Category: Reshape Federal Courts

Trump Calls America Stupid After Leaving Supreme Court Birthright Citizenship Hearing

President Donald Trump attended Supreme Court arguments regarding his administration’s attempt to eliminate birthright citizenship through executive order, then departed midway through proceedings. Trump’s Solicitor General John Sauer was completing his presentation when Trump left the chamber, and multiple justices appointed by Trump himself voiced skepticism about the administration’s constitutional arguments to strip automatic citizenship rights.

After the hearing concluded, Trump posted on Truth Social attacking the United States as “stupid” for permitting birthright citizenship, falsely claiming America stands alone in this practice. According to Pew Research Center data, 32 other nations maintain substantially similar birthright citizenship laws, predominantly in the Western Hemisphere, while approximately 50 additional countries employ more limited variations of the same principle.

The Supreme Court is currently deliberating whether Trump possesses unilateral executive authority to redefine citizenship standards through presidential order. The justices’ apparent reservations about the administration’s legal position, coupled with Trump’s public contempt for the nation’s founding constitutional framework, underscore the stakes of this proceeding, which will produce a decision by July.

(Source: https://www.independent.co.uk/bulletin/news/trump-supreme-court-birthright-citizenship-debate-stupid-b2950293.html)

Miller Pushes States to Strip Education Rights from Undocumented

Stephen Miller, Trump’s senior immigration adviser, is orchestrating a campaign to dismantle the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment by encouraging Republican-led states to deny public education funding to undocumented children. Miller raised this idea in a closed-door meeting with Texas lawmakers in Washington, citing congressional gridlock as justification for state-level action that would challenge the 1982 Supreme Court precedent in Plyler v. Doe, which mandated free public education for undocumented children as a constitutional right.

If enacted, Miller’s proposal would classify approximately one million children as members of a subordinate class excluded from mainstream society. As Justice William Brennan wrote in the Plyler decision, denying these children basic education forecloses their ability to contribute to the nation’s progress and violates the 14th Amendment’s guarantee that “The 14th Amendment to the Constitution is not confined to the protection of citizens.” Miller’s strategy aims to use state legislation as a testing ground to weaken federal constitutional protections, encouraging other Republican states and federal lawmakers to follow suit.

Miller’s assault on the 14th Amendment extends beyond education policy and represents a broader assault on the constitutional protections established after the Civil War. The 14th Amendment was designed as a political text to ensure equal protection and citizenship rights for all people, directly extending the prohibitions of the 13th Amendment against slavery and involuntary servitude. Miller’s crusade against immigration and his efforts to strip constitutional protections from vulnerable populations reveal an intent to fundamentally reshape American democracy by dismantling the legal and political framework designed to prevent the creation of subordinate classes.

(Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/28/opinion/stephen-miller-birthright-citizenship-14th-amendment.html)

Trump Praises Kavanaugh as Hero After Tariff Ruling Loss

President Donald Trump praised Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh as his “new hero” on Saturday morning, along with Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, after the Court voted 6-3 to strike down his emergency tariff authority on Friday. The decision included votes against Trump from Chief Justice John Roberts and two Trump-appointed justices, Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett, alongside the three Democratic-appointed justices. Trump’s public embrace of the three dissenters revealed his deliberate strategy to reward judicial loyalty and punish perceived disloyalty.

On Friday evening, Trump responded to the tariff ruling by attacking the majority justices, claiming their decision was “ridiculous” and that the justices who voted against him “should be ashamed of themselves.” He specifically targeted his own appointees Gorsuch and Barrett, claiming they violated an implicit obligation by ruling against him and complaining that “this never seems to happen with Democrats,” who he alleged vote as a bloc in their own interest regardless of the case merits.

Trump’s escalating posts throughout Friday night revealed his transactional view of judicial appointments. He complained that he did not appoint Chief Justice Roberts, blaming Roberts for allowing “foreign countries that have been ripping us off for years to continue to do so.” His final evening post urged Republicans to “Unite, stick together, and WIN,” framing judicial independence as party disloyalty rather than constitutional obligation.

By Saturday morning, Trump shifted to praising the three justices who sided with him, declaring Kavanaugh his “new hero” and asserting without evidence that all three dissenters wanted to “MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN.” This pattern of public reward and punishment for judicial decisions directly contradicts the principle of an independent judiciary, positioning judges as political operatives accountable to the executive.

(Source: https://www.mediaite.com/media/news/trump-wakes-up-blurting-praise-for-my-new-hero-and-its-about-his-devastating-court-loss/)

Trump Claims States Are Federal Agents in Elections

President Trump declared on Tuesday that states function as “agents for the federal government in elections,” advancing his push to federalize election administration. During an Oval Office signing ceremony, Trump told CNN’s Kaitlan Collins that the federal government should take over elections from states he deemed incapable of running them honestly, specifically naming Atlanta and other Democratic-led cities as sites of “horrible corruption.” Trump’s assertion contradicts the Constitution, which assigns election administration to state and local officials with limited federal involvement.

Trump framed federal takeover as necessary to ensure honest elections, stating that if states “can’t count the votes legally and honestly, then somebody else should take over.” When pressed by Collins on constitutional constraints, Trump dismissed them, declaring states “can administer the election, but they have to do it honestly.” This demand for federal control extends Trump’s pattern of weaponizing federal authority against election officials, mirroring his sustained efforts to delegitimize the 2020 election and intimidate state administrators into compliance with his directives.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt later reframed Trump’s “nationalize the voting” language as advocacy for the SAVE Act, which would require proof of citizenship for voter registration. However, noncitizens are already barred from voting in federal elections, making the legislation redundant. The move represents Trump’s broader strategy to impose new voting restrictions ahead of midterm elections under the guise of election security.

The statement follows an FBI seizure last week of election materials from Fulton County, Georgia, in connection with alleged voter fraud claims that have been repeatedly debunked. Legal experts, including UCLA law professor Rick Hasen, characterized such federal intervention as a dramatic escalation in federal control over state-run election infrastructure and warned of further interference in 2026 elections. Trump’s repeated false claims of election fraud and his push for federal dominance over election administration establish the groundwork for authoritarian control over voting mechanisms.

Trump’s assertion that states are federal agents in elections directly contradicts established constitutional law and democratic practice. His pattern of attacking election officials who refuse his demands, combined with federal actions targeting state election materials, demonstrates his intent to consolidate power over election administration and establish federal override of state election systems, dismantling the institutional safeguards that protect democratic elections from executive manipulation.

(Source: https://www.cnn.com/2026/02/03/politics/trump-nationalize-elections-states?Date=20260204&Profile=CNN+Politics&utm_content=1770166729&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwdGRjcAPxrotleHRuA2FlbQIxMQBzcnRjBmFwcF9pZAo2NjI4NTY4Mzc5AAEe_TP6JxjJ8F0XeylqLLR_PnMmKiHjepIwMfFSOkoZjpuKIlcOuE0eA99g3Kc_aem_XKBW8wXEdeRvaH0xj02M9A)

FBI Agent Resigns as DOJ Blocks Renee Good Shooting Probe

FBI supervisor Tracee Mergen resigned from the Minneapolis field office after Washington leadership pressured her to abandon a civil rights investigation into ICE officer Jonathan Ross, who fatally shot 37-year-old Renee Good on January 7. Such inquiries are standard procedure following officer-involved shootings. The Trump administration weaponized the Justice Department by instead investigating Good and her partner for alleged ties to left-wing protest groups, prompting at least six senior prosecutors in the Minneapolis U.S. attorney’s office to resign in protest.

Senior Justice Department officials have stated there are no plans to investigate whether Ross used excessive force when he fired multiple shots at the unarmed mother sitting in her vehicle. Federal investigators refused to cooperate with state and local Minnesota prosecutors seeking to open their own inquiry into the shooting. The New York Times video analysis found no evidence supporting Trump administration officials’ claims that Good attempted to ram Ross with her Honda Pilot, yet they publicly labeled her a “domestic terrorist.”

The Justice Department simultaneously opened investigations into Minnesota Democratic elected officials, including Governor Tim Walz and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey, scrutinizing whether they conspired to obstruct Trump’s immigration enforcement through public statements. Subpoenas were issued this week to their offices and St. Paul Mayor Kaohly Her’s office as part of this effort.

The department prosecuted three protesters—Nekima Levy-Armstrong, Chauntyll Louisa Allen, and William Kelly—charging them with conspiracy for interrupting a church service to protest a pastor’s apparent ICE work, alleging they “intimidated, harassed, oppressed and terrorized the parishioners.” Federal judges denied prosecutors’ requests to detain the three while awaiting trial.

These actions reflect a coordinated strategy by the Trump administration’s Justice Department to shield federal immigration enforcement from oversight, punish Democratic critics of ICE operations, and criminalize protest activity opposing deportation policies, while Trump falsely claimed protesters were paid agitators.

(Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/23/us/fbi-agent-ice-shooting-renee-good.html)

Trump Hires Beauty Salon Owner Mora Namdar to Decide Who to Ban From U.S.

Donald Trump appointed Mora Namdar, a Texas-based beauty salon owner and attorney, as assistant secretary for consular affairs, giving her authority over visa approvals, revocations, and decisions about who enters the United States. Namdar, 46, owns the Bam salon chain in Dallas, Fort Worth, and Plano, offering blowouts starting at $45 and makeup sessions at $55, while simultaneously operating a one-woman law firm she announced closing on Christmas Day. She previously held an interim position in the State Department’s Middle East and North Africa bureau during Trump’s first term in 2020.

Namdar’s Senate confirmation this month elevates a politically connected operative with no demonstrated expertise in immigration or consular affairs to control visa adjudications affecting millions of foreigners. In testimony, she aligned visa decisions with Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s national security framing, stating that consular officers can revoke visas for individuals who “undermine” U.S. foreign policy, a standard potentially weaponizable against political opponents and critics.

Namdar contributed to Project 2025, Trump’s policy blueprint, by authoring a section attacking the U.S. Agency for Global Media—which operates Voice of America and Radio Free Europe—accusing it of “espionage-related security risks” and “anti-U.S. talking points,” and calling for its reform or closure. Her appointment operationalizes the “personnel is policy” strategy documented by PBS, which found the administration has implemented approximately half of Project 2025’s agenda through ideological staffing choices.

Her interim leadership of the State Department’s Near Eastern affairs bureau triggered internal concerns about management and morale according to multiple outlets. Namdar now oversees implementation of the administration’s ban on citizens from various European countries announced Wednesday, which Trump and Rubio framed as punishment for “egregious” social media censorship of “American viewpoints,” with additional bans promised.

This appointment exemplifies Trump’s strategy of installing operatives committed to Project 2025’s authoritarian goals across government agencies controlling speech and entry. Paired with FCC chairman Brendan Carr—another Project 2025 architect now pushing regulatory rollbacks and culture-war “censorship” narratives—Namdar’s position consolidates power to silence dissent and control who accesses the United States based on political loyalty rather than law.

(Source: https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-hires-beauty-salon-owner-mora-namdar-to-decide-who-to-ban-from-us/)

Trump’s Executive Order Removes Check By Courts And Into Another Constitutional Crisis

Former President Donald Trump has signed a troubling executive order granting him unprecedented power over independent regulatory agencies, threatening their autonomy established to shield them from political interference. This directive specifically affects agencies such as the Consumer Product Safety Commission, the Securities and Exchange Commission, and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation but intentionally excludes the Federal Reserve’s Board of Governors, illustrating a careful manipulation of power dynamics to serve his administration’s interests.

The executive order mandates that these independent agencies must now submit all new regulations to the White House and form liaison offices, effectively placing them under White House control. The order further stipulates that the president and the attorney general have the sole authority to interpret laws, raising significant constitutional concerns and effectively undermining the judicial branch’s role in the federal government.

Trump’s push for expanded executive power indicates a strategic move to centralize governmental control and replace nonpartisan legal oversight with his administration’s loyalty-driven agenda. Law experts highlight that this order isn’t merely about regulation oversight; it represents a blatant disregard for the independence of these agencies and the principles of democratic governance. Legal experts regard Trump’s insistence on loyalty from government employees as an erosion of foundational democratic norms.

Under this directive, Trump has already dismissed several heads of independent agencies, prompting legal challenges that label these firings as illegal. The president’s aggressive aim to consolidate control is underscored in the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025, which advocates dismantling independent agencies altogether, claiming they do not fit within constitutional parameters.

The order may result in severe ramifications for financial and labor regulatory frameworks in the United States, with fears of regulatory instability as Trump’s administration will introduce significant shifts with each election cycle. Such actions are reflective of a broader agenda towards authoritarianism, showcasing an alarming effort to dismantle the checks and balances that are vital to American democracy.

(h/t: https://www.npr.org/2025/02/19/nx-s1-5302481/trump-independent-agencies)

Vance’s Dangerous Claims Undermine Democracy and Judicial Authority in Trump’s Agenda

Vice President JD Vance has made a troubling declaration asserting that judges lack the authority to restrict what he describes as the “legitimate power” of the executive branch, specifically in context to Donald Trump’s agenda. His comments arise amidst multiple court rulings that have recently halted various actions initiated by the Trump administration. These include controversial policies such as the elimination of birthright citizenship and the reassignment of transgender female inmates into male prisons.

Vance’s remarks signal a dangerous trend where the Republican Party seeks to undermine the judiciary’s role as a check on executive overreach. The vice president, who has a legal background from Yale Law School, has positioned himself alongside Trump and other allies in promoting the idea that the president is above the law, especially when it comes to implementing an authoritarian agenda. His statements hint at a willingness to disregard judicial rulings that threaten their interests.

This latest assertion reflects a broader Republican contempt for democratic norms and the essential function of the judiciary in maintaining a balanced government. By championing the idea that judicial decisions can be ignored, Vance and Trump are essentially advocating for an autocratic style of governance, reminiscent of regimes that sideline judicial authority to pursue their radical agendas.

Notably, Trump’s rhetoric continues to escalate, as he condemned a recent court ruling that restricts access to sensitive government payment systems controlled by his administration. This defiance showcases a deliberate strategy by Trump and his supporters to position themselves as victims of judicial oppression, while simultaneously seeking to dismantle the checks and balances that uphold American democracy.

The implications of Vance’s statements are stark; they suggest an increasing likelihood of the Trump administration challenging court orders that it deems unfavorable. This pattern reflects not only an erosion of judicial authority but also a coordinated effort among Republicans to secure fascist control over American institutions, threatening the democratic foundations that have historically restrained presidential power.

(h/t: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/09/us/politics/vance-trump-federal-courts-executive-order.html)

Trump to nominate anti-abortion, religious rights lawyer for next federal judgeship in St. Louis

The White House on Wednesday announced President Donald Trump’s “intent to nominate” a St. Louis County anti-abortion and religious rights lawyer, Sarah E. Pitlyk, for an open federal judgeship in St. Louis.

As the Post-Dispatch reported last month, Pitlyk is special counsel to the Chicago-based Thomas More Society, a not-for-profit law firm “dedicated to restoring respect in law for life, family, and religious liberty.” At the society, she worked to defeat an “abortion sanctuary city” ordinance in St. Louis, and on “several landmark pro-life and religious liberty cases.” She also worked on contract, employment, and tax cases.

Pitlyk was involved in a dispute over whether a divorced St. Louis County couple’s frozen embryos were property or “unborn children” under Missouri law; a civil lawsuit filed against Planned Parenthood by a man acquitted of a bomb threat charge; and the defense of a man accused in California of making a false exposé claiming Planned Parenthood was selling fetal tissue.

Pitlyk did not return messages seeking comment last month. 

Representatives of U.S. Sen. Josh Hawley and U.S. Sen. Roy Blunt, both Republicans, also did not return messages last month seeking comment. On Twitter, both praisedPitlyk Wednesday.

Pitlyk graduated summa cum laude from Boston College before receiving master’s degrees in philosophy from Georgetown University and in applied biomedical ethics from the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven in Belgium, where she was a Fulbright Scholar, her bio says.

In July, 2012, Pitlyk placed her Missouri bar license on inactive status, saying in a filing that she “was not planning on practicing law for the foreseeable future.” She sought to re-activate the license in February 2013.

Pitlyk worked at the Runnymede Law Group, formed by the last Trump pick for federal judge, Stephen R. Clark, and for Clark and Sauer LLC, a predecessor firm. 

Pitlyk, if confirmed, would replace U.S. District Judge Catherine Perry, who took senior status — a form of semi-retirement in which judges can take a reduced caseload — effective Dec. 31. 

[St. Louis Today]

Trump nominates judge who argued countries are stronger if everyone is same ethnic group

A White House lawyer chosen by Donald Trump to serve on the federal appeals court previously argued countries were weakened by ethnic diversity.

Steven Menashi, the president’s nomination for the Court of Appeals Second Circuit, wrote in an academic journal that “ethnic ties provide the groundwork for social trust” and “solidarity underlying democratic polities rests in large part on ethnic identification”.

“Surely, it does not serve the cause of liberal democracy to ignore this reality,” he added in the 2010 article for the University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Law.

The passages resurfaced on social media following the announcement of Mr Menashi’s nomination on Wednesday and were later discussed on air by MSNBC host Rachel Maddow, who described them as “a highbrow argument for racial purity in the nation state”.

In the journal article, titled “Ethnonationalism and Liberal Democracy”, the lawyer says he aims to refute claims that “Israel’s particularistic identity — its desire to serve as a homeland for the Jewish people — contradicts principles of universalism and equality upon which liberal democracy supposedly rests”.

“This article, in contrast, argues that ethnonationalism remains a common and accepted feature of liberal democracy, consistent with current state practice and international law,” he writes.

[The Independent]

Update

On November 14, 2019, Senate Republicans overwhelmingly voted to approve Menashi to a lifetime appointment.

Controversial Trump Judicial Nominee Steven Menashi Confirmed to Second Circuit Court of Appeals
1 2