Tag: judges

Pentagon Enforces Transgender Ban as Biden Judge Warns DOJ of Legal Fallout, Possible Court Ruling This Week

The U.S. military is undergoing major policy changes regarding transgender service members following a Presidential Trump directive to ban transgenders from service in the U.S. military.

The ongoing federal litigation challenging this policy. A ruling is expected on Tuesday or Wednesday. U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes, a Biden-appointed judge, has expressed skepticism and indicated her likely hostility towards Trump’s transgender ban.

The judge was quoted by the Associated Press as saying of transgender troops: “They have to essentially be in hiding while in service.”

The judge was quoted in this ABC story as saying she believed transgenders only had a higher risk of suicide because of discrimination. The judge said the DOJ ‘cherry picked’ evidence and examples to support its claims that transgenders were unfit for military service.

The ongoing litigation contends that Trump’s order violates transgender people’s rights to equal protection under the Fifth Amendment.

On February 26, 2025, the DoD implemented President Trump’s Executive Order 14183, titled “Prioritizing Military Excellence and Readiness.”

The policy prohibits transgender individuals from serving openly in the U.S. military and bars those diagnosed with gender dysphoria or related conditions from enlistment, appointment, or retention.

Gender dysphoria is the mental illness where one’s biological sex does not match the gender the individual believes they ought to have.

This move effectively reinstates the Trump-first-term-era policy that was ended by President Biden in 2021.

The DoD argues that the new policy banning transgenders is necessary to maintain combat effectiveness, unit cohesion, and medical readiness.

Transgender therapies, not including surgery, typically costs employers between $25,000-$75,000 per year.

Keep reading

Attorney General Pam Bondi Slams Radical Judge’s Order to Halt Trump Admin’s Deportation Flights for Venezuelan Gang Members

A radical leftist judge has thrown a wrench into President Donald Trump’s bold mission to secure America’s borders and protect its law-abiding citizens from foreign threats.

On Saturday, Chief Judge Judge James E. Boasberg—an Obama appointee—issued a temporary restraining order to block the Trump administration from deporting thousands of Venezuelan nationals, including dangerous gang members, under the Alien Enemies Act.

This wartime measure, a cornerstone of executive authority, has been wielded for centuries to expel hostile foreign nationals.

This outrageous ruling comes after far-left activist groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and Democracy Forward, rushed to court in a desperate attempt to shield violent illegal immigrants from deportation.

Their lawsuit, J.G.G. v. Trump, claims that using the Alien Enemies Act to remove illegal immigrants—many of whom are tied to the brutal Tren de Aragua gang— is “unlawful” and “unprecedented” during “peacetime.”

Never mind that the Constitution grants the president sweeping powers to defend the nation from foreign threats, or that these deportations target criminals who have no business roaming American streets. For now, Boasberg’s order halts deportations for the lawsuit’s named plaintiffs for a mere 14 days.

Judge Boasberg’s radical ruling reached a new level of insanity later on Saturday when he ordered the Trump administration to immediately return planes that were already deporting members of the notorious Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua—one of the most dangerous criminal organizations in the Western Hemisphere.

Keep reading

Activist Judges and the Overreach of Judicial Authority: A Case for Sedition and Treason

Executive Summary

The balance of power among the three branches of government is a cornerstone of the United States Constitution.

However, activist judges have increasingly encroached upon executive authority, undermining the separation of powers.

When judges exceed their constitutional authority by obstructing or overturning executive actions without legitimate constitutional grounds, they not only overstep their role but may also commit acts tantamount to treason and sedition.

This essay explores the legal basis for holding such judges accountable, citing relevant laws, cases, and precedents.

The Constitutional Framework

Article II of the U.S. Constitution vests executive power in the President, granting him authority over the administration of federal agencies and the enforcement of laws.

Conversely, Article III establishes the judicial branch, limiting its role to interpreting the law rather than legislating or executing it. The principle of separation of powers is intended to prevent any branch from usurping the functions of another.

James Madison, in The Federalist Papers No. 47, emphasized that “the accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands… may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.” When judges attempt to override executive decisions outside their jurisdiction, they disrupt this balance and engage in judicial tyranny.

Keep reading

The Left’s Judicial Insurrection Against Trump Is a Constitutional Crisis — Here’s Why It Must Be Stopped

Since returning to the White House in January, President Donald Trump has been met with an unprecedented legal onslaught from far-left activist judges and radical groups determined to sabotage his administration at every turn.

These rogue judges—many appointed by Clinton, Obama, and Biden—have launched a relentless legal coup to undermine the will of the American people and prevent Trump from carrying out his constitutional duties.

Appearing on The War Room with Steve Bannon, Josh Hammer, Senior Counsel for the Article III Project, warned that what America is witnessing is no ordinary judicial activism—it’s a full-blown judicial insurrection.

So far this year, President Trump has faced 125 legal challenges in just two months.

The full list of 125 legal challenges remains active and is documented on the Just Security website.

Keep reading

Clinton-Appointed Judge Rules Inmate Who Murdered Baby Must Be Provided Taxpayer-Funded Sex Change at ‘Earliest Opportunity’

Clinton-appointed Judge Richard Young has ordered the Indiana Department of Correction (IDOC) to provide sex change surgery for a “transgender” inmate who murdered a baby.

The inmate, Jonathan Richardson, who now goes by “Autumn Cordellioné,” is in prison for the reckless homicide of a baby.

Richardson was convicted in 2001 for strangling his then-wife’s 11-month-old daughter to death.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed the lawsuit against the Indiana Department of Corrections seeking a sex change on behalf of Richardson in 2023, three years after the baby-killer decided to begin identifying as a woman.

Currently, there is a law in Indiana banning taxpayer-funded sex change procedures for inmates.

According to a Fox News report, the ACLU argued that the law violates the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition of “cruel and unusual punishment.”

Judge Young sided with the ACLU on March 5 and ordered taxpayers to foot the bill for the murderer’s vanity surgery.

Keep reading

United Nations judge convicted of forcing young woman to work as slave

A Ugandan judge who sits on a UN court has been convicted of enslaving a young woman while she was living in Oxford.

Lydia Mugambe, 49, took “advantage of her status” over her victim in the “most egregious way” by preventing her from holding down steady employment and forcing her to work as her maid, while providing childcare for free, prosecutors said.

She was found guilty on Thursday at Oxford crown court of conspiring to breach UK immigration law, people trafficking, modern slavery and conspiracy to intimidate a witness.

Mugambe collapsed in the dock as the guilty verdicts were read out and the judge ordered that the court be cleared after there were audible gasps in the public gallery. The Ugandan judge was escorted from the court by two dock officers.

Mugambe was appointed two years ago to the UN court that deals with residual matters from the criminal tribunals for Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia.

She is understood to be a PhD research student at Oxford’s law faculty while on sabbatical from her main role as a high court judge in Uganda.

At the trial, Caroline Haughey KC, for the prosecution, said that Mugambe had “exploited and abused” the victim by “taking advantage of her lack of understanding of her rights to properly paid employment and deceiving her as to the purpose of her coming to the UK”.

The jury accepted the prosecution’s case that Mugambe had engaged in “illegal folly” with John Leonard Mugerwa, who was Uganda’s deputy high commissioner in London.

The pair were found to have conspired to arrange for the young woman to come to the UK. Prosecutors said that Mugambe and Mugerwa had participated in a “very dishonest” trade-off.

Keep reading

Judicial Insurrection: Radical Leftist Judges Wage All-Out War Against President Trump — 119 Legal Challenges in Just Two Months, MORE THAN DOUBLE Any U.S. President in History

Since returning to the White House in January, President Donald J. Trump has been met with an unprecedented legal onslaught from far-left activist judges and groups determined to sabotage his administration at every turn.

Appearing on The War Room with Steve Bannon, Josh Hammer, Senior Counsel for the Article III Project, warned that what America is witnessing is not just judicial activism—it’s an outright judicial insurrection.

This is similar to how the communist left attacked him using a cadre of radical activist judges his first time in office.

After nearly two months in office, these radical extremist judges continue to wreak havoc on the Trump administration and the country.

So far, the Supreme Court has failed to shut down this lawlessness by these far-left activists.

Attorney Josh Hammer: “Let me just lay the scene briefly here. What we’re seeing is not just judicial activism, Steve. I used the words very carefully there. I mean, this is a full-on judicial insurrection, going back to the very first days of this administration in power.

By the way, those of us with a long enough memory to remember the first Trump administration. This is nothing new.

The first Trump administration from 2017 to 2021, faced, by my count, I believe, it was 65 so-called nationwide injunctions, which, by the way, is more than the first 44 presidents of the United States combined, literally in all of American history, faced there.

They basically picked up in January, just last month, as if they hadn’t lost a beat over the past four years. Whether it’s a judge in Washington State or Ohio or Washington DC or Florida, or Hawaii, the notion that you can issue a TRO, a temporary restraining order, and thereby try to bring a federal executive branch policy and executive order to halt. It’s completely anathema. It’s bat-crap crazy. That’s not how the separation of powers works.”

On Wednesday, soulless activist Judge Tanya Chutkan ruled that state attorneys general can access information about DOGE employees working to cut waste and fraud in government. Chutkan put a target on their backs so violent leftists could pursue them on the streets of America. What a complete loon.

Keep reading

JUDICIAL TYRANNY: Radical Judge Tanya Chutkan Allows States Attorneys General to Unveil the Names of DOGE Employees

Corrupt U.S. District Judge Tanya S. Chutkan has unleashed a legal assault on Elon Musk and the newly formed Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), greenlighting a fishing expedition that threatens to expose DOGE employees to the wrath of left-wing bureaucrats.

On Tuesday, radical left Judge Tanya Chutkan, a disgustingly dishonest Trump-hater who believes she was elected to lead this country and take down Trump, issued an order today in State of New Mexico, et al. v. Elon Musk, et al. that demands Musk and DOGE cough up sensitive documents and data within a mere 21 days—all to appease a coalition of Democrat-led states desperate to undermine President Trump’s agenda.

Chutkan’s order mandates that DOGE disclose sensitive information and internal documents concerning employees, contracts, and federal engagements directly linked with states participating in the lawsuit.

Chutkan justified the plaintiffs’ aggressive interrogatories, ruling they sufficiently targeted “parameters of DOGE’s and Musk’s authority”—an issue central to plaintiffs’ claims under the Appointments Clause.

“Again, subject to a minor amendment, Plaintiffs have sufficiently tailored their interrogatories and requests for admission as well. Those requests seek to identify DOGE personnel and the parameters of DOGE’s and Musk’s authority- a question central to Plaintiffs’ claims,” Chutkan wrote.

This decision dangerously opens the door for politically motivated activists and partisan actors to weaponize personal information against private citizens simply doing their jobs.

What a sick and dangerous woman!

Keep reading

Judge who allegedly had a relationship with an accused child predator and let him out on bail is now accused of similar crimes

A Utah judge was put on unpaid leave after police accused him of committing several sex crimes involving children. The next day, a former fire chief from the same locality was charged with similar crimes. But court documents revealed an even deeper connection between the two men.

According to court documents obtained by KSL, a local NBC affiliate, Ned Brady Hansen, 54, was charged on Tuesday with eight counts of aggravated sexual exploitation of a minor. When Hansen was first arrested on Jan. 27 — when he was still Tremonton’s fire chief — investigators working his case asked a judge to hold him in custody without bail due to the nature of his alleged crimes.

That judge, Kevin Christensen, 64, let Hansen go free.

On Monday, Christensen was charged with seven felony sex crimes involving children and obstructing justice. And according to an affidavit for Hansen’s arrest, the two men had been engaged in a “sexual relationship,” KSL reported.

Keep reading

Biden Judge Strong-Arms Trump, Orders Admin to Pay a Portion of $2 Billion in Foreign Contracts by Monday Evening

A federal judge on Thursday ordered the Trump Administration to pay a portion of the $2 billion in foreign contracts by Monday evening.

US District Judge Amir Ali, a Biden appointee held a hearing on Thursday after the Supreme Court in a 5-4 ruling denied the Trump Administration’s request to vacate his TRO forcing the administration to pay $2 billion in foreign contracts.

Conservative Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh dissented.

Alito said he was stunned by the judge’s order forcing the Trump Administration to pay $2 billion in foreign contracts.

“Does a single district-court judge who likely lacks jurisdiction have the unchecked power to compel the Government of the United States to pay out (and probably lose forever) 2 billion taxpayer dollars? The answer to that question should be an emphatic “No,” but a majority of this Court apparently thinks otherwise. I am stunned,” Alito wrote in a scathing dissent.

After a four-hour hearing on Thursday, Judge Ali ordered the Trump Admin to get some of the plaintiffs’ invoices paid by 6 pm on Monday.

Keep reading