Category: fox-news/politics/executive/law

Instead of impeachment, Dems are using Article II challenges to impede Trump this time

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

Democrats tenaciously working to thwart the second Trump administration seemingly have thrown out their playbook from the president's first administration — abandoning repeated attempts to impeach President Donald Trump in favor of broadening their focus on leveraging Article II of the Constitution to impede MAGA policies. 

Democrats, since the early days of Trump's second presidency, have accused him of taking steps that amount to a "gross overreach of presidential authority" or launching "illegal power grabs," most notably in response to some of the more than 200 executive orders the president has signed this term. Lawsuits challenging the administration also have focused language on claims Trump is exceeding his executive authority, sparking some policies to get tied up in the courts. 

Article II of the Constitution lays out the foundation for the balance of power between the office of the president and other branches of the government, including establishing the executive branch. Section II of Article II details the duties and powers of a president. 

WHITE HOUSE REBUKES ‘EGREGIOUS’ COURT ORDER BLOCKING TROOP DEPLOYMENTS AMID PORTLAND UNREST

Political foes have turned to Article II in their legal battles against Trump, repeatedly claiming he has exceeded his authority.

"Trump Derangement Syndrome takes on many forms — despite the Democrats’ failure to stop President Trump’s incredibly popular agenda in his first term, they’re trying a new strategy this time and failing again," White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson told Fox News Digital Thursday when asked about the increase in claims and cases claiming Trump is overstepping his presidential bounds. 

"The Trump Administration’s policies have been consistently upheld by the Supreme Court as lawful despite an unprecedented number of legal challenges and unlawful lower court rulings from far-left liberal activist judges," she continued. "The president will continue implementing the policy agenda that the American people voted for in November and will continue to be vindicated by higher courts when liberal activist judges attempt to intervene." 

Trump's first administration was underscored by two impeachment efforts, which landed Trump as the first president in U.S. history to be impeached twice. Trump was acquitted by the Senate both times. 

The first impeachment effort in 2019 accused Trump of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress related to allegedly seeking foreign interference from Ukraine to boost his re-election efforts in 2020. 

The focus of that impeachment focused on a July 2019 phone call in which Trump pressed Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to launch investigations into the Biden family’s business dealings in Ukraine, including Hunter Biden’s business dealings with Burisma holdings company. Biden was under federal investigation at the time. 

NEWSOM WARNS AMERICANS 'YOU WILL LOSE YOUR COUNTRY' UNDER TRUMP AT CALIFORNIA SUMMIT

The House impeached Trump on both articles of impeachment in December 2019, with the Senate voting to acquit Trump on both articles of impeachment in February 2020. 

Months later, Democrats teed up another Trump impeachment after the breach of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. 

Trump notched another first, when the Senate tried a former president after the House voted to impeach him just a week before Joe Biden was inaugurated as the nation's 46th president. The Senate ultimately acquitted Trump in the case. 

The second impeachment focused on the breach of the U.S. Capitol by throngs of Trump supporters when the Senate and House convened to certify Biden's 2020 election win. Trump was accused of working to overturn the results of the election and that he incited an insurrection with rhetoric regarding the election ahead of the Capitol breach. 

"I will never forgive the people who stormed the Capitol for the trauma that they caused in our young people, our members of the press who were covering that day, our staffers, the maintenance crew, the people who keep the Capitol neat and clean," then-Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi said in an interview on MSNBC in 2022.  

"This was a disgrace. And the president instigated an insurrection, refused to stop it and as those films show, would not, in a timely fashion, allow the National Guard to come in and stop it. And that is sinful," she continued.

The Senate acquitted Trump of the impeachment charge of inciting an insurrection in February 2021. 

The impeachment efforts followed Democrats threatening and vowing to impeach Trump at various points throughout his first administration. 

"I rise today, Mr. Speaker, to call for the impeachment of the President of the United States of America for obstruction of justice. I do not do this for political purposes, Mr. Speaker. I do this because I believe in the great ideals that this country stands for — liberty and justice for all, the notion that we should have government of the people, by the people, for the people," Texas Democratic Rep. Al Green declared in May 2017 in regard to former FBI Director James Comey's investigation into former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn.

TRUMP HAS NOW BEEN IN OFFICE FOR SIX MONTHS, FOR THE SECOND TIME. HERE ARE THE HIGHLIGHTS

"The time has come to make clear to the American people and to this president that his train of injuries to our Constitution must be brought to an end through impeachment," Tennessee Democrat Rep. Steve Cohen said in November 2017 over claims Trump obstructed justice when he fired Comey in May 2017. 

Trump's four years after his first administration were riddled with a handful of civil and criminal cases, including standing trial in New York when he was found guilty on 34 counts of falsifying business records in May 2024. 

District Attorney Alvin Bragg's office worked to prove that Trump falsified the business records to conceal a $130,000 payment to former porn star Stormy Daniels ahead of the 2016 election to quiet her claims of an alleged 2006 affair with Trump. Trump has maintained his innocence in the case, and was sentenced after his election win to an unconditional discharge, meaning he faced no prison time or fines. 

Trump also was indicted in Georgia on racketeering charges over claims he attempted to overturn the state's 2020 election results, which the president denied. That case was put on hold after District Attorney Fani Willis was disqualified from prosecuting it. 

A pair of federal criminal cases were dismissed, including one that alleged Trump mishandled sensitive government documents at his Florida Mar-a-Lago home after his presidency, as well as another claiming Trump attempted to overturn the 2020 election results. Special counsel Jack Smith oversaw both cases. 

Trump also faced civil cases, including New York Attorney General Letitia James accusing Trump and the Trump Organization of inflating asset values. In another case, E. Jean Carroll, a former columnist who alleges Trump raped her in a New York City department store dressing room in the 1990s, accused Trump of defamation in a 2022 case. 

Trump railed against the accusations and cases as examples of lawfare to prevent him from winning a second presidency, taking a victory lap upon his 2024 win that the efforts failed. 

"These cases, like all of the other cases I have been forced to go through, are empty and lawless, and should never have been brought," Trump wrote on Truth Social in November 2024, when Smith announced he would drop the felony cases. 

TRUMP IS ‘UNIQUELY POSITIONED TO AVOID’ FATE OF MOST TWO-TERM PRESIDENTS, WASHINGTON POST EDITORIAL EXPLAINS

"It was a political hijacking, and a low point in the History of our Country that such a thing could have happened, and yet, I persevered, against all odds, and WON. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!" Trump added.

Trump's second administration has been his with more than 400 lawsuits, according to Just Security's lawsuit tracker targeting the administration, with many disputing Trump's executive orders and policies as they relate to slimming down the size of the federal government, his policies removing diversity, equity and inclusion language and initiatives from the federal government, protecting girls' sports from the inclusion of biological male players, and his various directives to remove the millions of illegal immigrants who have flooded the U.S. in recent years. 

Trump and his administration are in the midst of cleaning up U.S. cities that have historically been rocked by crime, including working to remove illegal immigrants residing in the cities. Most recently, Trump ordered the National Guard to Portland, Oregon, in response to "radical left terrorism" in the city, specifically members of the recently-designated domestic terrorism organization, Antifa. 

"The Radical Left’s reign of terror in Portland ends now, with President Donald J. Trump mobilizing federal resources to stop Antifa-led hellfire in its tracks. While Democrat politicians deny reality, it’s obvious what’s happening in Portland isn’t protest; it’s premeditated anarchy that has scarred the city for years — leaving officers battered, citizens terrorized, and property defaced," the White House said in an announcement that Trump was deploying federal resources to Portland on Sept. 30. 

WHITE HOUSE SAYS ‘THE REAL CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS IS TAKING PLACE WITHIN OUR JUDICIAL BRANCH’

"What President Trump is trying to do is an abuse of power," Democratic Oregon Gov. Tina Kotek said in September of Trump's order to deploy the troops to Portland. "And it is a threat to our democracy. Governors should be in command of their National Guards, our citizens soldiers who sign up to stand up in an emergency to deal with real problems."

Oregon sued the Trump admistration over the order, claiming Trump lacked the authority to deploy the National Guard. 

U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut issued a temporary restraining order halting Trump’s plan to deploy 200 Oregon National Guard troops, then again on Sunday expanded the order to bar the administration from deploying any National Guard units from any state to Oregon pending further proceedings. Immergut determined Trump's order likely exceeded his presidential authority. 

The White House has hit back that Trump is within his presidential limits. 

"I think her opinion is untethered in reality and in the law," Leavitt told reporters at a White House press briefing. "The president is using his authority as commander in chief, U.S. code 12 406, which clearly states that the president has the right to call up the National Guard and in cases where he deems it's appropriate. … The ICE facility has been really under siege. And, by these anarchists outside, they have been, disrespecting law enforcement. They've been inciting violence."

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals lifted Immergut's ruling that blocked the Oregon National Guard troops from deploying to Portland, but the other ruling baring any National Guard troops from deploying to Portland remains in effect. 

Hunter Biden special counsel got ‘one resume’ from DOJ to help prosecute president’s son

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

FIRST ON FOX: Former special counsel David Weiss got little support from the Department of Justice (DOJ) when he sought lawyers to help prosecute President Joe Biden’s son Hunter, Weiss told Congress during a recent closed-door interview.

Amid delicate plea deal negotiations between Hunter Biden and Weiss in 2023, Weiss said he asked the DOJ deputy attorney general’s office for a team of trial lawyers and received a single resume, according to a transcript of the interview reviewed by Fox News Digital.

"Actually, as I think about the sequencing, I had started to reach out myself directly to offices or people that I knew and make my own inquiries," Weiss told House Judiciary Committee staff of his struggle to hire lawyers for the sensitive job of trying the president's son.

Weiss appeared on Capitol Hill for the interview in June as part of the committee’s inquiry into the DOJ’s years-long investigation and prosecution of Hunter Biden.

SPECIAL COUNSEL WEISS BLASTS BIDEN IN FINAL HUNTER PROSECUTION REPORT

Now no longer a DOJ employee, Weiss spoke candidly for hours with the committee, shedding new light on his interactions with the Biden DOJ and giving fresh insight into why Hunter Biden was never charged with certain violations.

Weiss was appointed U.S. attorney of Delaware during the first Trump administration and began investigating Hunter Biden at that time. Former Attorney General Merrick Garland made Weiss special counsel in August 2023 after a plea agreement with Hunter Biden fell apart.

Republicans had accused Weiss of offering Hunter Biden a "sweetheart" plea deal that involved only misdemeanors. But in an unusual move, a judge rejected the deal, leading Weiss to instead bring two successful indictments against the then-first son, one for illegal gun possession and another for nine tax charges, including three felonies.

Weiss came under enormous scrutiny by Republicans and Democrats for his handling of the investigation, which had become a hyper-political national news story centered on the salacious behavior and wrongdoings of Hunter Biden, a recovering drug and alcohol addict, and allegations that Joe Biden was complicit in his son’s crimes.

Republicans claimed Weiss was not tough enough on Hunter Biden, while Democrats said he was being treated more harshly than a typical defendant because he was the president’s son. Joe Biden ultimately granted an unconditional pardon to his son, a move widely criticized by members of both parties.

Weiss said during the interview that he was "fortunate enough to obtain a couple very excellent prosecutors," a reference to the two DOJ attorneys who handled trial preparations for Hunter Biden.

But, Weiss also indicated that when he first requested lawyers in the spring of 2023, he had to be self-sufficient in finding them and that the deputy attorney general's office was unhelpful. Weiss noted he did not deal directly with former Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco at all and assumed she was recused from Hunter Biden's cases.

Weiss said that at one point he ran into the director of the Executive Office for United States Attorneys, which handles recruitment, at an event and asked if any hiring progress had been made.

Weiss did not "have a whole lot of success" during that conversation, he said.

"What do you mean, you didn’t have success? … They didn’t give you lawyers?" a committee aide asked.

"I got one resume," Weiss replied.

The aide asked, "Nobody wanted to come prosecute Hunter Biden?"

"I don’t want to say that because I don’t know that they weren’t trying to find people," Weiss said. "All I know was I didn’t get a whole lot of resumes."

HUNTER BIDEN: A LOOK AT HOW THE SAGA SPANNING OVER SIX YEARS UNFOLDED

Weiss eventually gained two attorneys, Leo Wise and Derek Hines, who went on to secure a conviction by a jury in Delaware after a week-long trial on gun possession charges and a guilty plea to all nine of Hunter Biden's tax charges.

A committee aide pressed Weiss on why he felt there was "such a drought" of help at DOJ headquarters.

"As I said a moment ago … I did not receive a lot of resumes in response to my initial request," Weiss said, noting that eventually the DOJ's Public Integrity Section assisted him.

Asked if the Public Integrity Section helped him because Weiss proactively reached out, Weiss replied, "Probably."

For his testimony, the Trump DOJ gave Weiss permission in a letter to talk to Congress about Hunter Biden’s cases. The department noted, however, that it could not authorize Weiss to talk about the former first son’s confidential tax information.

Weiss suggested, though, that he would have charged Hunter Biden for the 2014 and 2015 tax years if he could have.

FLASHBACK: DEMOCRATS CLASH WITH REPUBLICANS OVER PROSPECT OF CALLING HUNTER BIDEN IN IMPEACHMENT TRIAL

"To the extent I can put together — and this is general — a case that involves more years than not and allows me to more fully develop allegations about a course of conduct and a scheme, that's better for the prosecution," Weiss said. "So it's not like I'm looking to cut out years generally when you're pursuing a tax investigation."

During the years in question, Hunter Biden was raking in $1 million per year as a board member of the Ukrainian energy company Burisma while his father, then vice president, was overseeing foreign policy with Ukraine. The scenario became ripe for questions about conflicts of interest, in part because of suspicious interactions between Hunter Biden and the Obama State Department.

In Weiss’s final special counsel report, he dodged explaining why he brought charges of failure to pay taxes and tax evasion against Hunter Biden only for the tax years after 2015, citing Joe Biden’s pardon. Now, Weiss said, he would be more willing to talk about it if he were legally allowed to do so.

Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, pressed Weiss, saying the "political aspects of Burisma" raised "glaring" questions about the prosecutorial decisions made for the years for which Hunter Biden avoided charges.

"I understand," Weiss replied. "Absolutely. Yes. And I wish that I could address it. But it's my understanding that, for me to trip into 2014 and '15 is a violation of [U.S. code]."

Weiss also told the committee his team had no serious discussions about charging Hunter Biden under a foreign lobby law called the Foreign Agents Registration Act.

"We just couldn't put together a sufficient case," Weiss said.

Ex-Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy pleads for civil political discourse, warns ‘democracy is at risk’

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

Former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy warned Thursday that the tone of political discourse and threats to judges are undermining the ability of the U.S. to serve as an example of freedom and democracy around the world.

Kennedy, a Reagan appointee who retired in 2018 during President Donald Trump's first term, was speaking during a virtual forum about threats to the rule of law, as he defended the role of judges in a democracy and advocated for the need to protect them and their families from threats.

"Many in the rest of the world look to the United States to see what democracy is, to see what democracy ought to be," Kennedy said during the "Speak Up for Justice" event, one day before the current Supreme Court justices are set to deliver their final rulings of the current term.

"If they see a hostile, fractious discourse, if they see a discourse that uses identity politics rather than to talk about issues, democracy is at risk. Freedom is at risk," he continued.

BOOKER, CRUZ SPAR OVER THREATS TO US JUDGES IN FIERY SENATE EXCHANGE

Kennedy did not mention Trump, even as other participants expressed concern about the barrage of threats and attacks against judges for blocking key parts of the president's political agenda during his second term, including his immigration policies, firings of federal workers and his implementation of broad-based tariffs.

But Kennedy's remarks appeared to be sparked, at least in part, by the Trump administration's repeated attacks against judges who have ruled against him, including some whom he appointed during his first term.

In March, Trump criticized U.S. District Court Judge James Boasberg as a "radical left lunatic" and called for his impeachment after he attempted to block the administration from removing alleged Venezuelan gang members from the U.S. under the Alien Enemies Act, a wartime presidential power Trump invoked.

Last month, Trump attacked "USA-hating" judges as "monsters who want our country to go to hell."

Trump's rhetoric has come alongside an uptick in threats against judges, according to POLITICO, although spokespeople for the administration have said the president is against any threats and that they would face prosecution from the Justice Department.

Kennedy said "judges must have protection for themselves and their families" and that "judges are best protected when the public and our nation realize how central they are to our discourse." 

"We should be concerned in this country about, as I've already indicated, the tone of our political discourse," he said. "Identity politics are used so that a person is characterized by his or her partisan affiliation. That's not what democracy and civil discourse is about."

Other participants at the forum, which featured judges from the U.S. and other countries who warned about how attacks on courts can threaten democracies, also took aim at Trump's statement denouncing the courts.

Without mentioning Trump by name, U.S. District Judge Esther Salas, whose son was killed by a disgruntled lawyer who went to her New Jersey home in 2020, said disinformation about judges was spreading "from the top down," with jurists attacked as "rogue" and "corrupt."

CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS DOUBLES DOWN ON DEFENSE OF COURTS AS SCOTUS GEARS UP TO HEAR KEY TRUMP CASES

"Judges are rogue. Sound familiar? Judges are corrupt. Sound familiar? Judges are monsters. … Judges hate America," Salas said. "We are seeing the spreading of disinformation coming from the top down."

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Salas warned that the number of threats recorded against judges this year was reaching historic heights in the U.S., noting that the U.S. Marshals Service has tracked more than 400 threats against judges since January, when Trump was inaugurated.

"We're going to break records, people, and not in a good way," she said.

Reuters contributed to this report.

Lawyer of whistleblower in Trump impeachment case sues administration over revoked security clearance

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

A lawyer who represented a government whistleblower in a case that led to President Donald Trump's first impeachment sued the Trump administration on Monday for "unconstitutional retaliation" after his security clearance was revoked.

Lawyer Mark Zaid argued that the administration's decision to pull his clearance in March was in retaliation for representing former Department of Homeland Security intelligence chief Brian Murphy, who was key to Trump's 2019 impeachment.

Murphy filed a whistleblower complaint in 2019 alleging Trump, amid his re-election campaign, pressured Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy to investigate then-U.S. presidential candidate Joe Biden and his son Hunter's business dealings in Ukraine. 

The U.S. House of Representatives voted later that year to impeach Trump for abusing the power of his office and obstructing Congress, but he was later acquitted by the Senate.

HAKEEM JEFFRIES BLAMES TRUMP FOR NEWARK AIRPORT CHAOS, ACCUSES WHITE HOUSE OF 'BREAKING THE FAA'

Zaid's lawsuit, filed in federal court in Washington, D.C., claims the decision to rescind his security clearance represents a "dangerous, unconstitutional retaliation by the President of the United States against his perceived political enemies" that "eschews any semblance of due process."

The complaint accuses the Trump administration of violating the Administrative Procedures Act, the First Amendment and parts of the Fifth Amendment.

"No American should lose their livelihood, or be blocked as a lawyer from representing clients, because a president carries a grudge toward them or who they represent,"  Zaid said in a statement. "This isn’t just about me. It’s about using security clearances as political weapons."

FORMER VP PENCE VOWS TO SPEAK OUT IF PRESIDENT TRUMP VEERS FROM 'CONSERVATIVE AGENDA' 

The lawsuit cites a 2019 incident in which Trump called Zaid a "sleazeball" at a Louisiana rally and told reporters that the lawyer was a "disgrace" who "should be sued."

The move to pull Zaid's clearance was "a bald-faced attack on a sacred constitutional guarantee: the right to petition the court or federal agencies on behalf of clients," the lawsuit says, noting that an "attack on this right is especially insidious because it jeopardizes Mr. Zaid’s ability to pursue and represent the rights of others without fear of retribution."

Trump has also revoked clearances of several other political foes, including former President Joe Biden, former Vice President Kamala Harris, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and his own former national security advisor John Bolton, as well as attorneys at other law firms.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Zaid urged the court to rule that Trump's revocation decision was unconstitutional and reinstate his clearance. He has had access to classified information since 1995 and a security clearance since 2002.

Fox News Digital has reached out to the White House for comment.

Reuters contributed to this report.

Wisconsin judge’s arrest blasted by Democrats who previously claimed ‘no one is above the law’ in Trump cases

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

Several Democrats who have argued that "no one is above the law" in President Donald Trump’s cases are now condemning the arrest of Wisconsin Judge Hannah Dugan, warning it could threaten the rule of law.

"This is not normal," Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., tweeted of Dugan’s arrest by the FBI on proceeding obstruction charges for allegedly shielding an indicted Mexican migrant from ICE agents. 

"The administration's arrest of a sitting judge in Wisconsin is a drastic move that threatens the rule of law," Klobuchar added, saying it's a "grave step and undermines our system of checks and balances."

During Trump’s 2019 impeachment, Klobuchar said his first impeachment case marked a "somber day for our country."

FBI ARRESTS JUDGE, ALLEGING SHE OBSTRUCTED ARREST OF ILLEGAL ALIEN

"In America, no one is above the law, and the American people deserve to hear evidence and witness testimony during a full and fair trial in the Senate. If the president has any facts to present in his defense to the articles of impeachment, we should hear them," she said.

After the 2022 FBI raid on Mar-a-Lago, Klobuchar said, "The law is king, and the former president isn't."

Sen. Tina Smith, D-Minn., also condemned Dugan’s arrest, saying, "If [FBI Director] Kash Patel and Donald Trump don’t like a judge, they think they can arrest them.

"This is stunning — we must stand up to this blatant power grab. Republicans: How is this not a red line for you?"

AG PAM BONDI OUTRAGED AT WISCONSIN JUDGE ARRESTED FOR OBSTRUCTING ARREST OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT

Commenting in 2020 on her vote to remove Trump from office over abuse of power allegations, Smith said she took her constitutional oath seriously and that "to condone corrupt behavior such as this undermines the core value that we stand for as a nation -- that no one is above the law, including and most especially our president."

Smith said she pored over presentations and evidence to reach that conclusion.

Rep. Gwen Moore, D-Wis., who represents Dugan’s county, lambasted the White House, saying its "willingness to weaponize federal law enforcement is shocking and this arrest has all the hallmarks of overreach."

"I will be following this case closely and facts will come out. However, I am very alarmed at the increasingly lawless actions of the Trump administration, and in particular ICE, who have been defying courts and acting with disregard for the Constitution."

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., commented on an apparently deleted tweet from Patel, writing on X, "Donald Trump and JD Vance are arresting judges now. Deleting the tweet won't undo the constitutional crisis you have just thrust us into."

In a 2023 interview with radio host Hugh Hewitt, Khanna said of the Trump impeachment, "You can't just say, 'OK, because someone was president or someone is a candidate, that you're above the law.' Everyone is under the law, and that allegations, the evidence needs to be pursued."

When reached for comment by Fox News Digital, Khanna said of the contrast that Trump has "waged war on the judiciary" and that there is no public evidence yet regarding Dugan, but "it is deeply concerning given the administration’s attacks on the courts."

"Even Chief Justice Roberts has rebuked Trump’s conduct toward the judiciary," Khanna added.

Rep. Mark Pocan, D-Wis., said norms were being violated on the immigration and legal fronts for Dugan’s arrest.

In a statement obtained by Fox News Digital, Pocan laid out the differences he sees between the Dugan and Trump cases: "Judge Dugan’s arrest is outrageous and a fear tactic to our independent judiciary. Trump has always thought he was above the law, but now he’s enabling his goons to push that limit as far as it can go. His reckless deportations and flaunting of the Constitution will fail," Pocan said.

"This is stuff I expect from Third World countries," he told Axios.

In a December 2019 statement after his vote in favor of impeachment, Pocan said Trump was "never held accountable for his actions" over his 70-plus years of life.

"Today, Democrats sent a clear signal to this president and all future presidents: No one is above the law."

Fox News Digital reached out to the offices of Klobuchar and Smith for comment.

GOP hits back after judges demand Trump allies be condemned for targeting judiciary

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

FIRST ON FOX: The GOP lawmaker leading a collective response to more than 100 judges and attorneys who demanded condemnation of Trump allies said Tuesday she and her delegation won't be "pushed around" amid ongoing attacks on left-wing judges.

Wyoming’s congressional delegation responded to dozens of Cowboy State jurists, including a former governor who issued an open condemnation of lawmakers’ failure to defend judges under fire from conservatives over sweeping nationwide injunctions hindering President Donald Trump’s foreign policy and homeland security actions.

The response, led by Sen. Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyo., rejected the basis on which the jurists were calling for the state’s Republicans to vociferously intervene in support of what the White House describes as rogue judges, citing the Founding Fathers’ words.

"In Federalist [Paper] 78…  Alexander Hamilton wrote that "the judiciary, from the nature of its functions, will always be the least dangerous" and that judges "have neither force nor will," the letter states. 

WYOMING SHERIFF'S BOLD BILLBOARD RECRUITING DENVER OFFICERS OUT OF LIBERAL CITY CREATES STIR

"In recent years, we have become increasingly concerned with how our country has strayed from this Hamiltonian aspiration. We have seen judges across the political spectrum assume both "force" and "will" — Many Americans are worried judges are misusing their independence by imposing policy preferences on our country — all with no accountability."

They also noted Georgetown Law professor Brad Snyder "said it best" – "The Court does not have the last word on the Constitution."

‘TRAITOR’ LIZ CHENEY WALLOPED BY WYOMING VOTERS FOR HARRIS ENDORSEMENT, BREAK FROM GOP

In comments to Fox News Digital, Lummis said Americans elected Trump and did not select "liberal judges."

"I represent the people of Wyoming, and they have made it clear that they support President Trump’s agenda and want a government where their elected representatives make the laws," she said.

"Our delegation stands with President Trump and won’t be pushed around by far-left judicial activists who wish to further divide our country."

The jurists objecting to the Republicans’ silence cited calls to reject disinformation after the Jan. 6 Capitol riot and similarly recounted critiques from administration allies of judges, like James Boasberg, who have issued nationwide injunctions blocking Trump’s homeland security measures.

In a missive entitled "The Rule of Law Matters," they cited more virulent critiques of such judges, as well as a conservative op-ed decrying that "if impeachment is the remedy for every adverse judicial ruling, we wouldn’t have a judiciary left."

"These attacks are part of a growing effort to discredit, not just judges, but seemingly the American Rule of Law as we know it," the original letter states. It was signed by about 100 jurists, including former Wyoming Democratic Gov. Michael Sullivan, former President Bill Clinton’s Irish ambassador.

"Recent executive orders targeting prominent national law firms disfavored by the administration with severe retribution… has, as night follows day, resulted in yet more incendiary social media postings attacking the judiciary and openly encouraging the executive branch to disobey court orders."

In their response to the scores of jurists, Lummis, Sen. John Barrasso and Rep. Harriet Hageman condemned the fact the direct letter had also been distributed to the media and that the lawmakers would have collectively appreciated direct discussion.

"We are disappointed you failed to express your concerns with us directly before rushing to publish your letter," they wrote.

"A robust discussion about addressing the challenges and concerns facing our nation would be more beneficial than attempting to score political points through the press."

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

The complainants wrote that while there is populist sentiment for "radical change," the "growing reckless disdain for the independence and security of our judiciary must be resisted by anyone sworn to uphold our Constitution.

"That includes us, and it certainly includes you."

The lawmakers stood firm, however, on the idea that they are acting responsibly and within their legislative role.

They cited their co-sponsorship of a bill that would ban most nationwide injunctions effecting change "across the ideological spectrum," and not just those against Trump’s actions.

Legislation highlighted by the lawmakers cited both conservative and liberal Supreme Court justices issuing criticisms of such nationwide injunctions.

"The Supreme Court has consistently noted that political questions should be kept at arm’s length by the judiciary," they wrote, as a Senate Judiciary Committee statement on the Judicial Relief Clarification Act quoted reservations from both Justices Clarence Thomas and Elena Kagan.

Other jurists have, however, echoed Trump's criticisms, including George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley, who told Fox News' "The Ingraham Angle" that judges must remember they've been "appointed, not anointed."

Judge awards $6.6M to whistleblowers who were fired after reporting Texas AG Ken Paxton to FBI

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

A district court judge awarded $6.6 million combined to four whistleblowers who sued Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton on claims he fired them in retaliation for reporting him to the FBI.

Blake Brickman, David Maxwell, Mark Penley and Ryan Vassar notified Paxton and his office on Oct. 1, 2020, that they had reported him to the FBI for allegedly abusing his office. The four were all fired by mid-November.

Travis County Judge Catherine Mauzy ruled Friday that by a "preponderance of the evidence," the whistleblowers proved liability, damages and attorney's fees in their complaint against the attorney general's office.

The judgment says the former aides made their reports to federal law enforcement "in good faith" and that Paxton's office did not dispute any claims or damages in the lawsuit.

FBI FLOODED WITH RECORD NUMBER OF NEW AGENT APPLICATIONS IN KASH PATEL'S FIRST MONTH LEADING BUREAU

"Because the Office of the Attorney General violated the Texas Whistleblower Act by firing and otherwise retaliating against the plaintiff for in good faith reporting violations of law by Ken Paxton and OAG, the court hereby renders judgment for plaintiffs," Mauzy wrote in her judgment.

The court found that the four former aides of the attorney general were fired in retaliation for reporting allegations that he was using his office to accept bribes from Austin real estate developer and political donor Nate Paul, who employed a woman with whom Paxton was having an extramarital affair.

Paxton has denied allegations that he accepted bribes or misused his office to help Paul.

"It should shock all Texans that their chief law enforcement officer, Ken Paxton, admitted to violating the law, but that is exactly what happened in this case," Tom Nesbitt, an attorney representing Brickman, and TJ Turner, an attorney representing Maxwell, said in a joint statement.

Paxton said in a statement that the judge's ruling is "ridiculous" and "not based on the facts or the law." He said his office plans to appeal the ruling.

The attorney general was probed by federal authorities after eight employees reported his office to the FBI in 2020 for bribery allegations. He agreed to settle the lawsuit for $3.3 million that would be paid by the legislature, but the state House rejected his request and conducted its own investigation.

Paxton was impeached in the House in 2023 before he was later acquitted in the Senate.

TEXAS AG PAXTON ACQUITTED ON ALL IMPEACHMENT CHARGES: 'THE TRUTH PREVAILED'

In November, the state Supreme Court overturned a lower-court ruling that would have required Paxton to testify in the lawsuit.

The U.S. Justice Department declined to pursue its investigation into Paxton in the final weeks of the Biden administration, according to The Associated Press.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Judge targeted by GOP for impeachment deals blow to Trump’s FEMA objectives

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

A Rhode Island federal judge targeted for impeachment dealt the Trump administration a legal blow on Friday, ordering it to lift a freeze on federal funds.

U.S. District Judge John McConnell ordered the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to unfreeze federal funds to states after plaintiffs alleged the agency had failed to comply with an earlier court order.

The lawsuit was originally launched by 22 states and the District of Columbia, challenging the Trump administration’s decision to block funding for programs like the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Climate Pollution Reduction Grant and other environmental initiatives. 

LAWSUIT TRACKER: NEW RESISTANCE BATTLING TRUMP'S SECOND TERM THROUGH ONSLAUGHT OF LAWSUITS TAKING AIM AT EOS

Plaintiffs in the suit, including the states of New York, California, Illinois and Rhode Island, argued that FEMA's implementation of a manual review process for payment requests violated a previous preliminary injunction issued by McConnell. The states argued that the review "constitutes 'a categorical pause or freeze of funding appropriate by Congress.'"

The defendants, which include President Donald Trump and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), responded that the review did not violate the order because "FEMA is relying on its own independent authorities to implement the process rather than the OMB Directive."

McConnell concluded that the plaintiffs had "presented evidence that strongly suggests that FEMA is implementing this manual review process based, covertly, on the President's January 20, 2025 executive order." 

COURTROOM COMBAT: INSIDE THE FEDERAL JUDICIARY SYSTEM WHERE TRUMP'S AGENDA IS UNDER ASSAULT

"The Court reaffirms its preliminary injunction order," McConnell wrote. 

McConnell had issued a restraining order in late January that enjoined the defendants from freezing federal funds. This came after OMB released a memo on Jan. 27 announcing the administration's plans to temporarily pause federal grants and loans. The White House later rescinded the memo on Jan. 29. 

However, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said that the move didn’t equate a "recission of the federal funding freeze." 

‘CORRUPT, DANGEROUS’: GOP REP MOVES TO IMPEACH JUDGE WHO BLOCKED TRUMP FEDERAL FUNDS FREEZE

After McConnell ordered the administration to comply with the restraining order, the government appealed to the First Circuit — which refused to stay the orders. 

McConnell also recently made headlines after becoming one of several federal judges hit with impeachment articles. 

Georgia Republican Rep. Andrew Clyde formally introduced his articles of impeachment against McConnell on March 24, after his initial announcement in February. 

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

The articles, first shared with Fox News Digital, charged McConnell with abuse of power and conflicts of interest, stating he "knowingly politicized and weaponized his judicial position to advance his own political views and beliefs."

"The American people overwhelmingly voted for President Trump in November, providing a clear mandate to make our federal government more efficient," Clyde told Fox News Digital. "Yet Judge McConnell, who stands to benefit from his own injunction, is attempting to unilaterally obstruct the president’s agenda and defy the will of the American people. Judge McConnell’s actions are corrupt, dangerous, and worthy of impeachment."

Fox News Digital's Diana Stancy contributed to this report.

Trump allies scrutinize Judge Boasberg’s DC connections as high-stakes legal battles escalate

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

Federal Judge James Boasberg is facing mounting criticism from President Donald Trump and his allies as he presides over multiple high-profile lawsuits targeting the Trump administration – cases that have now brought the judge’s personal and professional ties under fresh scrutiny. 

Boasberg, who was previously appointed to the secretive Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court by Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts and reportedly once roomed with Justice Brett Kavanaugh at Yale, has become a flashpoint for conservatives who accuse the judiciary of bias against the Trump administration. Now the chief judge of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, Boasberg's recent orders halting deportations of violent illegal immigrants and overseeing cases tied to leaked internal communications have amplified claims of partisanship and drawn fierce rebukes from Trump and his allies.

"The Chief Justice handpicked DC Obama Judge Jeb Boasberg to serve on the FISA court," said Mike Davis, president of the Article III Project. "The DC federal judges are in a cozy little club, and they protect their own." His comments echo a broader sentiment on the right that Boasberg’s judicial decisions – and his close ties within the legal establishment – reflect a partisan tilt against the president.

Boasberg, a Washington, D.C., native, earned an advanced degree in Modern European History from Oxford University in 1986 and later attended Yale Law School, where he lived with Kavanaugh, according to multiple reports.  

TRUMP UNLOADS ON JUDGE BOASBERG, 'RADICAL LEFT JUDGES' FOR HALTING DEPORTATIONS OF VIOLENT ILLEGAL ALIENS

He graduated in 1990 and clerked for the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals before joining Keker & Van Nest in San Francisco as a litigation associate from 1991 to 1994. He later worked at Kellogg, Huber, Hansen, Todd & Evans in Washington from 1995 to 1996.

After serving in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia, Boasberg was appointed in 2002 by then-President George W. Bush to serve as an associate judge on the Superior Court of the District of Columbia, the local trial court for the District. In 2011, then-President Barack Obama nominated him to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, where he was confirmed by the Senate and received his commission on March 17, 2011.

Boasberg was appointed to serve a seven-year term on the U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, or FISA Court, by Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts. 

The FISA Court is made up of 11 federal judges, all of whom are hand-selected by the chief justice. After undergoing rigorous background checks, FISA Court judges are then responsible for approving surveillance requests and wiretap warrants submitted by federal prosecutors, law enforcement and intelligence agencies. Most of the court's work remains classified.

Boasberg served as the court’s presiding judge from 2020 to 2021 before returning to the D.C. District Court.

After Boasberg on March 15 ordered the Trump administration to halt its deportations of illegal immigrants under a 1798 wartime authority, Trump took to Truth Social to call for his impeachment. The president’s remarks echoed a growing chorus of conservatives who have recently called for the impeachment of federal judges overseeing his administration’s legal battles.

JUDGE IN CROSSHAIRS OF TRUMP DEPORTATION CASE ORDERS PRESERVATION OF SIGNAL MESSAGES

"I’m just doing what the VOTERS wanted me to do. This judge, like many of the Crooked Judges’ I am forced to appear before, should be IMPEACHED!!! WE DON’T WANT VICIOUS, VIOLENT, AND DEMENTED CRIMINALS, MANY OF THEM DERANGED MURDERERS, IN OUR COUNTRY. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!!!" Trump wrote in the post.

In an unprecedented move by the nation's high court, Roberts released a public statement shortly thereafter, denouncing impeachment as an appropriate response to judicial disagreements. 

"For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision. The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose," he said in the statement released in mid-March.

Trump once again unloaded on Boasberg in a March 30 Truth Social post after the judge extended his restraining order on March 28. The extension will run through April 12. 

"People are shocked by what is going on with the Court System. I was elected for many reasons, but a principal one was LAW AND ORDER, a big part of which is QUICKLY removing a vast Criminal Network of individuals, who came into our Country through the Crooked Joe Biden Open Borders Policy! These are dangerous and violent people, who kill, maim and, in many other ways, harm the people of our Country," Trump wrote on the social media platform. 

WHO IS JAMES BOASBERG, THE US JUDGE AT THE CENTER OF TRUMP'S DEPORTATION EFFORTS?

"The Voters want them OUT, and said so in Record Numbers. If it was up to District Judge Boasberg and other Radical Left Judges, nobody would be removed, the President wouldn’t be allowed to do his job, and people’s lives would be devastated all throughout our Country. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!," he continued. 

Boasberg came under additional fire after he was randomly assigned to preside over a lawsuit involving the Trump administration's leaked Signal chat. 

After Boasberg was assigned to the case, Trump again took to Truth Social and accused Boasberg of "grabbing the 'Trump Cases' all to himself."

Davis also took to social media, writing, "Judge Jeb Boasberg is lighting on fire his legitimacy over an unnecessary, lawless, and dangerous pissing match with the President Jeb will lose. 

"Let’s hope the Chief Justice doesn’t light the entire federal judiciary’s legitimacy on fire by siding with his personal buddy Jeb," Davis wrote. 

At the start of the March 27 hearing, Boasberg emphasized that he was randomly assigned to the case through a docket computer system.

"That's how it works, and that's how all cases continue to be assigned in this court," Boasberg said during the hearing. 

Fox News Digital reached out to the White House, the Supreme Court, and the D.C. District Court for additional comment.

Fox News Digital's Breanne Deppisch, Emma Colton and Alex Nitzberg contributed to this report. 

Hunter Biden hires Alex Murdaugh’s lawyer in latest court case; Abbe Lowell out

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

Hunter Biden has hired a heavyweight South Carolina attorney – with a similar high-profile to his last lawyer – to go after a right-wing business executive for defamation.

Former state Sen. Dick Harpootlian, D-Columbia, a self-described "Joe Biden guy" who recently represented Low Country prosecutor-turned-convicted killer Alex Murdaugh, is the younger Biden’s new lawyer as he pursues ex-Overstock CEO Patrick Byrne in court.

Harpootlian confirmed to The State newspaper in Columbia that he is replacing Abbe David Lowell – who led Biden through his special counsel probe and gun charges in Wilmington.

Biden, who was pardoned by his father for those allegations, is primed to go to Los Angeles court in July against Byrne.

HUNTER BIDEN INDICTMENT MUDDIES WEISS' CREDIBILITY, WHISTLEBLOWERS FEEL ‘VINDICATED’: ATTORNEY

The suit claims Byrne wrongfully accused Biden of being in touch with Iranian officials in 2021, seeking a bribe in exchange for unfreezing $8 billion in funds at the behest of his father.

Meanwhile, Biden is reportedly facing "lagging" art sales and "several million dollars in debt" from fighting past cases when he was represented by Lowell, according to ABC News. 

In the Byrne case, Biden is reportedly claiming defamatory statements from the Iran allegation that led him to lose "economic opportunities," including memoir and art sales and speaking engagements estimated to be collectively worth about $500,000.

Harpootlian was ousted from the state Senate in a narrow November upset by state Sen. Russell Ott, D-St. Matthews, as both men were seeking a redrawn, open seat.

FMR HUNTER BIDEN BIZ PARTNER BOBULINSKI OFFERED ‘CRITICAL TESTIMONY’: COMER

Ott criticized Harpootlian’s representation of Murdaugh, according to the Daily Gazette, and while the longtime Biden ally performed well in urban Richland County, where he also practices law, Ott overperformed in rural Calhoun County, where he and his father long held office.

"We went through a process… I lost. The process worked. I’m not accusing anybody of stealing anything. I’m not having a temper tantrum. I’m not expressing some doubt in our system," Harpootlian said in conceding the race.

Harpootlian also told a 2023 crime-themed convention that he would rather represent Murdaugh pro-bono in a second trial than splurge on a vacation or a racehorse:

"What's so astounding about that? We do cases for free all the time," he said at CrimeCon. 

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Meanwhile, Lowell was a constant presence while Biden was fighting various allegations in the special counsel probe and House Republicans’ investigations.

After a 2024 deposition, Lowell slammed GOP lawmakers for ending the day "where they started."

"They have produced no evidence that would do anything to support the notion that there was any financial transactions that involved Hunter with his father. Period," Lowell said.

"It seems to me that the Republican members wanted to spend more time talking about my client's addiction than they could ask any question that had anything to do with what they call their impeachment inquiry."

Lowell is also facing a defamation suit, to the tune of $20 million, brought by IRS whistleblowers Gary Shapley Jr. and Joseph Ziegler.

Fox News Digital reached out to Harpootlian’s Columbia office and a communications email for Lowell seeking additional comment.