Showing posts with label courts. Show all posts
Showing posts with label courts. Show all posts


Anti-Trump Judges Hit Hard by Groundbreaking Bill

  • CLICK HERE: Subscribe to Diwida’s daily U.S. politics newsletter >
  • PODCAST: Get the latest news and rumors direct from inside the White House - Tune into Welcome to MAGAland here.

Widespread injunctions issued by federal district judges that affect all Americans might soon become an artifact of history following Republicans pushing through legislation to support the Trump administration.

The House approved the 'No Rogue Rulings Act' on Tuesday with a vote of 219 to 213. The legislation will now move to the Republican-controlled Senate, where it is anticipated to be enacted.

This legislation limits federal district courts from imposing nationwide injunctions unless specific conditions apply. Its purpose is to reduce judicial obstacles to the policy initiatives of the Trump administration.

"These unexpected judicial decisions represent a fresh form of opposition to the Trump administration, marking the first instance where such a significant group of judges has deemed it essential to engage in politics," stated Representative Darrell Issa, R-Calif., who authored the legislation, earlier this week.

The federal judiciary is not merely interpreting the law; it is obstructing the presidency. In reality, it does not maintain equality with the other branches of government but views itself as superior.

It was of utmost importance for Republicans to Congress As they assert, 'rogue' judges were incorrectly restricting presidential power.

"We aim to stop activist judges from handing down these unconstitutional nationwide injunctions and making laws from the bench, as this has turned into a significant issue," stated the Speaker. Mike Johnson said Tuesday.

Trump has been frustrated by judges across the country from Washington, D.C., to San Francisco for ruling against his deportation and DOGE orders. The president even took the unprecedented step of calling for one judge's removal.

"This judge, similar to numerous corrupt judges" I have to face, ought to be impeached!" Trump stated regarding Washington, D.C. Judge James Boasberg, who suspended the president’s immigrant relocation initiatives.

Rulings issued by Judge Boasberg and many other judges nationwide caused Trump's deportation plans to come to an abrupt stop.

After this legislation is signed off by Trump, which is anticipated, such judges' decisions might be confined to specific cases. This would enable the president to use his authority freely, unhampered by comprehensive restraining orders spanning across the nation.

"We do hold jurisdiction over the federal courts," Johnson stated while discussing the bill lately.

'We have the option to abolish an entire district court,' he pointed out.

We hold sway over the court's finances and various other aspects. However, in dire circumstances, extreme actions may be necessary, Congress is going to act.'

His comment seemed like an oblique hint, if not outright intimidation, suggesting that Congress possesses the authority to reorganize and cut funding for courts nationwide.

Though the Supreme Court The supreme judicial authority in the nation, along with district courts that have consistently overturned White House executive actions through widespread rulings, falls under congressional oversight.

The president has requested that D.C. district court Judge James Boasberg face impeachment for his decision to issue an injunction against the administration’s deportations of Venezuelans pursuant to the Alien Enemies Act.

The president has similarly criticized district Judge John James McConnell Jr., who ruled in favor of 22 states and the District of Columbia to restore the distribution of federal grants and loans that the administration had halted as they reviewed expenditures related to DOGE.

Republican legislators have already filed Articles of Impeachment against McConnell and an additional judge from Maryland. Theodore Chuang, who recently determined that disbanding USAID is against the Constitution.

Nevertheless, impeachment seems improbable since it would necessitate backing from Democrats.

According to Article III of the Constitution, it falls upon Congress to 'ordain and establish' the courts below the Supreme Court, which implies that legislators are responsible for providing funding and structuring the lower court system.

Read more


Brazilian court authorizes crypto seizure for debt collection — Report

Judges in Brazil now have permission to confiscate cryptocurrency holdings from individuals who owe debts and are delinquent in their payments. This move indicates an increasing acknowledgment that virtual currencies serve as both a means of settlement and a repository for wealth.

According to local media reports The Third Panel of Brazil’s Superior Tribunal de Justiça has unanimously approved a measure allowing judges to issue letters to cryptocurrency exchanges. These letters will notify the exchanges of the intention to freeze an individual's assets in order to compensate their creditors.

The report was validated by the Superior Court of Justice, which posted an announcement on its website.

The unanimous decision was made by the Third Panel after they examined a case presented by a creditor.

“Although they are not legal tender, crypto assets can be used as a form of payment and as a store of value,” a translated version of the Superior Court of Justice’s memo read.

According to current regulations, Brazilian judges have the authority to freeze bank accounts and initiate fund transfers, even without informing the debtor, if they determine that a creditor is entitled to payment.

After the latest ruling, cryptoassets now come under the same jurisdiction.

Minister Ricardo Villas Bôas Cueva, part of the five-member committee, stated during the voting process that cryptocurrencies remain unregulated in Brazil. However, he acknowledged that some proposed bills have categorized these assets as "a digital representation of value."

Related: Brazil’s data watchdog upholds ban on World crypto payments

Even with regulatory ambiguity, Brazil stands as a key center for cryptocurrency.

Even though Brazil doesn’t yet have a comprehensive regulatory framework for digital assets, the nation’s central bank is involved. divvying up The regulatory procedures have been divided into stages, leading to a rapid increase in cryptocurrency adoption nationwide.

According to a report released in October by Chainalysis, Brazil stands as the second-highest country in Latin America regarding "crypto value received," making it a significant indicator of adoption.

earlier this year, the cryptocurrency exchange Binance was given permission to function within the nation following its acquisition of a São Paulo-based investment firm.

A representative from Binance informed Cointelegraph back then that Brazil was advancing "substantial progress" towards regulating the sector and anticipated a complete regulatory structure would be completed "by the middle of this year."

However, not all of Brazil’s proposed regulations have been beneficial for the industry.

In December, the nation's principal banking institution proposed banning stablecoin transactions On self-managed wallets as more residents started utilizing dollar-linked tokens to protect themselves from the depreciation of the Brazilian real.

Industry analysts informed Cointelegraph at the time that implementing such a ban would likely be challenging to execute.

Centralized exchanges may be regulated by governments, yet peer-to-peer transactions and decentralized platforms pose greater challenges for oversight," noted Lucien Bourdon, an analyst at Trezor. "This suggests that such bans might impact just a segment of the overall system.

Related: Brazilian legislator proposes bill for regulating bitcoin-based payrolls



Trump Admin Contends Judge Lacks Authority to Order Man's Return After Deportation Error

A federal judge lacked the power to direct the Trump administration to facilitate the return of a Maryland resident who was wrongly sent back to a well-known prison in El Salvador, according to arguments made by government lawyers. argued Saturday as they asked an appellate court to halt the ruling .

On Friday, U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis instructed the administration to "help and ensure" Kilmar Abrego Garcia’s return to the U.S. by late Monday evening. Attorneys from the Justice Department have requested that the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals halt the judge's directive right away.

"A court directive compelling the Executive branch to interact with a foreign nation in a specific manner, not to mention mandating particular actions by a foreign government, would be unconstitutional," they stated.

The appellate court requested Abrego Garcia's legal representatives to reply to the government's submission by Sunday evening.

Abrego Garcia, a 29-year-old citizen of El Salvador, was apprehended in Maryland and sent back to his home country last month even though an immigration judge had ruled in 2019 not to deport him due to potential gang persecution he would face in El Salvador.

The wrongful deportation, which the White House termed an "administrative mistake," has sparked anger among many people and heightened worries regarding the removal of noncitizens who had been permitted to stay in the U.S.

Many supporters assembled at the federal courthouse in Greenbelt, Maryland, for the hearing on Friday. When Judge Xinis sided with Abrego Garcia, who had his spouse—a U.S. citizen—present in court, cheers filled the room.

Xinis, who was nominated by President Obama, said there was no legal basis for Abrego Garcia’s detention and no legal justification for his removal to El Salvador, where he has been held in a prison that observers say is rife with human rights abuses.

On Friday’s hearing, Attorney Erez Reuveni from the Justice Department admitted to Judge Xinis that removing Abrego Garcia from the U.S. or deporting him to El Salvador would be inappropriate. When pressed by the judge, Reuveni couldn’t specify the legal basis for his arrest in Maryland.

"I'm equally annoyed because I can't provide you with many answers to these questions," he stated.

Reuveni’s name did not appear in the court documents from Saturday. A representative from the department verified that he has been put on leave.

"As instructed, all attorneys at the Department of Justice must vigorously represent the interests of the United States. Attorneys who do not comply with this directive will encounter repercussions," stated Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi in a press release.

Simon Sandoval-Moshenberg, Abrego Garcia’s lawyer, stated that the government hasn't taken any steps to return his client, despite acknowledging its mistakes.

“There were numerous tweets and White House press conferences, but no concrete actions were taken regarding the government of El Salvador to correct the situation,” he stated to the judge on Friday.

The White House has cast Abrego Garcia as an MS-13 gang member and reiterated that claim after Friday’s hearing. Abrego Garcia’s attorneys contend that there is no evidence he was in MS-13.

Garcia Abrego possessed a permit issued by the Department of Homeland Security allowing him to lawfully work within the U.S., according to his lawyer. As he worked towards obtaining his journeyman license, he held an apprenticeship position in sheet metalwork.

In 2011, Abrego Garcia left El Salvador due to threats from local gangs targeting him and his family. By 2019, a U.S. immigration judge had provided him with protection against being deported back to El Salvador.

Government attorneys claim they lack jurisdiction over Abrego Garcia and do not have the ability to facilitate his return. They argue this situation is comparable to their inability to enforce a court order directing them to conclude the war in Ukraine or secure the release of hostages from Gaza.

"It orders a foreign sovereign to return a foreign terrorist within three days, which is not how governance should be conducted. Furthermore, this lacks any foundation in U.S. law," they stated.

Kunzelman is a writer for the Associated Press. AP contributors Alanna Durkin and Richer also worked on this report.

This tale initially surfaced in Los Angeles Times .