In the run-up to the midterms, district and circuit federal court judges have done an admirable job in beating back absurd, abusive Trump regime legal maneuvers that are utterly lacking in merit. Moreover, they are apparently designed to either disrupt the midterms or assure the unraveling autocrat in the Oval Office that his dutiful lackeys at the Justice Department are doing everything possible to try to do just that. Alternatively, the flurry of vindictive actions against long-held presidential enemies — such as Rep. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota and former FBI director James Comey — is simply meant to distract the addled president; catnip for a demented feline, if you will.
The range of abusive, nonsensical actions is breathtaking:
Sending an unverified list of semi-suspected noncitizen voters to have their ballots set aside;
Rushing to the 9th Circuit prematurely for relief;
Challenging the results of a not-yet-transpired Alaska Senate race;
Pounding on doors to interrogate suspected noncitizen voters;
Defying a district court in racing to destroy hundreds of trees at the East Potomac Golf Course (and then coming up with a cock and bull story that contradicts Trump’s own social media post that this is not part of a “final plan”);
Filing an “information” (not seeking or failing and not obtaining) indictment to try to fudge the statute of limitations in a third vindictive effort to prosecute James Comey;
Rummaging through decades-old immigration paperwork to try to strip Rep. Omar of citizenship.
While it remains a mystery how any federal court official issued a search warrant for Omar’s home, overall the courts — to their credit — have rebuffed DOJ’s legal gamesmanship, often in exceptionally harsh language.
From the 9th Circuit’s snub of the non-emergency, “emergency” appeal in California:
The United States’s claimed emergency, at least in part, is a self-constructed one. At least part of the delay here is attributable to the United States’s own delay in filing suit, in realizing that existing California state law governs the issuance and processing of ballots, in recognizing that California has millions of registered voters and processes ballots on a schedule aligned with that scale, and in communicating to the court its desired relief.
The concurrence from Trump-appointed Judge Bennett was even more dismissive (and on the merits, to boot):
Despite these various mechanisms to challenge the eligibility of a voter, Plaintiff prefers that this court require a different procedure to effectuate a challenge to over 20,000 voters solely because, in a different context, the California Legislature permits the segregation of ballots. See Cal. Code Regs. tit. 2, § 20363 (providing for the segregation of ballots in a recount). But Plaintiff’s preference does not carry with it the force of law. . . .
Beyond the infeasibility of and risks associated with segregating tens of thousands of ballots, Defendants also lack the ability to verify voters’ citizenship status before December 4, 2026—the deadline for counties to certify their election results to the Secretary of State. . . . Plaintiff seeks equitable relief, asking us to order Defendants to set aside vote-by-mail ballots from over 20,000 individuals whom Plaintiff believes are likely noncitizens. But Plaintiff offers no workable plan as to how this could be accomplished, let alone how it could be accomplished without burdening Defendants more than necessary. Instead, Plaintiff simply claims that California has an existing regulation, Cal. Code Regs. tit. 2, § 20363, which provides for ballot segregation. But as discussed, that regulation is inapplicable.
From the golf course case, Judge Ana Reyes all but called the government lawyers a pack of liars (multiple times):
The Government felled hundreds of trees from East Potomac Golf Course without real notice even though it knew of the scheduled removal at least a week prior. And even though the Court literally warned against bulldozers bulldozing on no real notice. … And even though the Court was equally clear that it did not want an act-first-ask-forgiveness-later situation. … All this is concerning. The Government appears to have set the timing of the tree removal and late notice to impede Plaintiffs’ ability to seek Court intervention. And its recent actions call into question other representations it has made to the Court over these many months. …
Government counsel argues that President Trump, who discussed the Plan to redesign the Course no fewer than five times, has “at most . . . has given preliminary thought to” the Washington National Plan. That claim does not square with the record. The Court cannot disbelieve the President’s clear, repeated statements of fact when those statements find support in the record and the Government has presented no credible evidence to contradict him.
And yet, even defeats for the government’s patently frivolous actions and refreshing rebukes from courts leave us unmoved. The government, particularly Attorney General Todd Blanche and his flunkies, suffer no adverse consequences from trying every trick in the book — no matter how frivolous, no matter how legally unsound and constitutionally abusive. Indeed, they may well get ‘atta boys for having angered federal court judges.
Unless and until DOJ lawyers themselves face sanctions pursuant to Rule 11 and referral to state bar associations for misconduct, the incentive to keep abusing the federal court system will remain. Frankly, handing out more-than-justified sanctions would stiffen the spines of DOJ attorneys, encouraging them to push back against their political bosses. Ultimately, contempt citations (of the sort now the subject of heated litigation in the D.C. Circuit, concerning the Trump regime’s defiance of Judge James Boasberg’s directive to turn around planes filled with deportees headed to CECOT) may be required to halt this relentless assault on the rule of law.
Aside from a new president, the most effective and entirely justified remedy for such widespread, shameless abuse of the justice system is impeachment of Attorney General Todd Blanche. Even before the current spate of lawless, partisan actions, Blanche’s record (e.g., ongoing defiance of the Epstein Files Transparency Act, refusal to investigate publicly disclosed instances of graft involving the president’s inner circle) and his repeated appearances in partisan campaign settings violate his oath of office and make a mockery of his department’s title (“Justice” Department).
In sum, courts deserve kudos for holding the line against Trump autocratic abuses. But extraordinary times and unprecedented abuse require that they do more. Sanctions and contempt citations must be meted out when appropriate. The new Congress will have an obligation to act as well, starting with the impeachment of an unfit partisan hack occupying the august role of attorney general.
If the Democrats blow this chance to bring the hammer down on these fascists, they’ll never hold a majority again in my lifetime. We are angry and we are entrusting them one more time. The weakness of Jeffries and Schumer concerns me. I resent that we’re seemingly stuck with them.
Yes, Judge Reyes patience should be at an end and if the DoJ shows up in court again with a similar flimsy argument she needs to lower the boom. I think she should have done it already. Same with the other cases. The pattern is clear and judges should respond accordingly. Failing to do so is encouraging further DoJ malfeasance.