Tag: judges

Biden Appointed Federal Judge who Blocked Trump USAID Freeze is a Far-Left Activist and Biden Donor, Who Pushed to Defund Police and Drop BLM Charges, Previously Accused Trump of “Hatred Towards Muslim People”

A Biden-appointed federal judge who is trying to stop the President from freezing foreign aid and USAID disbursements was discovered to be a radical-left anti-Trump activist who has accused the President of hating Muslims and lobbied for Black Lives Matter activists and defunding the police.

As The Gateway Pundit recently reported, Judge Amir Ali blocked Trump’s order halting foreign funding and ordered the Trump Administration to pay the foreign contracts last week.

“At least to date, Defendants have not offered any explanation for why a blanket suspension of all congressionally appropriated foreign aid, which set off a shockwave and upended reliance interests for thousands of agreements with businesses, nonprofits, and organizations around the country, was a rational precursor to reviewing programs,” Judge Ali wrote in a 15-page order reviewed by The Gateway Pundit.

Ali’s order was temporarily paused by the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday pending a review of the far-left judge’s ruling.

According to the Daily Wire, Ali, the former Executive Director of the leftist MacArthur Justice Center, is a donor to Democrats, including Joe Biden, whom he gave thousands of dollars during his 2020 bid against Trump, and former DNC Chair Jamie Harrison in a bid for South Carolina’s U.S. Senate race.

Prior to the 2020 election, the judge was an opponent of Trump’s 2017 travel ban, which halted travel and visa issuance from several Islamic nations to prevent terrorists from entering the U.S.

In an editorial for the far-left Guardian newspaper, Ali described the President’s order as a “campaign of animus against people of the Muslim faith.” In a 2022 interview, he further claimed that the President has a “history of animus and hatred towards Muslim people. In the same interview, he also called for DEI to be implemented within the legal profession in DC, calling it a problem that he’s “one of few people of North African or Middle Eastern descent, one of few immigrants to the country, and one of few Muslim Americans.”

Keep reading

Biden-Appointed Judge Blocking Trump’s ‘Spending Freeze’ Always Sides With The Left

After losing at the ballot box, the left has returned to its familiar strategy of slowing President Donald Trump’s agenda through the courts. Lucky for them, former President Joe Biden appointed reliable lefty U.S. District Judge Loren AliKhan in 2023 to the Washington, D.C. court.   

AliKhan has sided against the American people throughout her legal career, often in cases involving faith. Did you want to go to church during Covid? AliKhan actively worked against the freedom of religious assembly.

Now, AliKhan is overseeing a court challenge to the temporary spending freeze requested by the Trump Administration’s Office of Management and Budget (OMB).

The OMB requested spending pause in a Jan 27 memo, saying OMB must do an analysis of all federal financial assistance programs to identify spending that may be affected by Trump’s executive orders. It was looking for spending related to foreign aid, nongovernmental organizations, DEI, woke gender ideology, and the Green New Deal.

The National Council of Nonprofits went to court the next day, Jan. 28, challenging the 90-day pause, saying the pause “could deprive people and communities of their life-saving services,” court papers show.

“This order is a potential five-alarm fire for nonprofit organizations and the people and communities they serve,” said a statement from National Council of Nonprofits President and CEO Diane Yentel. “The impact of even a short pause in funding could be devastating and cost lives. This order could decimate thousands of organizations and leave neighbors without the services they need.”

AliKhan immediately granted a temporary restraining order Jan. 28, blocking the spending pause. The next day, Jan. 29, OMB rescinded the memo and later told the court the case was moot because the pause was no longer in effect. Money is flowing to nonprofits.

The pause was to look at spending before sending out payments. The spending cuts are still happening. This case only addresses the pause. Ending the pause should have been the end of the case, but it continued.

On Tuesday, AliKhan issued a preliminary injunction blocking the pause.

“Plaintiffs painted a stark picture of nationwide panic in the wake of the funding freeze. Nonprofits and organizations across the country were left adrift as they scrambled to make sense of the memorandum and its effects,” AliKhan wrote in her dramatic decision. “Entire funding portals were taken offline with no rhyme or reason, generating significant confusion and fear. Many organizations had to resort to desperate measures just to stay operational. The pause placed critical programs for children, the elderly, and everyone in between in serious jeopardy. Because the public’s interest in not having trillions of dollars arbitrarily frozen cannot be overstated, Plaintiffs have more than met their burden here.”

The decision from AliKhan was predictable as he often sides outside of common sense and in alignment with the political views she favors.

During AliKhan’s 2023 confirmation hearing, numerous religious groups signed a joint letter to Congress in opposition to her nomination, detailing her activism. She was approved in a tie-breaking vote by former Vice President Kamala Harris.

Keep reading

Federal Judge Sides with Woke Agenda, Blocks Trump’s Orders to End Taxpayer-Funded DEI Scam

In yet another case of activist judges undermining the will of the American people, a Biden-appointed federal judge has issued a sweeping injunction blocking President Donald Trump’s executive orders aimed at ending taxpayer-funded diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) schemes.

U.S. District Judge Adam Abelson, a left-wing operative placed on the bench by Joe Biden, ruled on Friday that the Trump administration cannot immediately revoke federal contracts and grants that promote divisive DEI initiatives, claiming such actions may violate “free speech rights,” according to far-left AP.

In other words, the judge believes that forcing taxpayers to fund radical leftist ideology is a constitutional right.

On his first day back in office, President Trump moved swiftly to dismantle the race-obsessed, Marxist bureaucracy embedded within the federal government by issuing executive orders that directed agencies to eliminate DEI-related funding and contracts.

He further required federal contractors to certify that they do not promote discriminatory DEI policies, a move that sent leftist institutions into a panic.

The City of Baltimore, along with a coalition of liberal academia and DEI profiteers, rushed to sue the Trump administration, desperately trying to keep the federal gravy train flowing.

The lawsuit whines that Trump’s orders will cause “irreparable harm” to DEI bureaucrats and the institutions that rely on billions in taxpayer funding to push radical race and gender policies.

Keep reading

Federal Judge Temporarily Blocks Trump’s Firing of CIA Officers Involved in DEI Programs

Judge Anthony J. Trenga, an appointee of George W. Bush, has temporarily blocked President Trump’s move to clean house in the intelligence community—specifically targeting agents involved in Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives that have compromised national security in favor of leftist ideology.

This ruling comes after a group of anonymous intelligence officers, who had been temporarily reassigned to roles implementing controversial Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility (DEIA) programs, have filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) and the CIA.

The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, names ODNI, the CIA, and their respective heads—Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and CIA Director John Ratcliffe—as defendants.

The plaintiffs, identified as “John Does 1-6” and “Jane Does 1-5,” claim they are being unfairly targeted simply for their prior assignments to DEIA programs.

However, conservatives see it differently. President Trump’s Executive Order 14151, signed on his first day back in office, decisively dismantled DEIA offices across the federal government, branding them “illegal and immoral.”

The order made it clear that radical left-wing hiring practices, which prioritized identity over merit, had no place in a serious government, especially in agencies tasked with protecting American national security.

According to the lawsuit, the plaintiffs claim they were placed on administrative leave “without cause” and fear imminent termination.

Keep reading

Crazed Biden Judge Signals She May Block Trump’s EO on Transgender Troops, Says the Assertion That Only Two Genders Exists is “Not Biologically Correct”

A federal judge on Tuesday signaled she would side with a group of transgender soldiers who sued to block President Trump’s executive order on transgender troops.

Judge Ana Reyes, a Biden appointee, grilled DOJ lawyers on Tuesday and said that Trump’s executive order asserting there are only two genders is “not biologically correct.”

“With the DOD policy expected to be finalized over the coming week, Reyes said she would hold off on issuing an order but had largely made up her mind about the legality of the order, at one point remarking that “smarter people on the D.C. Circuit would have to tell me I’m wrong” about the policy. She added that the central premise of the executive order — that only two genders exist — is “not biologically correct.”” – ABC News reported.

Last month President Trump signed the “Restoring America’s Fighting Force” executive order and the “Prioritizing Military Excellence and Readiness” executive orders, which direct every element of the U.S. military to “operate free from any preference based on race or sex” and root out gender insanity and made up pronoun usage, respectively.

This order directs the Secretary of Defense to ensure that military service is “reserved for those mentally and physically fit for duty” and “promptly issue directives for DoD to end invented and identification-based pronoun usage.” The standards for our military troops are deemed “inconsistent with the medical, surgical, and mental health constraints on individuals with gender dysphoria.”

“It is the policy of the United States Government to establish high standards for troop readiness, lethality, cohesion, honesty, humility, uniformity, and integrity,” the order states. “This policy is inconsistent with the medical, surgical, and mental health constraints on individuals with gender dysphoria. This policy is also inconsistent with shifting pronoun usage or use of pronouns that inaccurately reflect an individual’s sex.”

Judge Reyes also grilled lawyers on the use of pronouns and gender ideology.

“If you were in a foxhole, you wouldn’t care about these individuals’ gender ideology, right?” the judge asked DOJ lawyers.

The judge did not issue a ruling on Tuesday.

Keep reading

Wife of Federal Judge Who Threw a Wrench in Trump’s Agenda Has a Curious Connection to USAID: Report

The wife of a federal judge who blocked President Donald Trump’s decision to shutter government websites that promoted gender ideology founded an organization that received funds from the United States Agency for International Development, an agency that the administration is currently targeting.

U.S. District Judge John Bates issued a decision on Tuesday ordering federal health agencies to restore pages about transgenderism they had pulled after a Trump executive order about “gender ideology extremism.”

He reasoned that the websites were removed without any publicly provided rationale or opportunity for recourse, an apparent violation of the law, according to Politico.

“No backend remedy could ameliorate the inability to provide all required care during an appointment time to a patient who cannot return in the future,” Bates wrote.

The ruling came as left-wing organizations and elected officials challenged Trump administration efforts to address wasteful and fraudulent projects in government.

After the ruling, however, Shore News Network noted that Bates’ wife, Carol Rhees, started a nonprofit called Hope for Children in Ethiopia.

The organization has received funds from USAID, one of the agencies facing scrutiny under the government efficiency effort.

Keep reading

Federal Judge Didn’t Even Read Final Complaint Before Enjoining Trump

New York federal Judge Paul Engelmayer’s temporary restraining order blocking the Trump administration’s access to Treasury documents happened so fast it’s unlikely he carefully read the case filings. The filings from the 19 suing Democrat state attorneys generals were so voluminous, and Engelmayer’s order was entered so quickly, that it could not possibly have been the product of reasoned judicial analysis and reflection.  The stench is so bad, questions of possible corruption must be answered.

Engelmayer is the first judge ever to grant a temporary restraining order (TRO) against the president of the United States that also forbids a cabinet secretary from accessing his own records without giving these parties an opportunity to respond. He offered zero analysis of his constitutional authority to make such a radical ruling, the federal rule governing injunctions and temporary restraining orders, or why he is enabling fraud and grift by blocking access to records that show who got government money and for what.

The next court hearing scheduled in this case is Feb. 14. I wrote an earlier article focused on some of the procedural defects in the plaintiff states’ request for a TRO and Engelmayer’s order keeping Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency, headed by Elon Musk, from investigating federal payments. New information shows the situation was much worse than suggested by my earlier observation that “Engelmayer’s Order was a very rushed, put-up job.”

As I wrote earlier, “After Engelmayer got the States’ Complaint and related filings on Friday night, he wasted no time in ruling on the application for a TRO. In a feat of seeming super-human efficiency and concentration, he must somehow have reviewed and diligently analyzed the 80+ pages of the Complaint and the Memorandum of Law, carefully read at least some of the 100+ court opinions, articles and other sources cited by the Plaintiffs, and concentrated on it all very carefully before entering his unprecedented Order granting the request for a TRO.”

The situation is actually worse than that. Here’s the timeline of the court filings. All these initial documents were filed by New York Special Trial Counsel Colleen Faherty.

Keep reading

Judge Who Blocked Trump’s Spending Freeze Calls Him a ‘Tyrant,’ Decries Racism as a ‘White People Problem,’ and Advocates Packing His Court with ‘People of Color’ Because It’s ‘Too White’ in Resurfaced 2021 Footage

In a striking example of judicial activism, newly unearthed footage from 2021 exposes U.S. District Judge John McConnell for what he truly is—an Obama-appointed activist masquerading as a judge.

Judge McConnell, who recently blocked President Trump’s initiative to freeze federal spending and audaciously accused Trump of defying his court order, is exposed in a resurfaced video as he lambasts the Trump administration and pushes for identity-based sentencing and the creation of a race-obsessed committee within his court in his attempt to inject his progressive ideology into the legal system.

The interview was conducted in January 2021 and has been published on Helen Cooke’s YouTube channel.

In the footage, uncovered by Natalie Winters, co-host of Steve Bannon’s War Room, McConnell asserts that “racism is a white people problem” and advocates for special sentencing considerations based on gender identity and race.

McConnell: When you’re sentencing someone, you have to take a moment and realize that this middle-class, white, male, privileged person needs to understand the human being that comes before us. That may be a woman, may be Black, may be transgender, may be poor, may be rich, may be whatever—may have experiences that are not yours. And you have to walk in their shoes and understand that the law applies to them where they are. And then you have to apply the law accordingly.”

Keep reading

Justice for Sale: How Corrupt Politicians Undermine the Legal System

Imagine a world where the scales of justice aren’t balanced by truth or fairness, but by money and power. A world where the rich and connected can buy their way out of trouble, while the rest of us are left to face the full weight of the law. This isn’t the plot of a dystopian novel—it’s the reality we’re living in. The legal system, the very foundation of a functioning society, is being eroded by judicial bribery, crony judges, and legal loopholes. And the ones responsible? Corrupt politicians who’ve turned justice into a commodity.

Let’s pull back the curtain and see how this works.

The Price of a Favor: Judicial Bribery

When you think of bribery, you might picture a shady backroom deal with cash stuffed into an envelope. But judicial bribery is often far more subtle—and far more damaging. It’s not just about buying a verdict; it’s about buying influence.

Politicians and wealthy elites have long understood that controlling the courts means controlling the outcome. They funnel money into campaigns for judges who will rule in their favor. They fund “impartial” judicial organizations that just so happen to push their agendas. And when that’s not enough, they find ways to pressure judges directly—through threats, promises of future positions, or even outright bribes.

The result? A justice system that’s no longer blind. Instead, it’s rigged to favor those with deep pockets and political connections.

Crony Judges: The Puppets of Power

Not all judges are corrupt, but it only takes a few bad apples to spoil the bunch. Enter the crony judges—handpicked not for their integrity or legal expertise, but for their loyalty to the politicians who put them in power.

These judges aren’t interested in upholding the law. They’re interested in protecting their patrons. They’ll dismiss cases against powerful figures, no matter how strong the evidence. Likewise, they’ll issue rulings that benefit their political allies, even if it means twisting the law beyond recognition. And they’ll do it all while wearing a robe and sitting on a bench, giving their actions an air of legitimacy.

The problem isn’t just that these judges exist—it’s that they’re often shielded from accountability. Judicial oversight is weak, and complaints about misconduct are frequently ignored. It’s a system designed to protect its own, leaving the rest of us to suffer the consequences.

Keep reading

MORE LEGAL INSANITY: Obama Judge Blocks Trump Administration from Sending Venezuelan Migrants to Guantanamo Bay

Yet another judge has decided to legislate from the bench to stop President Trump from carrying out his agenda.

As Fox News reported, a federal court in New Mexico issued a temporary restraining order barring the Trump administration from shipping three Venezuelan immigrants held in the state to Guantánamo Bay as part of Trump’s efforts to rid America of illegal aliens.

The migrants’ lawyers accused the administration of racial profiling, stating in a legal filing that the men “fit the profile of those the administration has prioritized for detention in Guantánamo, i.e., Venezuelan men detained in the El Paso area with (false) charges of connections with the Tren de Aragua gang.”

The attorneys also went on to whine about “the mere uncertainty the government has created surrounding the availability of legal process and counsel access is sufficient to authorize the modest injunction.”

Attorney Jessica Vosburgh, who represents the three individuals, revealed District Court Judge Kenneth J. Gonzales granted the temporary restraining order.

Readers will not be surprised to find out that Gonzales was nominated to the bench by Barack Obama.

Keep reading