AS. Donald Trump aggressively tries to retaliate against several enemies in the United States, he can disagree with judges, law firms, prosecutors, presses and other major US agencies using an executive orders and social media using a vendita.
Legal scholars say the president’s sad attacks, some of which support for Trump’s biggest campaign, have echoed by billionaire Elon Musk, aimed at silencing critics of their radical agenda and reducing the rule of law by expanding their own powers.
“Trump’s tricks have been a dictatorial playbox,” said Harvard Law School lecturer and retired Massachusett Judge Nancy Gartner. “You need to represent institutions that can be critical. Trump is trying to use the president’s power to represent universities, law firms, judges and others, including other institutions. This is contrary to American democracy.”
In a surprising move on Tuesday, Trump said that a Washington DC judge should be forced to stop the deportation of hundreds of Venezuelan, including members of the group, who, who, made a strong statement to make a strong statement to the Supreme Court’s Chief Justice, John Roberts.
Legal scholars strongly criticize other attacks on Trump and mega -world judges, who have issued decisions against executive orders or Musk’s “department’s performance” (Dodge), which aims to weaken the court branch to promote Trump’s powers.
This month, concerns about Trump’s war increased when the president issued an executive order, which sentenced three major law firms, including Koongton and Berling and Perkins Koi. Critics say that the sanctions against Trump’s firms were given by his clients by former special lawyer Jack Smith, who, respectively, accused Trump for trying to end his 2020 election loss, and Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign, which helped Trump’s campaign.
These executive orders, which include preventing some firms from entering federal buildings, interacting with agencies and taking security clearance from some lawyers, were widely seen as a huge amount of punitive measures to financially hurt.
District Judge Barrel Hole on March 12 prevented the Trump administration from enforcing important parts of his ruling against Perkins Koi, which he said, “The first amendment reservations move forward”.
The third legal firm, Trump, was targeted with an executive order. But Trump’s executive order was overturned on March 19 when the firm agreed to provide $ 40 million in Pro Bono services to support the management’s priorities.
Legal scholars have condemned the Justice Department’s Justice Department’s firing or renovation of about two dozen lawyers, who, on January 6, 2021, acting against the Congress who attacked the capital from confirming the Biden election victory.
There are strong claims about their role in the January 6 attacks and baseless claims on Capital and a strong claim that their election loss from Biden in 2020, Trump announced on March 14, announcing his “law -abiding”.
In an angry and rotating conversation, Trump confronted Jack Smith among others, with whom Koongton provided Pro Bono’s support, and former Perkins’ lawyer Mark Elias, an important figure in fighting Trump’s false claims, was a fake 2020 choice.
Trump blew up and others who investigated “bad people, really bad people … they tried to transform the United States into a corrupt Communist and a third world country, but finally, thugs failed and the reality won.”
Immediately after Trump spoke, Jamie Raskin, a member of the Democratic Congress in Maryland, who taught constitutional law for two decades, reacted strongly to a rally outside the Justice Department. Raskin said, “No other president in American history stands to announce the agenda of criminal prosecution and retaliation against his political enemies in the Justice Department.”
Legal experts say Trump’s attacks on lawyers and judges are dangerous.
“Trump and his allies have targeted lawyers,” said Daniel Richman, a Colombian law professor and former federal prosecutor, said, “In both the government and private process – and the judges affected lives, raised costs, and even given security.”
“I am sure that something is scared, and it certainly feels its intention. Others will be comfortable with it. But as it happens – and I don’t imagine it will stop – as much as Trump’s problem is less with lawmakers, and more than the law of the world, they will be more pleased with the law.
Other legal scholars have expressed serious concerns over Trump’s widespread attacks on law firms, judges and other institutions, who have criticized their policies and the grip of power.
“Trump’s sanctions against Koongton and Perkins fulfill two goals,” said Stephen Gallers, a professor of NYU law. In an immediate period, he takes revenge on two firms that have offended them. “
Gellers emphasized that these orders have also warned other law firms that if they cross Trump by representing the plaintiffs by challenging their executive orders, they face the same punishment.
Gullers added, “The rest of the institution is the only judiciary for the pursuit of Trump’s full power … lawyers are concussion for access to the judicial power. We see a dual barrel strategy: attack judges who attack Trump as a law and order as a law, attacking the court.
The increase in the Trump administration’s attacks on judges has been fueled by numerous judicial decisions, which, with little respect for the Congress and judicial powers, delayed or delayed Trump’s executive orders and Musk’s dodge operations to shrink the federal government.
For example, Trump’s deputy chief of staff, Stephen Miller, wrote on the X last week: “Under the ideology established by radical bullying judges, a district court in Hawaii can order the movement of a troops in Iraq. The judges have no authority for the executive branch.
After the newsletter advertising
Judges who rule against Trump have witnessed an increase in threats. Even after joining three liberal judges and Chief Justice Roberts in the decision against Trump, a bomb blast was blamed in March against a sister of the Conservative Supreme Court Justice Amy Konny Barrett.
In Congress, Trump’s allies have jumped into the legal field with calls to prosecute some judges, who have ruled against some steps to cost the administration and the cost of the Dodge.
New York District Judge Paul Angel Mayor on February 8, after stopping the Dodge from accessing millions of sensitive and personal treasury records, Kasturi accused him of baselessly that he is a corrupt judge who owns a corruption -protecting corruption, where he owns about 200 million followers.
“It needs to be impressed now!” Musk said on February 9.
Last month, with a Musk at the Oval Office, Trump recovered the attacks by the world’s richest man, who donated around $ 300 million for his campaign:
Trump said, “It seems difficult to believe that a judge can say,” We don’t want you to do, “so maybe we have to see the judges because I think it’s a very serious violation.”
To strengthen the allegations, Derek Wan Order, a member of Wisconsin, a member of Wisconsin, filed a resolution against the judge, which was decided after more than a dozen Democratic State Attorney, which filed a lawsuit in which it was argued that the details of the law were not accessible.
Former federal judges and scholars say that Trump and Musk have pursued legal envelopes in ways that are unprecedented in the United States.
“When you flood the zone with numerous executive orders, many of which were clearly based on objectionable legal grounds, no one should be surprised that they are not competing for judicial scrutiny,” said John Jones, who is now the president of Dickinson’s College.
“An additional problem to the administration is that it is losing credibility with the courts by making permanent arguments in support of these orders.”
Other critics also raise the sound of similar concerns.
“The aim of Trump’s actions is part of the war to reduce the judicial branch for the role of lawyers and the courts for the role of lawyers and courts,” said a former general lawyer of the Federal Election Commission, who now teaches law at the US University. “If Trump is capable of punishing the lawyers who oppose them and ignore the courts, they will only be far from the steps that he wants to be.”
On another front, where Trump is desperate to end criticism and disagreement, the president, in his recent speech by the Justice Department, extended his attacks on the media without any evidence, saying that some of the major reporting outlets were “illegal” and “corrupt”.
“This network and these newspapers are not really different from the highly salaried political operators,” Trump added, adding that CNN and MSNBC were corrupt.
Trump conspired in a conspiracy manner: “He has to stop, it has to be illegal, it is affecting judges and it is really changing the law, and it cannot be just legal.”
Trump’s widespread attacks, courts, law firms and other US agencies at the press damaged the rule of law in Raskin’s eyes.
Raskin said, “Trump is attacking any means of potential institutional opposition.” Whoever offers any resistance is the target of Trump. We see Trump’s disqualified lawlessness. “
