Please disable your Ad Blocker to better interact with this website.

News Clash

AG Barr Hammers Activist Judges With Truth Bomb — These Numbers Don’t Lie

There’s a REASON some people are now calling Barr ‘Honeybadger’. And this is it.

As the internet memes say…

“Honeybadger just don’t care”

Barr isn’t here to sugar coat the truth.

He said ‘spying’ when he meant… spying. (The Left lost their $#^! over that one.)

And now, in his speech to the American Law Institute, he’s putting Judicial Mischief against the President in its proper historical context.

When lower courts issue injunctions at a national level, he sees that as exceeding their Constitutional authority. And that’s not all…

For those unable to watch the whole thing, here’s an excerpt:

Since President Trump took office, federal district courts have issued 37 nationwide injunctions against the Executive Branch. That’s more than one a month. By comparison, during President Obama’s first two years, district courts issued two nationwide injunctions against the Executive Branch, both of which were vacated by the Ninth Circuit. And according to the Department’s best estimates, courts issued only 27 nationwide injunctions­ in all of the 20th century. [emphasis added]

“Some say this proves that the Trump Administration is lawless. Not surprisingly, I disagree. And I would point out that the only case litigated on the merits in the Supreme Court—the so-called “travel ban” challenge—ended with President’s policy being upheld. But my aim today is not to debate the merits of any particular policy; it is to discuss the improper use of nationwide injunctions against policies of all stripes. Specifically, aside from the particular oddities of the DACA case, I want to highlight five ways in which nationwide injunctions are inconsistent with our American legal system.

“First, and most fundamentally, nationwide injunctions violate the Separation of Powers. Article III vests federal courts with “the judicial power” to decide ‘Cases’ or ‘Controversies.’ As the Supreme Court has instructed, that means concrete disputes among individual parties. In the words of Chief Justice Marshall in Marbury v. Madison, ‘the province of the Court is solely to decide on the rights of individuals, not to inquire how the Executive or Executive officers perform duties in which they have a discretion.’”
Source: WesternJournal

By the way, since Facebook has unpublished ClashDaily’s page, your best bet to keep in the loop is to Subscribe to our ClashDaily Newsletter right here:

Become a Clash Insider!

Sign up for our free email newslettaer, and we’ll make sure to keep you in the loop.

We’re also moving onto a new platform, MeWe. It’s like Facebook without the data breaches and censorship.

Sign up and you can still get all the ClashDaily goodness by joining our MeWe group.

Do you love what we’re doing at Clash?

Do you want to kick in to our ‘war chest’ so that we Happy Warriors can maximize the size of the footprint we leave on Leftism’s backside? Here’s a link for ya to do just that.

Stay Rowdy!

Wes Walker

Wes Walker is the author of "Blueprint For a Government that Doesn't Suck". He has been lighting up since its inception in July of 2012. Follow on twitter: @Republicanuck