Tag Archives: U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

Jurisdiction Matters

Posted on by

On May 45h, PJ Media reported the following:

When President Trump returned to the White House, he didn’t just get to work cleaning up Joe Biden’s mess—he set his sights on dismantling decades of entrenched bureaucratic bloat, waste, and corruption. With a relentless series of executive orders and policy directives, Trump reignited his mission to drain the swamp—this time with laser precision and zero patience for the status quo.

Predictably, the left went into full-blown panic mode. Liberal legal groups immediately launched a barrage of lawsuits, cherry-picking friendly courts in a shameless attempt to stall Trump’s agenda. They’re terrified of losing control over the bloated regulatory state they’ve used for years to push policies they could never pass through Congress.

But that strategy just hit a major roadblock. In a landmark ruling on Saturday, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals handed the Trump administration a decisive legal victory—one that could fundamentally change how activist judges and forum-shopped cases interfere with executive authority. 

“This is a huge victory for President Trump and his Article II powers granted in the United States Constitution. It’s also a victory for US Agency for Global Media (USAGM) and VOA,” Kari Lake told Fox News Digital. Lake now serves as a USAGM senior advisor to the Trump administration. “We are eager to accomplish President Trump’s America First agenda which has always been to modernize and make our government efficient while cutting waste, fraud, and abuse.”

Kari Lake told Fox News

The appeals court’s 2-1 ruling Saturday emphasized the judiciary’s deference to executive authority in matters concerning federal employment and contractual decisions.

The court noted that the district court likely lacked jurisdiction to interfere with the administration’s personnel actions and funding decisions, particularly regarding grant agreements with non-federal entities like Radio Free Asia and the Middle East Broadcasting Networks.

This ruling  Trump’s March 14 executive order (EO), which aimed to dismantle USAGM operations.

The article at PJ Media concludes:

The significance of this decision extends far beyond these specific cases—it establishes clear jurisdictional parameters that could affect dozens of pending lawsuits against Trump administration policies. While the administration won’t prevail in every case, this ruling suggests courts may need to more carefully consider their jurisdictional authority before issuing sweeping injunctions against executive actions.

The D.C. Circuit Court just handed Trump a game-changing victory that will help him clean house in 2025.

Let’s hope that this is the first of many good decisions by the courts.

This Could Be Very Interesting

Posted on by

On March 1 (updated March 2), Trending Politics posted an article about a recent decision by a federal appeals court in Washington D.C.

The article reports:

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled Friday that defendant Larry Brock — a retired Air Force colonel who was sentenced to two years in federal prison for peacefully protesting in a building — was improperly sentenced. The court took issue with the inclusion of charges of “interference with the administration of justice.”

According to Circuit Judge Millett, who authored the court’s opinion, interference with Congress’ certification of the presidential election in 2021 does not apply to a sentence enhancement.

“Brock challenges both the district court’s interpretation of Section 1512(c)(2)’s elements and the sufficiency of the evidence to support that conviction. He also challenges the district court’s application of the three-level sentencing enhancement for interfering with the ‘administration of justice,’” the opinion reads.

The court upheld Brock’s conviction but disagreed with the sentencing. “”As for Brock’s sentence, we hold that the ‘administration of justice’ enhancement does not apply to interference with the legislative process of certifying electoral votes,” Judge Millett wrote.

Obviously this decision could affect the sentences of all the January 6th political prisoners.

The article concludes:

Brock was initially arrested and charged on January 6, 2021 on just two charges: knowingly entering or remaining in any restricted building or grounds without lawful authority, and violent entry and disorderly conduct on Capitol grounds.

The “interference” charge was added at a later date.

“Larry Brock participated in the violent January 6th riot at the United States Capitol that forced the evacuation of members of Congress and their staff and prevented Congress’s certification of the 2020 presidential election until the next day. After a bench trial, the court convicted Brock of six crimes, including corruptly obstructing Congress’s certification of the electoral count under 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2),” Judge Millet wrote. “At sentencing, the district court applied a three level sentencing enhancement to Brock’s Section 1512(c)(2) conviction on the ground that Brock’s conduct resulted in ‘substantial interference with the administration of justice.’”

The Supreme Court is also reviewing the validity of the Biden DOJ’s use of the “obstruction of an official proceeding” statute.

Stay tuned.