Tag Archives: John Yoo

May 15th

Posted on by

On Saturday, PJ Media posted an article about a case that will be argued before the Supreme Court on May 15th. Generally, the Supreme Court does not hear cases in May.

The article reports:

The U.S. Supreme Court is preparing to weigh in on one of the most significant legal power plays in recent memory: whether individual federal trial judges can continue issuing nationwide injunctions that derail national policy. The high court’s move could mark a turning point in the Trump administration’s effort to rein in what it sees as activist judges stifling the will of the elected government.

John Yoo, a law professor at UC Berkeley and former Justice Department official, broke down the issue during an appearance on Fox News, where he explained the gravity of the situation and why the Supreme Court is now stepping in.

“This is about who controls all those… and there’s about 675 federal trial judges spread out all over the country,” Yoo said. “And some of them have been bringing the federal government, bringing President Trump’s agenda to a screeching halt, even though they don’t have anybody, say, who works for the government or any of the illegal aliens or any of the spending in their own courtrooms.”

In recent years, liberal activists have filed lawsuits in strategically chosen jurisdictions where they know they’ll find a sympathetic judge. The result? Leftist district judges, with no direct connection to the underlying policy or parties involved, have been able to issue injunctions blocking Trump administration directives nationwide—from immigration enforcement to federal spending priorities.

The important quote in the article:

“Whether you agree or disagree with President Trump’s order on birthright citizenship,” Yoo said, “they may not even get to the question, because the key thing here is for the Supreme Court to put an end to the 675 trial judges who all think they can run foreign policy, spending and hiring throughout the federal government.”

Stay tuned.

It Really Should Be About The Constitution

Posted on by

Issues & Insights posted an article today titled, “It Was Obama, Not Trump, Who Failed The Constitution.” The article contrasts the ways both men governed while in the office of President.

The article notes:

One of the key aspects of the Trump presidency has been his success at maintaining the vibrant and dynamic role of the office of the president.  In John Yoo’s latest book “Defender in Chief,” he counters the narrative that President Trump challenges our constitutional order.  On the contrary, Yoo explains, President Trump has been quite remarkable in promoting and protecting the presidency as an integral part of our federal system.

From its inception, our Constitution contemplated that the head of the federal government have the agility and flexibility to accomplish his agenda – one that had been presented to the public in the national election.  President Trump’s effective use of his office to focus like a laser on his policy goals has been truly amazing to watch.

The article continues:

In “Defender in Chief,” Yoo carefully explains the seriousness of the Trump administration in pursuing its objectives lawfully and also simultaneously reveals how so many of his critics colored outside Constitutional lines.

In nine chapters, he reminds us of the myriad methods of this dichotomy that psychologists might otherwise call projection. Remember the left’s attacks on the Electoral College? Yoo also reminds us of the odious court-packing schemes of FDR, repackaged by progressives Pete Buttigieg and VP candidate Kamala Harris.

…Even when the policy issue doesn’t necessitate a visit to federal courts, Trump’s critics twist themselves into pretzels figuring out how to oppose him. Take the Paris Agreement or the Iran nuclear deal. In both cases, President Obama failed to follow the Constitution’s predicates to submit the agreements to the Senate as treaties. Yet when Trump withdrew from both he was criticized for “undermining America’s standing in the world.”

The article concludes:

John Yoo’s latest book reveals that Trump is a bold and vigorous force in Washington, and even more an agent of support for his office just as our founders planned.  While the left continually challenges his position as president and his person as a threat to our Constitutional order, the reality Yoo reveals is quite different.

In “Defender in Chief,” Yoo gives the reader a robust defense of Trump’s commitment to the American experiment.  That our president has an unalloyed love of our country is clear.  Now we see with numerous examples that Trump has been able to accomplish his policy goals while staying within the lines of Article II because he’s the defender in chief.

Quite often the things the Democrats accuse others of doing are the things the Democrats themselves are doing. President Trump has never claimed that because he has a phone and a pen he can enact laws.