempe, Las Vegas, and Denver in recent days and drawing crowds in the tens of thousands.
“We are going to fight Trump and his oligarchic friends,” Sanders said. “But we have got to do something else. We have got to ourselves have a vision for the kind of country we want to become.&#8221;
On the other side are Democrats who feel November’s results were a clear rebuke of progressive ideologies and governance. They say the party has to shake the “woke” label and moderate on social issues while embracing a more old-school Blue Dog Democrat approach. Leading the charge on that front is, ironically, California’s Gavin Newsom, one of the nation’s most far-Left Governors. Newsom launched a new podcast where he’s been having friendly chats with hardline conservatives like Steve Bannon and Charlie Kirk. He’s openly criticized his party as being elitist and out of touch while conceding that he understands why folks supported Trump in November. He even went as far as saying he opposes trans-identifying males in women’s sports and called on Democrats to stop using gender-neutral language like “Latinx,” although he has used that term many times in the past.
The Democratic base appears to be as divided as their leadership &#8212; the latest numbers from Gallup found that 45% of Democrats want the party to become more moderate, while 29% say they should be more liberal, and 22% want to hold course.
<h2>Wisconsin Supreme Court</h2>
<div id="attachment_896401" style="width: 873px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-896401" class="wp-image-896401 size-large" src="https://www.dailywire.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/GettyImages-2206573074-863x576.jpg" alt="" width="863" height="576" srcset="https://www.dailywire.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/GettyImages-2206573074-863x576.jpg 863w, https://www.dailywire.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/GettyImages-2206573074-300x200.jpg 300w, https://www.dailywire.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/GettyImages-2206573074-768x512.jpg 768w, https://www.dailywire.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/GettyImages-2206573074-1536x1025.jpg 1536w, https://www.dailywire.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/GettyImages-2206573074-1200x800.jpg 1200w" sizes="(max-width: 863px) 100vw, 863px" />RACINE, WISCONSIN &#8211; MARCH 23: Dane County Circuit Court Judge Susan Crawford, candidate for the Wisconsin Supreme Court (Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images)</div>
Topline: An upcoming election will determine whether liberals or conservatives control Wisconsin’s top court. Already the most expensive judicial race in United States history, analysts are calling it the first referendum on Trump’s presidency.
Next week, a midwestern election will offer a rare chance to flip the ideological balance of the highest court in a key swing state. Depending on how things play out on April 1st, Wisconsin’s Supreme Court could go from a 4-3 liberal majority to a 4-3 conservative one, which would have several ramifications on national policy.
The balance of power could play a significant role in Wisconsin’s congressional districting. After the 2020 census, Republicans — who controlled the legislature — drew Wisconsin’s congressional maps. Democrats said this was gerrymandering and sued. In 2022, the liberal court threw out the GOP’s maps and adopted ones drawn by Governor Tony Evers, a Democrat. That new map helped Democrats flip one congressional seat in 2024. If conservative candidate Brad Schimel wins, he will likely uphold GOP-drawn maps that help cement that very slim margin Republicans have in the House right now. On the other hand, if liberal Susan Crawford wins, the court is likely to strike down the Republican maps again, meaning Democrats will have a greater likelihood of winning more seats in the state.
“The congressional majority is so razor thin, it could cause the house to switch to Democrat if federal redrawing takes place,” Elon Musk, the world’s wealthiest man and the mastermind behind DOGE (the Department of Government Efficiency), said on <a href="https://x.com/cb_doge/status/1903547076002316644">X</a>, the platform formerly known as Twitter. “Then we won&#8217;t be able to get through the changes that the American people want.”
Republicans also see a conservative court in Wisconsin as a potential firewall that could shield Trump’s policies from state-level challenges — think lawsuits over federal overreach or immigration crackdowns. On Truth Social yesterday, Trump called Crawford a “Radical Left Democrat” who is “insistent on bringing hardened CRIMINALS, that we removed to far away places, back into our Country, allowing men into women’s sports, [and] Open Borders.”
<h2>Security Switch Up</h2>
<div id="attachment_896275" style="width: 874px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-896275" class="size-large wp-image-896275" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/US-Security-Nodes-864x576.jpg" alt="" width="864" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/US-Security-Nodes-864x576.jpg 864w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/US-Security-Nodes-300x200.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/US-Security-Nodes-768x512.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/US-Security-Nodes-1536x1024.jpg 1536w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/US-Security-Nodes-2048x1365.jpg 2048w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/US-Security-Nodes-1800x1200.jpg 1800w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/US-Security-Nodes-1200x800.jpg 1200w" sizes="(max-width: 864px) 100vw, 864px" />(Photo by Douglass Rissing via Getty Images)</div>
Topline: Immigration authorities may soon receive help from the IRS to confirm the identities of illegal aliens. Reports of the new agreement come as thousands of law enforcement officials are expected to be redirected toward President Trump’s mass deportation agenda.
The IRS and ICE are near an agreement that would essentially allow immigration agents to cross-check information on aliens with IRS databases &#8212; that’s according to <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/22/us/politics/irs-ice-immigrants-deportation.html">The New York Times</a>. To be clear, DHS would not have access to IRS systems, but agents would be able to verify with the IRS whether the home addresses agents have for illegal aliens are correct. The Trump administration has tried before to get the IRS to help locate illegals, but the agency has always resisted because of the sensitivity of taxpayer information &#8212; and because it didn’t want to run afoul of federal law. This way, the IRS can keep complete control over its taxpayer database.
Illegal immigrants are often employed in the United States and file tax returns that include information such as where they live, who they work for, and their income. The IRS has long encouraged illegal aliens to pay taxes; the agency even has a separate nine-digit code called an individual taxpayer identification number that it will give to aliens in place of a Social Security number.
More generally, the Department of Homeland Security is in the middle of a massive reshuffle to focus resources on deportations, according to reporting by <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/us/thousands-agents-diverted-trump-immigration-crackdown-2025-03-22/">Reuters</a>. The Trump administration has also canceled the CHNV parole program, which allowed 30,000 immigrants from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela to apply for entry to the United States. Trump ended the program on his first day in office, but over the weekend, DHS issued an order revoking legal status for those aliens who entered the country through it. The order encourages them to self-deport within 30 days or risk deportation.
In other news, President Trump officially revoked the security clearances of a number of people on Friday, including top Biden administration officials, as well as some of the president’s top antagonists &#8212; those who brought and supported the court cases he faced during the election and who pushed Russian collusion conspiracies. Some of the most prominent names on that list include former President Joe Biden, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, New York Attorney General Letitia James, and former Republican Congresswoman Liz Cheney (WY).

TOPSHOT-US-POLITICS-GOVERNMENT-HEALTH-KENNEDY

Morning Brief: Dems’ Downward Spiral, Wisconsin Supreme Court Race, And Security Shakeup

Democratic Party

Department of Homeland Security

Elections

Internal Revenue Service (IRS)

Politics

Wisconsin

Tesla and its CEO Elon Musk are under attack for his influence on the Trump administration. A handful of judges are halting a number of Trump’s executive actions, setting up numerous legal showdowns. And a Daily Wire investigation into a recently shuttered federal agency uncovers rampant waste and abuse.
It’s Thursday, March 20th, and this is the news you need to know to start your day. If you’d rather listen to your news, today’s edition of the Morning Wire podcast can be heard below:
<iframe style="width: 100%; max-width: 660px; overflow: hidden; border-radius: 10px;" src="https://embed.podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/tesla-attacks-investigated-trump-battles-legal-injunctions/id1576594336?i=1000700081217" height="175" frameborder="0" sandbox="allow-forms allow-popups allow-same-origin allow-scripts allow-storage-access-by-user-activation allow-top-navigation-by-user-activation"></iframe>
<h2>Attacks On Tesla</h2>
<div id="attachment_894499" style="width: 778px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-894499" class="size-large wp-image-894499" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/67da9af669253ccddf99a82f-768x576.webp" alt="" width="768" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/67da9af669253ccddf99a82f-768x576.webp 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/67da9af669253ccddf99a82f-300x225.webp 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/67da9af669253ccddf99a82f-1536x1152.webp 1536w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/67da9af669253ccddf99a82f.webp 2000w" sizes="(max-width: 768px) 100vw, 768px" />(Photo via the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department)</div>
Topline: Elon Musk remains in the spotlight this week, with attacks on Tesla facilities continuing nationwide as the tech mogul worked to bring home NASA astronauts who had been stuck in space for more than nine months. 
Once the darling of the Left, Musk and Tesla are under attack by Democrats. This week alone, we saw a Tesla facility attacked with Molotov cocktails and firearms in Las Vegas. In that incident, the perpetrators spray painted the word “RESIST” across walls and doors.  The day before, we saw similar vandalism at a dealership in Kansas City, with multiple cars being set ablaze. A week earlier, a shooter fired more than a dozen times at a dealership in Oregon. There were separate attacks at dealerships and charging stations in Massachusetts, South Carolina, and Washington.
It&#8217;s not just Tesla dealerships being hit; individual owners have also been targeted. Social media has been flooded with security footage showing Teslas being keyed, spray painted, or having their windows busted. Musk says he has received numerous death threats in recent weeks, including from an Indiana man who was arrested. 
“They basically want to kill me because I&#8217;m stopping their fraud,” Musk <a href="https://x.com/AutismCapital/status/1902176061187879404">said</a> in a recent interview on Fox News, referencing Trump&#8217;s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) initiative that he leads. “And they want to hurt Tesla because we&#8217;re stopping this terrible waste and corruption in the government. I guess they&#8217;re bad people and bad people will do bad things.&#8221;
This week, Attorney General Pam Bondi issued a statement saying the DOJ is treating attacks on Tesla dealerships and Tesla owners as domestic terrorism because they are political in nature. Bondi says perpetrators will be hit with five-year mandatory minimum sentences, and there will be severe consequences for “those operating behind the scenes to coordinate and fund these crimes.” 
<h2>The White House Slams Judicial Overreach</h2>
<div id="attachment_894493" style="width: 874px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-894493" class="size-large wp-image-894493" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/Gavel-over-flag-864x576.jpg" alt="" width="864" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/Gavel-over-flag-864x576.jpg 864w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/Gavel-over-flag-300x200.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/Gavel-over-flag-768x512.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/Gavel-over-flag-1536x1024.jpg 1536w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/Gavel-over-flag-2048x1365.jpg 2048w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/Gavel-over-flag-1800x1200.jpg 1800w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/Gavel-over-flag-1200x800.jpg 1200w" sizes="(max-width: 864px) 100vw, 864px" />(Photo by Creativeeye99 via Getty Images)</div>
Topline: Several of President Trump’s executive orders have been halted or hampered by injunctions made by district court judges, sparking a heated constitutional dispute about the separation of powers.
A series of court orders issued by relatively junior federal judges are attempting to reverse the Trump administration’s executive actions on issues ranging from deportation to DOGE. These decisions, often issued before a formal trial, have led to allegations of judicial overreach and activism by the president and his allies.
“We will continue to comply with these court orders and fight the battles in court,” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters on Wednesday. “But it&#8217;s incredibly apparent there is a concerted effort by the far Left to judge shop to pick judges who are clearly acting as partisan activists from the bench to derail this president’s agenda. We will not allow that to happen.”
Federal judges serve for life and are largely insulated from political blowback, although in extreme circumstances, they can be impeached and removed by Congress. 
Rep. Brandon Gill (R-TX) introduced articles of impeachment against Judge James Boasberg, an Obama appointee, after he attempted to block the deportation of more than 250 illegal aliens to El Salvador. The move drew a rare public condemnation by Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, who said “impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision.”
Other prominent Republicans have proposed different means of checking the power of nationwide injunctions. Florida Republican Governor Ron DeSantis has suggested that Congress<a href="https://x.com/RonDeSantis/status/1902313141951762729"> strip the federal courts of their jurisdiction.</a> 
“Jurisdiction stripping statutes are [constitutionally] permitted.” Daniel Huff, Senior Legal Fellow at the American Path Initiative and former attorney in the Trump White House, told Morning Wire. “However, as a practical matter, you can&#8217;t get that through the Senate.”
The relevant cases are likely going to be settled before the Supreme Court, and the scope of the judiciary’s power to issue nationwide injunctions could come before the court as well, but while the court has a 6-3 conservative majority, even temporary delays can have meaningful repercussions on the president’s agenda. “The Supreme Court conservative majority has not always been reliable,” Huff said. “These things take time. And in the meantime, momentum is lost.”
&nbsp;
<h2>DOGE Downsizes, Shutters 7 Agencies</h2>
<div id="attachment_894491" style="width: 874px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-894491" class="size-large wp-image-894491" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/Money-Down-the-Drain-864x576.jpg" alt="" width="864" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/Money-Down-the-Drain-864x576.jpg 864w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/Money-Down-the-Drain-300x200.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/Money-Down-the-Drain-768x512.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/Money-Down-the-Drain-1536x1024.jpg 1536w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/Money-Down-the-Drain-2048x1365.jpg 2048w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/Money-Down-the-Drain-1800x1200.jpg 1800w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/03/Money-Down-the-Drain-1200x800.jpg 1200w" sizes="(max-width: 864px) 100vw, 864px" />(Photo by Bill Oxford via Getty Images)</div>
Topline: Trump ordered seven small federal agencies downsized or eliminated, including one that might be the poster child for waste, fraud, and abuse. A new Daily Wire investigation reveals just how deep the corruption went. 
The agencies include the United States Agency for Global Media, which oversees the Voice of America; the Minority Business Development Agency; and four smaller boards. Daily Wire’s investigative reporter Luke Rosiak spent a year scrutinizing the final target, the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (FMCS).
“The first thing to understand is that these are “independent” agencies, which means their top person nominally reports directly to the president, but also that they’re so tiny that no one, including the president, ever looks at them,” Rosiak told Morning Wire. “That has made them really susceptible to all the worst impulses of bureaucrats. And I don’t know that I’ve ever seen a more wild example of out-of-control unaccountability than FMCS.”
For more details, you can read the full investigation <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/fmcs-slush-fund-abolished-by-trump">here.</a> Highlights include a few dozen bureaucrats maintaining a luxurious 9-story office building in Washington, D.C., hiring friends and family for positions and contracts, silencing whistleblowers, billing personal expenses such as housing and luxury vacations to Uncle Sam and generally living like “reigning kings.”
“Let me give you the honest truth,” one anonymous employee told Rosiak. “A lot of FMCS employees don’t do a hell of a lot, including myself. Personally, the reason that I’ve stayed is that I just don’t feel like working that hard.”

Tesla Supercharger Station In San Diego

Morning Brief: Tesla Attacks, Judicial Overreach, And DOGE Axes Government Waste

Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE)

DOGE

Elon Musk

The House Judiciary Committee will hold a hearing on the slew of federal judges who have issued rulings that halted elements of President Donald Trump&#8217;s second-term agenda, Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) said on Wednesday.
Jordan made the announcement during an interview with CNN&#8217;s Kasie Hunt after James Boasberg, an Obama-appointed judge, <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/congressman-introduces-articles-of-impeachment-against-judge-blocking-trump-deportations?topStoryPosition=undefined" target="_blank" rel="noopener">blocked</a> Trump’s invocation of the Alien Enemies Act to deport violent criminal illegal migrants.
&#8220;We&#8217;re going to hold hearings on this entire issue, the 15 injunctions that have been done in an eight-week timeframe. Judge Boasberg&#8217;s decision &#8230; hearing from experts, talking about this whole kind of body of law, this whole situation,&#8221; he said.
Over the past few weeks, some House Republicans have <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/impeachathon-ensnares-growing-number-of-get-trump-judges" target="_blank" rel="noopener">unveiled</a> articles of impeachment against Boasberg and other judges they feel are delivering rulings that are unfavorable to the Trump administration out of political animus.
Trump himself took aim at Boasberg in a <a href="https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/114183576937425149" target="_blank" rel="noopener">post</a> on Truth Social on Tuesday, calling him a “troublemaker and agitator” who “like many of the Crooked Judges’ I am forced to appear before, should be IMPEACHED!!!”
Jordan would not go as far as to reveal whether he would hold impeachment hearings, but the chairman did say, &#8220;We&#8217;re not ruling out anything.&#8221; He also stressed that &#8220;it&#8217;s important for us to gather information — get input on this issue.&#8221;
The House and Senate are currently led by Republicans, though by slim margins. While a simple majority to impeach could be achieved along party lines in the House, a bipartisan group of 67 senators would be needed for removal.
On Tuesday, Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/chief-justice-john-roberts-speaks-out-against-trump-backed-push-to-impeach-judges" target="_blank" rel="noopener">issued</a> a rare statement pushing back on the GOP impeachment push and declaring the &#8220;normal appellate review process exists&#8221; for the purpose of fighting a judicial decision.
While Jordan acknowledged that he expects the White House to proceed with the appellate process, he emphasized that Boasberg&#8217;s history with <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/meet-the-obama-appointed-judge-trying-to-stop-trump-from-deporting-criminal-illegals" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Russiagate</a> and &#8220;the pace&#8221; of the injunctions has become a &#8220;concern&#8221; for Republicans.
Jordan also touted a bill the Judiciary Committee recently <a href="https://issa.house.gov/media/press-releases/issa-legislation-stop-rogue-federal-judges-passes-house-judiciary-committee" target="_blank" rel="noopener">advanced</a> that seeks to restrain the number of injunctions being levied by federal judges and said there may be &#8220;another legislative remedy&#8221; that lawmakers may want to examine, too.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
<a href="https://t.co/N8CfdR3IR3">pic.twitter.com/N8CfdR3IR3</a>
&mdash; Rep. Jim Jordan (@Jim_Jordan) <a href="https://twitter.com/Jim_Jordan/status/1902473422996742227?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 19, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

U.S. Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH

Jordan Plans Hearings On Flood Of Judges’ Injunctions Against Trump Agenda

Congress

Jim Jordan

Supreme Court Chief Justice <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/john-roberts" target="_blank" rel="noopener">John Roberts</a> issued a rare statement on Tuesday pushing back on a push by some Republicans to impeach federal judges who have sided against President Donald Trump&#8217;s second-term administration.
&#8220;For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision,&#8221; Roberts <a href="https://x.com/edokeefe/status/1902029175638073448" target="_blank" rel="noopener">said</a>. &#8220;The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose.&#8221;
Over the past few weeks, a couple of House Republicans have <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/impeachathon-ensnares-growing-number-of-get-trump-judges" target="_blank" rel="noopener">unveiled</a> articles of impeachment against federal judges who have issued rulings unfavorable to the Trump administration, arguing they have become &#8220;judicial activists.&#8221;
The Daily Wire <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/congressman-introduces-articles-of-impeachment-against-judge-blocking-trump-deportations?topStoryPosition=undefined" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reported</a> the latest set of impeachment articles was introduced against James Boasberg, an Obama-appointed judge blocking Trump’s invocation of the Alien Enemies Act to deport violent criminal illegal migrants.
Trump himself <a href="https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/114183576937425149" target="_blank" rel="noopener">took aim</a> at Boasberg in a post on Truth Social earlier on Tuesday, calling him a &#8220;troublemaker and agitator&#8221; who &#8220;like many of the Crooked Judges’ I am forced to appear before, should be IMPEACHED!!!&#8221;
More than a dozen judges have been subject to impeachment proceedings over the course of United States <a href="https://www.senate.gov/about/powers-procedures/impeachment/impeachment-list.htm" target="_blank" rel="noopener">history</a>, dating back to the 1700s. Some of the cases resulted in a guilty verdict and removal from office.
The House and Senate are currently led by Republicans, though by slim margins. While a simple majority to impeach could be achieved along party lines in the House, a bipartisan group of 67 senators would be needed to convict.
Mike Davis, who <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/govt-background-checks-for-trump-political-appointees-include-left-wing-questions" target="_blank" rel="noopener">helped</a> oversee the vetting of judicial appointments as a Senate staffer and now runs the conservative Article III Project, responded defiantly to Robert&#8217;s statement on impeaching judges in a <a href="https://x.com/mrddmia/status/1902029950452113699" target="_blank" rel="noopener">post</a> on X.
&#8220;For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is a political decision by Congress. An activist judge ordering planes to turn around during a national-security operation is not a &#8216;judicial decision,'&#8221; Davis said.
&#8220;That is a highly illegal and extremely dangerous sabotage of the presidency, which is an impeachable offense,&#8221; he added. &#8220;Your statement is not an appropriate response. The normal impeachment process exists for that purpose.&#8221;

Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts

Chief Justice John Roberts Speaks Out Against Trump-Backed Push To Impeach Judges

Courts

Illegal Immigation

Impeachment

John Roberts

Salvadoran Government Receives 238 Alleged Members Of Criminal Organizations ‘Tren De Aragua’ and ‘MS13’

Trump Just Played His Trump Card Against This Insane And Unlawful Judge

El Salvador

Federal Government

illegal immigrants

Judicial Branch

MS-13 Gang

President Trump

Tren De Aragua

White House

The American Bar Association (ABA) recently released two public statements aimed at the new administration: The first <a href="https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/aba-news-archives/2025/02/aba-supports-the-rule-of-law/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">condemns</a> presidentTrump and DOGE for gutting the Federal Bureaucracy.
<blockquote>The American Bar Association supports the rule of law. That means holding governments, including our own, accountable under law.</blockquote>
The second statement <a href="https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/aba-news-archives/2025/02/aba-statement-re-remarks-questioning-judicial-review/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">condemns</a> Vice President Vance for <a href="https://x.com/JDVance/status/1888607143030391287" target="_blank" rel="noopener">his comments</a> on the judiciary:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
If a judge tried to tell a general how to conduct a military operation, that would be illegal.
If a judge tried to command the attorney general in how to use her discretion as a prosecutor, that&#39;s also illegal. 
Judges aren&#39;t allowed to control the executive&#39;s legitimate power.
&mdash; JD Vance (@JDVance) <a href="https://twitter.com/JDVance/status/1888607143030391287?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 9, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
While these statements reflect the ABA’s commitment to our system of government, many conservatives are startled by the blatant double standard: The ABA is willing to hold the Trump administration accountable for perceived unconstitutional conduct, but rarely countered the Biden administration’s conduct. These statements only affirm conservatives’ suspicion that the ABA is a Left-wing organization hostile to their values. This belief undermines trust in valuable ABA programs that have sustained confidence in our legal system for decades. To restore faith in the legal profession, the ABA must show the country they exist to support both liberals and conservatives.
In each statement, the bias is clear.
In the first statement, a response to President Trump’s mass gutting of the federal bureaucracy, the ABA <a href="https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/aba-news-archives/2025/02/aba-supports-the-rule-of-law/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">affirms</a> their support for “the rule of law.” This is a disingenuous statement because by firing bureaucrats President Trump is <a href="https://fingfx.thomsonreuters.com/gfx/legaldocs/movawxboava/2025.02.12-OUT-Durbin-530D.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">testing</a> a legal theory to overturn Humphrey’s Executor. When the prior administration used legal theories to try and <a href="https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-business-health-coronavirus-pandemic-executive-branch-18fb12993f05be13bf760946a6fb89be" target="_blank" rel="noopener">compel millions</a> of Americans to receive the COVID vaccine and forgive <a href="https://www.npr.org/2023/07/14/1187545921/student-loan-forgiveness-save-repayment" target="_blank" rel="noopener">millions</a> in student loans, the ABA released no statement. Neither did it balk when the Biden administration <a href="https://www.reuters.com/technology/zuckerberg-says-biden-administration-pressured-meta-censor-covid-19-content-2024-08-27/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">pressured</a> social media companies to censor COVID dissenters, or when the former president unilaterally <a href="https://www.npr.org/2025/01/17/nx-s1-5264378/biden-era-national-archivist-constitution" target="_blank" rel="noopener">declared</a> the Equal Rights Amendment “The law of the land.” The Association even remained silent when it <a href="https://www.wsj.com/politics/biden-white-house-age-function-diminished-3906a839" target="_blank" rel="noopener">became clear</a> that Biden’s presidency was run by committee for nearly four years. Are these allowances indicative of reverence for the rule of law?
The double standard is also apparent in the association’s second statement, which <a href="https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/aba-news-archives/2025/02/aba-statement-re-remarks-questioning-judicial-review/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">condemned</a> Vice President JD Vance’s comments on the role of the judiciary. For years progressives have <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2023/07/02/politics/aoc-supreme-court-dangerous-cnntv/index.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">said</a> the Supreme Court is a threat to Democracy. Even President Biden questioned the <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/07/29/joe-biden-reform-supreme-court-presidential-immunity-plan-announcement/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">integrity</a> of the Supreme Court when it ruled in ways he disagreed. If protecting judicial oversight and independence were a prerogative for the ABA, they would have admonished this behavior. Instead, they remained quiet. Finally, our justice system was attacked in an egregious manner by President Biden when he <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c3dx9n3m9y2o" target="_blank" rel="noopener">claimed</a> the Department of Justice engaged in a pattern of selective prosecution so he could justify his son’s pardon. The ABA’s response to this outrageous attack on our justice system was, once again, silence.
Historically, when progressives and a Democratic President ignore the rule of law and attack our judicial system, no response is necessary. In contrast, when a Republican administration tests legal theories or suggests judges shouldn’t be granting preliminary injunctions against valid executive actions, it’s a constitutional crisis warranting a reprimand. Like the proverbial slip, the ABA’s partisan bias is showing.
The mere appearance of partisanship and ideological bias in the ABA destroys Americans’ trust in the legal profession. The ABA may claim the above “double standard” is merely a false equivalence, but doing so misses the point: Millions of Americans who voted for President Trump believe the above “double standard” is proof the ABA exists to push a radical Left-wing agenda. This matters because the ABA plays a vital role in supporting legal-practitioners and maintaining public faith in the legal profession. Attorneys rely on the Association before they begin law school, as the ABA <a href="https://www.americanbar.org/groups/legal_education/resources/standards/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">accredits</a> Law Schools. With accreditation comes <a href="https://www.abarequireddisclosures.org/requiredDisclosure" target="_blank" rel="noopener">disclosures</a> for potential law students to examine employment outcomes and bar passage rates so they can make an informed decision on where they attend law school. Attending an accredited law school guarantees the school trains its students in basic legal subjects like Torts and Civil Procedure so their students pass the bar. Post-law school the ABA continues to support attorneys with <a href="https://www.americanbar.org/membership/?utm_medium=sem&amp;utm_source=google&amp;utm_campaign=mk25adsa&amp;promo=mk25pmax&amp;gad_source=1&amp;gclid=CjwKCAiAqrG9BhAVEiwAaPu5zthn91n7sGdiTvGLPu-TqdO_eO0_S2g7huDZq9lGfd5GT9Aw2qeUqxoCl9IQAvD_BwE" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Continuing Legal Education seminars</a> and provides practitioners with ethical guidance via the <a href="https://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/publications/model_rules_of_professional_conduct/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Model Rules of Professional Conduct</a> and various <a href="https://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/publications/ethics_opinions/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">ethics opinions</a>.
Additionally, the ABA doesn’t just aid practitioners — they also support the general public. First, the ABA demystifies our profession by <a href="https://www.americanbar.org/groups/public_education/resources/public-information/what-is-a-lawyer-/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">informing</a> the public on what lawyers do. Next, the ABA <a href="https://www.americanbar.org/groups/legal_services/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">connects</a> people who need legal services, like indigent individuals or veterans, with legal practitioners. Finally, the ABA <a href="https://www.americanbar.org/groups/committees/federal_judiciary/ratings/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">rates</a> judicial nominees to provide both political parties with non-partisan insight on the qualifications of potential jurists. Indeed, the ABA represents the legal profession to the general public making it imperative that the ABA maintain credibility in the eyes of all Americans, not just the American Left.
Unfortunately, the ABA’s selective criticism makes them appear like a liberal political entity hostile to conservatives. This will make the public distrust services the ABA provides. The public losing faith in the ABA threatens the integrity of the legal profession. If the public believes the ABA exists only to push a leftist agenda, they won’t trust the programs that have maintained public trust in our legal system for decades.
The American Bar Association must stop acting like a partisan actor and more like a non-ideological entity devoted to enhancing the legal profession for liberals and conservatives alike. Failure to do so will have disastrous consequences for all Americans.
* * *
Ryan Silverstein is a J.D. Candidate at Villanova University and a fellow with Villanova’s McCullen Center for Law, Religion and Public Policy. His work has appeared in Fox News, the New York Post, and the Daily Wire.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the Daily Wire.

Court of Law and Justice Trial Session: Imparcial Honorable Judge Pronouncing Sentence, striking Gavel. Focus on Mallet, Hammer. Cinematic Shot of Dramatic Not Guilty Verdict. Close-up Shot.

‘Hostile To Conservatives’: How The American Bar Association Undermines Its Credibility

'Hostile To Conservatives': How The American Bar Association Undermines Its Credibility

American Bar Association

JD Vance

Lawyer

While Democrats are screaming that the Trump administration is fomenting a “constitutional crisis” by contending that leftist activist judges are impeding the administration’s agenda, they were singing a different tune during the Biden administration, when they were only too willing to advise ignoring judges’ rulings.
On January 31, District Judge John McConnell Jr. of Rhode Island issued a <a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.rid.58912/gov.uscourts.rid.58912.50.0_2.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">temporary restraining order</a> blocking the Trump administration from freezing payments for grants and other programs.
On Sunday night, President Trump said, “Well, you&#8217;ve got some very bad rulings, and it&#8217;s a shame to see it, frankly. They want to sort of tell everybody how to run the country when they say that certain people in charge of massive agencies or people doing very, very &#8212; important people, smart people &#8212; doing investigations of fraud, and they don&#8217;t talk about what you&#8217;re looking at. All they just say is, oh, it&#8217;s unconstitutional. Judges should be ruling; they shouldn&#8217;t be dictating what you&#8217;re supposed to be doing.”
“If a judge tried to tell a general how to conduct a military operation, that would be illegal,” Vice-President Vance <a href="https://x.com/JDVance/status/1888607143030391287" target="_blank" rel="noopener">echoed</a>. “If a judge tried to command the attorney general in how to use her discretion as a prosecutor, that&#8217;s also illegal. Judges aren&#8217;t allowed to control the executive&#8217;s legitimate power.”
On Monday, McConnell accused the Trump administration of ignoring his order, <a href="https://www.npr.org/2025/02/10/nx-s1-5292342/trump-federal-funding-freeze-restraining-order" target="_blank" rel="noopener">arguing</a> that the Trump administration was working “to improperly freeze federal funds and refused to resume disbursement of appropriated federal funds,” adding that the freeze was “likely unconstitutional and has caused and continues to cause irreparable harm to a vast portion of this country.”
Democrats and their allies in the media then heightened their rhetoric. &#8220;This isn&#8217;t hyperbole to say that we are staring the death of democracy in the eyes, right now,&#8221; Democrat Senator Chris Murphy (CT) exclaimed Monday night. “The centerpiece of our democracy is that we observe court rulings. Criminal court rulings, civil court rulings and constitutional court rulings. No one is above the law. And whether we like it or not, the courts interpret the law.”
“If the President of the United States says, ‘You know what, I don&#8217;t care what the courts say, I&#8217;m going to do whatever the hell I want,’ that&#8217;s essentially the end of the rule of law,” he declared. “Because if the President isn&#8217;t bound by our laws and the Constitution, then why would anybody else be bound by our laws and the Constitution? &#8230;. If they were to openly declare that because they disagree with, for instance, a court&#8217;s order to reopen USAID, or to get Elon Musk out of the Treasury Department, simply because on the merits, they disagree with the court&#8217;s ruling, then you are clearly in the most serious constitutional crisis.”
Legacy media outlets are following the Democrats&#8217; lead on the issue. “Vice President JD Vance, Elon Musk and others in the Trump administration are openly challenging the centuries-old power of the nation’s judiciary, foreshadowing a possible constitutional breakdown of American government,” CNN&#8217;s chief Supreme Court Analyst Joan Biskupic <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2025/02/10/politics/constitutional-crisis-trump-overhaul-analysis-biskupic/index.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">asserted</a>.
The New York Times joined the effort in an article titled, “Trump’s Actions Have Created a Constitutional Crisis, Scholars Say.” “Law professors have long debated what the term means. But now many have concluded that the nation faces a reckoning as President Trump tests the boundaries of executive power,” the Times&#8217; Adam Liptak <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/10/us/politics/trump-constitutional-crisis.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">wrote</a>.
Yet Democrats and their allies in the media took a very different approach when Biden was in office. In February 2023, Democrat Senator Ron Wyden (OR) <a href="https://www.wyden.senate.gov/news/press-releases/wyden-delivers-floor-speech-calling-on-president-biden-and-the-fda-to-keep-mifepristone-on-the-market-regardless-of-outcome-in-texas-case" target="_blank" rel="noopener">advised</a> the Biden administration to ignore a Texas judge’s ruling on abortion, stating:
<blockquote>
There are moments in history where Americans and their leaders must look at circumstances like this one and say, “Enough.” &#8230; A judge’s rulings stand because elected leaders and citizens have agreed that abiding by them is right and necessary to uphold the rule of law. That’s part of the social contract in America. 
But the judiciary must uphold its end of the social contract too. It must follow the rule of law and earn the confidence of the American people continually, every day, every month, every year. The awful reality is, from the moment this case landed in front of Judge Kacsmaryk, it’s been a rigged game all along. It’s illegitimate. The case is an affront to the Constitution and to the rule of law in the United States of America. 
So here’s what must happen if and when Judge Kacsmaryk issues his nationwide injunction halting access to mifepristone. 
President Biden and the FDA must ignore it. 
</blockquote>
New York Democratic Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez <a href="https://www.mediaite.com/news/watch-aoc-lashes-out-at-abortion-pill-decision-says-biden-should-ignore-this-ruling/">echoed</a> the call to ignore the court two months later, <a href="https://x.com/EndWokeness/status/1889337281518969102">telling</a> Anderson Cooper of CNN: &#8220;I think we&#8217;ve been preparing and anticipating for there being these egregious overreaches by members of the judiciary appointed by a right-wing Republican Party, whose goal for a very long time was to just pack these Courts with partisan Judges often under qualified or completely unqualified for the for their role. And so there has been thought I believe given to this. Senator Ron Wyden has already issued statements, for example, advising what we should do in situations like this, which I concur, which is that I believe that the Biden administration should ignore this ruling.&#8221;

Baby crying, screaming and howling, close-up

Dems Cry ‘Constitutional Crisis’ If Trump Ignores Leftist Judges. Here’s What They Told Biden.

Biden Administration

Constitution

Democrats

The 119th Congress has begun, and Republicans are poised to pass a series of conservative priorities in line with President-elect Trump’s agenda. Given the overwhelming number of caseloads facing the judiciary, and the subsequent inefficiency of our legal system, creating <a href="https://www.americanbar.org/advocacy/governmental_legislative_work/publications/washingtonletter/december-24-wl/congress-add-judges-1224wl/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">new Federal Judgeships</a> should be lawmakers’ top priority. 
In 2023, the Judiciary <a href="https://www.uscourts.gov/data-news/judiciary-news/2023/03/14/federal-judiciary-seeks-new-judgeship-positions" target="_blank" rel="noopener">requested</a> 66 new District Court Judgeships be created to assist with its burdensome caseload. Last month, Congress listened and passed the <a href="https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/4199/text" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Judges Act of 2024</a>. This bill, which <a href="https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/4199/all-actions?overview=closed#tabs" target="_blank" rel="noopener">passed</a> with bipartisan support in the House and by unanimous consent in the Senate, sought to remedy the judiciary’s issues by creating 66 new Federal District Court Judgeships to relieve overwhelmed and overworked jurists.
Unfortunately, President Biden <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2024/12/23/biden-vetoes-bill-federal-judge-slots-00195981" target="_blank" rel="noopener">vetoed</a> the much-needed Judges Act a few weeks ago, purportedly because of “hurried action” from the House regarding how judgeships are allocated and how senior-status judges and magistrates affect the need for new jurists. 
President Biden’s reasoning is inopportune. Congress conducted an <a href="https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/4199/text" target="_blank" rel="noopener">extensive</a> investigation into the judiciary’s issues and allocated judgeships in a manner which does not benefit either party. Congress passed this bill in a bipartisan fashion for these reasons. President Biden likely vetoed this bill because he does not want his successor, President-elect Trump to fill those 66 new judgeships.
<a href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/?_gl=1*1lail3r*_gcl_aw*R0NMLjE3MzIyMDEyNDkuQ2owS0NRaUEwZnU1QmhEUUFSSXNBTVhVQk9JSkM0VnNsMFVreURxYXUxVWVEVWdOdjZkNzR2Y1pEeEZQeHVBcGl2R3BLaTdBMjVzT1p5TWFBdG1nRUFMd193Y0I.*_gcl_au*NDUxNDQ0NzYwLjE3MzY3ODI2NDY.*_ga*MTc2NzM0NDQ2NS4xNzI4OTA5Nzkx*_ga_CZKR9ZYKJP*MTczNjk1NzYwMy4zNDAuMS4xNzM2OTU3NzE2LjYwLjAuMA.." target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/?_gl%3D1*1lail3r*_gcl_aw*R0NMLjE3MzIyMDEyNDkuQ2owS0NRaUEwZnU1QmhEUUFSSXNBTVhVQk9JSkM0VnNsMFVreURxYXUxVWVEVWdOdjZkNzR2Y1pEeEZQeHVBcGl2R3BLaTdBMjVzT1p5TWFBdG1nRUFMd193Y0I.*_gcl_au*NDUxNDQ0NzYwLjE3MzY3ODI2NDY.*_ga*MTc2NzM0NDQ2NS4xNzI4OTA5Nzkx*_ga_CZKR9ZYKJP*MTczNjk1NzYwMy4zNDAuMS4xNzM2OTU3NzE2LjYwLjAuMA..&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1737044249231000&amp;usg=AOvVaw15fpgzSqdekU8AKrqgMU6V">CELEBRATE #47 WITH 47% OFF DAILYWIRE+ MEMBERSHIPS + A FREE $20 GIFT</a>
While Federal District Courts are expected to maintain a large and robust docket, they are currently overwhelmed with the amount of cases on their dockets. Federal District Courts had <a href="https://www.uscourts.gov/data-news/reports/statistical-reports/federal-judicial-caseload-statistics/federal-judicial-caseload-statistics-2024">347,991</a> civil cases filed in 2024, an increase of 22% from the prior year. Moreover, pending civil cases <a href="https://www.uscourts.gov/data-news/reports/statistical-reports/federal-judicial-caseload-statistics/federal-judicial-caseload-statistics-2024" target="_blank" rel="noopener">increased</a> by 8% — meaning these cases are stalled in the litigation process. Because there are only <a href="https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/us-senate-approves-bill-create-66-new-federal-judgeships-2024-08-01/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">677</a> Federal District Court judges in the United States, each District Judge has 1000 pending civil cases on their docket and 514 new civil cases filed in their court. This burdensome caseload is prolonging cases. On average it takes <a href="https://www.uscourts.gov/data-news/reports/statistical-reports/judicial-business-united-states/judicial-business-2023/us-district-courts-judicial-business-2023" target="_blank" rel="noopener">8.7 months</a> to dispose of a civil case, and only <a href="https://www.uscourts.gov/data-news/reports/statistical-reports/federal-judicial-caseload-statistics/federal-judicial-caseload-statistics-2024" target="_blank" rel="noopener">298,371</a> civil cases concluded in 2024 — a 12% decline from the prior year.
District Court judges don’t only hear civil cases. Their dockets also include criminal ones. Last year, 66,053 federal criminal cases were <a href="https://www.uscourts.gov/data-news/reports/statistical-reports/federal-judicial-caseload-statistics/federal-judicial-caseload-statistics-2024" target="_blank" rel="noopener">filed</a>. Moreover, 113,511 federal criminal cases are currently pending before a federal court. This means on average a federal judge had 100 new criminal cases filed in their court and 167 criminal cases pending on their docket. Much like the civil cases, this burdensome caseload has also led to delays as terminations of criminal cases also <a href="https://www.uscourts.gov/data-news/reports/statistical-reports/federal-judicial-caseload-statistics/federal-judicial-caseload-statistics-2024" target="_blank" rel="noopener">decreased</a> by 2%. Judges believe these delays in civil and criminal cases <a href="https://www.uscourts.gov/data-news/judiciary-news/2024/11/18/need-additional-judgeships-litigants-suffer-when-cases-linger" target="_blank" rel="noopener">erode faith</a> in the judiciary and harm litigants. Federal District Courts are overwhelmed and need help.
President Biden erred in vetoing the Judges Act. Federal District Courts are not political entities, but neutral forums where parties resolve disputes. In fact, Federal District Courts rarely delve into the political or cultural issues consistently heard by the Supreme Court. Rather, they mainly deal with tort cases, contract disputes, and procedural issues.
Further, Federal District Courts issue non-precedential decisions, meaning their decisions do not affect any other Courts. Such actions are consistent with the Supreme Court’s belief that the proper role of the Federal Judiciary is to “<a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/5/137/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">say what law is</a>.” By playing games with the District Courts, President Biden toys with the lives of litigants who are dealing with pressing civil and criminal legal issues. These issues must be solved sooner rather than later — as prolonged litigation can cost both parties thousands of dollars and, in some criminal cases, could mean life or death.
Unfortunately for President Biden, Republicans retained the House and regained the Senate. Hence, they can pass bills that align with President Trump’s agenda of fixing America. Congressional Republicans should prioritize passing the Judges Act as President-elect Trump’s administration would gain short and long-term wins if it passes. Not only would this be an easy short-term win as a bipartisan solution to a pressing problem facing our nation, it would grant President Trump future wins by empowering him to confirm more judges, something his conservative base loves. President Trump has a knack for confirming judges; in his first term, he <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2021/01/13/how-trump-compares-with-other-recent-presidents-in-appointing-federal-judges/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">confirmed</a> 174 Federal District Court Judges- roughly 26% of all active Federal District Court Judges. By creating more judgeships, Congress can empower President-elect Trump to reshape our lowest courts by appointing fair-minded jurists who can expeditiously and fairly resolve cases on their dockets. 
This would be a boon to the new administration, the Federal Judiciary, litigants, and the American people. A smart Republican Congress will pass this bill and empower President-elect Trump to resolve the judiciary’s peril while building his legacy.
* * *
Ryan Silverstein is a J.D. Candidate at Villanova University and a fellow with Villanova’s McCullen Center for Law, Religion and Public Policy. His work has appeared in Fox News, the New York Post, and RealClearPolitics.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Court house neoclassical building in Lower Manhattan

The Judges Act Would Be A Boon To Jurists, Litigants, And Trump’s Legacy

The Judges Act Would Be A Boon To Jurists, Litigants, And Trump's Legacy

Presidency

U.S. House of Representatives

A brief trip back to my native Britain the other week was a depressing experience.
There has been widespread rioting in cities across England following the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/more-than-a-dozen-people-mostly-children-stabbed-by-17-year-old-male-in-u-k-multiple-fatalities-reported" target="_blank" rel="noopener">murder</a> of three young girls in Southport at a Taylor Swift dance class.
A large number of Brits, I think it is fair to say, are extremely <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/people-have-finally-had-enough-of-the-illegal-immigration-takeover" target="_blank" rel="noopener">agitated</a> about uncontrolled (often illegal) immigration. Tens of thousands of migrants have been allowed to flood into the country on small dinghies from France. 1 in 27 people now living in Britain arrived in the past two years. 4 in 10 foreign-born people in Britain have arrived in the past decade. 
There is a palpable sense that nothing in Britain runs the way it should, least of all the criminal justice system.
The number of <a href="https://rapecrisis.org.uk/get-informed/statistics-sexual-violence/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">recorded rapes</a> in England and Wales in 2023-24 was three times higher than in 2013-14. A recent investigation discovered that across much of the country, the police had not identified a single suspect for neighborhood crimes over the previous three years. Only a few weeks before the unrest erupted, the authorities announced that even violent offenders would be released from prison after serving a mere 40 percent of their sentences.
Then came the riots, and the authorities suddenly discovered that it is possible to arrest and prosecute criminals after all. Prosecutions that would normally take months to come to court were undertaken within a few days. That, plus the return of British rain, seems to have dampened the spirits of the troublemakers.
Instead of clamping down on immigration, or addressing some of the underlying concerns about Muslim integration (or lack thereof), the authorities seem to find it easier to clamp down on <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/the-uks-orwellian-crackdown-on-free-speech-could-be-headed-our-way" target="_blank" rel="noopener">free speech</a>, prosecuting people for obnoxious opinions about either immigrants or Muslims expressed online.
The most senior official in charge of public prosecutions in Britain declared that he has a team of “dedicated police officers scouring social media” to <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/uk-police-chief-suggests-he-would-arrest-americans-for-highlighting-british-riots-online" target="_blank" rel="noopener">arrest people</a> for posting things that are “insulting” or “abusive”. He even threatened to extradite people to the UK for sharing such material online.
All of this has helped contribute to the now widely held idea that Britain has a “two tier” criminal justice system.
Having cheerfully announced that they would be letting violent criminals out of prison after completing less than half their sentences a few weeks before, the authorities now threaten people with jail time for expressing idiotic views. In Cheshire, the police boasted of arresting a woman for what they called “an inaccurate social media post”.
In order to fully understand why Britain is in such a sorry state it is essential to appreciate what has gone wrong with the country’s judiciary.
Mass immigration has become an explosive issue in Britain because judges have routinely thwarted attempts by successive governments to control it. In 2010, 2015, 2017 and 2019, Brits voted repeatedly to end mass immigration. It has not happened because judges have systematically prevented elected governments from controlling the country’s borders.
British judges only ever seem to rule in favor of those who enter the country illegally being able to remain, ruling on the basis of what they think the law should be, not the laws Parliament has passed. 
  
Britain, a once orderly, high-trust society has become increasingly lawless because judges have routinely failed to apply sentences that ordinary Brits would regard as just. It is so commonplace for violent robbers and rapists to be given community sentences, rather than go to prison, it is seldom even reported anymore.
Why are British judges so awful? Because they are unaccountable to the public.
In Britain, judges are appointed, not elected. Until 2006, at least the appointments were made by an elected minister, meaning there was a degree of democratic oversight. 
  
Since 2006, Britain’s judges have been appointed by the Judicial Appointments Commission, a body obsessed about diversity, equity and inclusion, rather than justice. Thanks to Human Rights law, judges are not merely unaccountable. They regard judicial activism as part of their job.
Liberty and order in Britain are collapsing as a consequence.
At some point, we must all hope a new Margaret Thatcher emerges in Britain, someone with the vision and principle to save the country from decline. On its current trajectory, Britain is drifting towards the abyss of a sectarian society.
In 2001, there were one and a half million Muslims in Britain. Today there are 4 million. If even a small percentage of British Muslims adhere to the Islamist teachings of Sayyid Qutb, the Egyptian father of modern violent jihad, the country has a massive problem. Far from addressing the problem, right now Britain is a country that cannot even talk about the fact that it might have a problem.
Any new Thatcher must, as she did, address an underlying British economic malaise. Thanks to net zero energy policies, extraordinary restrictive regulations, high taxes and excessive public spending, the UK has had remarkably little per capita growth over the past decade.
But far more important than fixing the economy, Britain needs a state machinery capable of addressing issues of culture and cohesion. Old assumptions, and long established precedents governing citizenship, will need to change.
For that to happen, the next Thatcher needs to recognize that much of the machinery of the British state is dysfunctional. Reform is overdue.
Judges need to come under some sort of democratic oversight. Senior civil servants must no longer be afforded the luxury of deciding whether to implement policies that clash with their preferences. Those elected to Parliament, not unelected officials, need to be able to decide if the country can afford to cut taxes.
Britain can only be pulled back from the brink by a leader that recognizes that it is time to treat the judiciary and the administrative state as Thatcher once treated the trade unions.
* * *
Douglas Carswell is the President and CEO of the Mississippi Center for Public Policy. He was previously a Member of Parliament for 12 years and never lost an election.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
<a href="http://www.amiracist.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH THE TRAILER FOR &#8216;AM I RACIST?&#8217; — A MATT WALSH COMEDY ON DEI</a>

Menu