Are judges abusing their power to block Trump's agenda?

[AgnosticBoy]

President Trump issued an executive order to end birthright citizenship. Several judges then halted that executive order. Many on the Left would probably say that Trump is abusing his executive power, while many on the Right could say that judges are abusing their judicial power.

Now Trump's attorneys are trying to get the Supreme Court to take up the case involving judges being able to issue national injunctions.

US President Donald Trump took his bid to end birthright citizenship to the US Supreme Court on Thursday, in a case that could help further his agenda on immigration and other issues.

The case asks whether lower court judges should be able to block presidential orders for the entire country - as they have done in this case.
The justices did not appear to reach a consensus as they considered both sides.

Source: BBC

What's your view on this topic?

Is there some effort by some judges to block Trump's agenda?

Are national injunctions, where judges issue orders that apply nationally, an abuse of power or can they be abused?

 

[AgnosticBoy]

Are national injunctions, where judges issue orders that apply nationally, an abuse of power or can they be abused?

We might have gotten a response from the Supreme Court...

I have my usual independent media people that I listen to, and other straight shooters like Chris Cuomo on News Nation. Can't wait to hear their take on this issue.

 

[AgnosticBoy]

Finally, the straight shooters and independents are starting to give their take on this...

(he goes after the hype takes....just the first 2 minutes was good stuff as expected!)

 

[AgnosticBoy]

What's your view on this topic?

I believe that judges should be able to issue national injunctions, but not under the conditions that they've been doing lately. Under the current system (pre-SCOTUS's recent decision), the system was being abused by politicians from both sides. And I'm not even sure I agree that SCOTUS recent decision fixes the issue. Would have to read up more on it and listen to both sides more.

Either way, here's the problem with the old system. National injunctions are being used as a tactic by politicians to use against an opposing party president to stall the President's policies. It doesn't seem that it is really about the President's policy really violating the law since the plaintiffs (again, usually someone from the opposing party of the President) shops for a judge in a district that would be favorable to their side. If these cases were truly about merits, and the plaintifs were so confident that the President's exec. orders violated the Constitution and US laws, then they would be confident enough to file the suit in any district and with any judge. This also shows a clear problem in our judicial system where decisions by judges are increasingly falling along party lines just as some would argue is the case for SCOTUS.