Skip to comments.The Courts v. the President of the United States
Posted on 08/25/2018 3:54:03 PM PDT by jazusamo
A U.S. federal judge on Saturday rejected key elements of President Donald Trumps May executive orders that would make it easier to fire federal employees and reduce their ability to bargain collectively. Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson , of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, said in a court order that Trumps orders, which also would reduce the amount of time low-performing employees had to improve their performance before being fired, undermine federal employees right to bargain collectively.
Trump signed three executive orders in May that administration officials said would give government agencies greater ability to remove employees with poor performance, obtain better deals in union contracts and require federal employees with union responsibilities to spend less time on union work.The directives drew immediate criticism from the American Federation of Government Employees, which said the moves would hurt veterans, law enforcement officers and others.
Of course they did; it's a wonder they didn't include women, children, and minorities as well. But the "public service" unions, far from being non-partisan, are among the biggest supporters of the Democrat Party -- and so, one suspects, is Judge Jackson.
Jackson ruled that while the president has the authority to issue executive orders relating to federal labor relations, the orders cannot eviscerate the right to bargain collectively as envisioned in a long-standing federal statute. The President must be deemed to have exceeded his authority in issuing (the orders), Jackson ruled.
"Ruled." On what authority? The judicial branch, whose reach was once tightly circumscribed by the Constitution but is now apparently all encompassing, has zero authority over the chief executive or the executive branch.and has no business ruling on executive orders, as the Supreme Court decision on Trump's "travel ban" should have settled.
Further, the collective bargaining agreement under which the federal employees unions operate is itself the product of executive orders issued by John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon. The statute in question dates from the Carter administration. So once again, as in the DACA case (in which Trump has sought to overturn a previous president's executive order, in this instance, Obama's), rogue members of the lesser federal judiciary have "ruled" that the current president cannot remand a prior occupant's arbitrary decrees.
Anyone who has ever had the slightest interaction with members of federal public-employees unions knows that the American government is often the employer of last resort for the least capable among us, a jobs provider for those unable to procure useful employment elsewhere. What makes matters even worse is that once hired, they're almost impossible to fire, which is the situation Trump seeks to redress.
Watch for this decision, too, to get drop-kicked by the Supreme Court should the case make its way there. And all lower federal court judges -- whose jobs and courts could be jurisdictionally constrained or even abolished by Congress tomorrow should it so ordain --should also have been put on notice by Justice Thomas, who warned lower judges in the travel-ban decision against the indiscriminate use of "nationwide injunctions" and other such sweeping measures against lawful executive orders, threatening greater Supreme Court scrutiny in the future.
In short, they're asking for it.
It sure is and these leftist judges are proficient at legislating from the bench.
These black-robed Judiciarchs need to be first, ignored; then de-bencehed; then de-robed,, then de-barred, then probably be de-fenestrated.
How did I not know she would look like this??
Obama’s third term on full display. The GOP has their heads up a** as the administration is being constantly pummeled.
I totally agree with you on the civil service protection and government employee unions but President Trump has tried to only limit them a tiny bit and look at the outcome. Can you imagine if he tried to do away them altogether? LOL!
He should do it though, if for nothing else just to get their attention, and who knows, when judge Kavanaugh is on the bench SCOTUS may just support him.
Support Free Republic, Folks!
Oh, look - it’s Federal judge-president Kentanji “Affirmative Action” Jackson from Wakanda, appointed by the Seditious Halfrican Kenyan, Bammy the Clown...
And lastl, en-hemped...
We will have to re-elect Trump to undo the damage done to our courts. obama placed activists on the bench that we must have removed.
Use a high enough window and you don’t have to dirty up your rope.
If Congress refuses to get off their fat asses and reign in these black-robe fascists illegally writing law, then the task will fall to Trump’s deplorables to correct the balance of power. And Congress and the Deep State won’t like the results because they will be caught in the backdraft.
Change a few words and issue it again.
She’s got those bat $#it crazy eyes that are so popular with the socialists.
Yep, they go along with her bat $#it crazy judicial reasoning.
I get so tired of these leftist judges legislating.
You’re assuming that the majority of Congress doesn’t want this.
The real role of the judiciary is to pass laws which Congress is afraid to pass. If some judge dared to rule in a way which the Left found offensive, you can be sure he would be slapped down real quick.
Reason informs me that Congress in general, and the Senate in particular, no longer serve their Constitutional purposes.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.