NBC News - In rare interviews with NBC News, a dozen federal judges — appointed by Democratic and Republican presidents, including Trump, and serving around the country — pointed to a pattern they say has recently emerged:
Lower court judges are handed contentious cases involving the Trump administration. They painstakingly research the law to reach their rulings. When they go against Trump, administration officials and allies criticize the judges in harsh terms. The government appeals to the Supreme Court, with its 6-3 conservative majority.
And then the Supreme Court, in emergency rulings, swiftly rejects the judges’ decisions with little to no explanation.
Emergency rulings used to be rare. But their number has dramatically increased in recent years.
Ten of the 12 judges who spoke to NBC News said the Supreme Court should better explain those rulings, noting that the terse decisions leave lower court judges with little guidance for how to proceed. But they also have a new and concerning effect, the judges said, validating the Trump administration’s criticisms. A short rebuttal from the Supreme Court, they argue, makes it seem like they did shoddy work and are biased against Trump.
“It is inexcusable,” a judge said of the Supreme Court justices. “They don’t have our backs.”
All 12 judges spoke on condition that they not be identifiable, some because it is considered unwise to publicly criticize the justices who ultimately decide whether to uphold their rulings and others because of the risk of threats.
Judges are increasingly targeted, with some facing bomb threats, “swattings” and other harassment. Judges especially involved in high-profile cases — and their families — have reported receiving violent threats. More
No comments:
Post a Comment