Supreme Court Justice Jackson Says Trump's Criticisms of Judges Are ‘Attacks on Our Democracy'
Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson said on May 1 that President Donald Trump's criticism of some judges seemed 'designed to intimidate the judiciary.'
Jackson did not specifically mention Trump during her speech but spoke about 'the elephant in the room.'
'The attacks are not random. They seem designed to intimidate those of us who serve in this critical capacity,' Jackson said at the First Circuit Judicial Conference in Rio Grande, Puerto Rico, on May 1.
'The threats and harassment are attacks on our democracy, on our system of government. And they ultimately risk undermining our Constitution and the rule of law.'
Jackson took her seat on the high court in June 2022 after being nominated by President Joe Biden.
Several federal judges have said the Trump administration has not complied with various court orders on federal spending, the firing of government employees, and foreign aid. The administration denies that it disobeyed the orders and has criticized judges who have halted its policy actions, in some cases calling for the judges to be impeached.
Related Stories
5/1/2025
4/8/2025
Jackson's comments followed a public statement by Chief Justice John Roberts on March 18 after Trump called for the impeachment of U.S. District Judge James Boasberg, who was confirmed in 2011 after being nominated by President Barack Obama.
Boasberg
'For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision,' Roberts
Later that month, Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.) introduced a resolution in the House to impeach Boasberg.
'We cannot stand by while activist judges who incorrectly believe they have more authority than the duly-elected President of the United States, impose their own political agenda on the American people,' Biggs said in a
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court is
Trump's Executive Order 14160, signed on Jan. 20,
In the court filings, the Department of Justice did not ask the Supreme Court to rule on the constitutionality of the executive order itself, although it acknowledged that the birthright citizenship question raises 'important constitutional questions with major ramifications for securing the border.'
Instead, the department made what it called a 'modest' request to contain the coverage of court injunctions within the parties in the lawsuits.
'While the parties litigate weighty questions, the Court should 'restrict the scope' of multiple preliminary injunctions that 'purport to cover every person ... in the country,' limiting those injunctions to parties actually within the courts' power,' it wrote.
Nationwide injunctions, also known as non-party or universal injunctions, set policy for the entire country. Such injunctions issued by judges have become controversial in recent years as they have become increasingly common.
On April 9, the House
Wielding national injunctions in that way 'undermines the system of government,' the bill's sponsor, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), said on the House floor on April 8.
Sam Dorman contributed to this report.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
27 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Judge says Columbia University activist facing deportation should be freed
Supporters of Mahmoud Khalil rally outside the federal courthouse in Newark on March 28, 2025. (Reena Rose Sibayan for New Jersey Monitor) A federal judge ruled Wednesday that a Columbia University activist detained for partaking in pro-Palestinian protests cannot be held by the federal government over allegations that his presence in the United States undermines the nation's foreign policy interests. U.S. District Judge Michael Farbiarz issued the order Wednesday but gave federal prosecutors until Friday at 9:30 a.m. to ask the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals to step in. It's unclear if the activist, Mahmoud Khalil, will be released Friday if the government does indeed appeal. 'This is the news we've been waiting over three months for. Mahmoud must be released immediately and safely returned home to New York to be with me and our newborn baby, Deen,' Noor Abdalla, Khalil's wife, said in a statement from the American Civil Liberties Union of New York. 'True justice would mean Mahmoud was never taken away from us in the first place, that no Palestinian father, from New York to Gaza, would have to endure the painful separation of prison walls like Mahmoud has.' If it stands, Farbiarz's ruling, which comes on the heels of a previous decision that said the government's push to deport Khalil was likely unconstitutional, could deal a blow to the Trump administration's efforts to deport dissidents. Khalil was arrested by immigration authorities in March and has been held in Louisiana since. He's fighting two cases to fend off his deportation — one in Louisiana and one in New Jersey, because he was being transferred through Elizabeth Detention Center when his attorneys first filed a petition for his release. U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio claimed Khalil supports terrorist group Hamas and called his presence in the country a national security risk. Rubio has cited a rarely used provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 to justify Khalil's deportation. Farbiarz noted in his Wednesday ruling that the government could argue that Khalil would have been detained anyway because he inaccurately filled out his lawful permanent resident application, which can be a basis for removal under very rare circumstances. But that argument won't work, he said. 'Lawful permanent residents are virtually never detained pending removal for the sort of alleged omission' Khalil is accused of, the judge wrote in the 14-page filing. Khalil, whose wife and newborn son are American citizens, has not been charged with any crime. He was among the first university students who were picked up by immigration authorities targeting pro-Palestine activists. Some students who were detained under similar circumstances have been released but still face deportation. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
27 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump's DOGE efficiency agency says it slashes $25B in federal spending as rehiring begins
The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) announced on Wednesday it has decreased its annual non-defense federal obligations by an additional ~1.9% since last month. As of June 8th, annual non-defense federal obligations are down 22.4%, or ~$25B, as compared to 2024, DOGE announced on X. The cut marks an additional ~1.9% reduction from last month's figures, which were announced on May 8. Doge's Greatest Hits: Look Back At The Department's Most High-profile Cuts During Trump's First 100 Days "Cash outlays will follow as obligations come due," DOGE wrote in the post. "Our initiative to reduce wasteful spend, consistent with the DOGE Cost Efficiency Executive Order, continues to bear fruit." On May 14, DOGE announced the current year's non-defense federal obligations were down 20.5% as compared to 2024. Read On The Fox News App The announcement came minutes before Fox News Digital was first to report the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is rehiring more than 450 previously fired employees belonging to multiple divisions within the agency's Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The rehired CDC employees came from the National Center for HIV, Viral Hepatitis, STD, and Tuberculosis Prevention; the National Center for Environmental Health; the Immediate Office of the Director, and the Global Health Center, according to an HHS official familiar with the matter. HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. told CBS News in April some personnel who were cut shouldn't have been. Doge Ends 108 'Wasteful' Contracts, Including For An 'Executive Transformational Leadership Training Program' "We're reinstating them, and that was always the plan," Kennedy said. "Part of the—at DOGE, we talked about this from the beginning, is we're going to do 80% cuts, but 20% of those are going to have to be reinstated, because we'll make mistakes." In addition to the HHS rehires, the Internal Revenue Service, Food and Drug Administration, State Department, and Department of Housing and Urban Development started rehiring employees let go during DOGE cuts, the Washington Post reported. Doge Takes A Chainsaw To Federal Spending With 7 Major Victories This Week: 'Got To Be Done' Another roadblock this week was a ruling from U.S. District Judge Denise Cote of the Southern District of New York, who ruled to restrict the agency's access to federal databases. The Trump administration previously said DOGE could not work effectively with the limitations, noting DOGE needed to access Social Security information to root out fraud. Fox News Digital's Alec Schemmel and Danielle Wallace contributed to this article source: Trump's DOGE efficiency agency says it slashes $25B in federal spending as rehiring begins
Yahoo
27 minutes ago
- Yahoo
RIDE disability rights case settlement disrupts R.I. House final budget preparations
The Rhode Island Department of Education's Westminster Street entrance in Providence is shown. (Photo by Alexander Castro/Rhode Island Current) The Rhode Island Department of Education (RIDE) may soon have to pay $1.86 million to settle a class action lawsuit that claimed the state had failed to provide special education services for students with disabilities between the ages of 21 and 22. That news presented a last minute complication for the Rhode Island House Committee on Finance's fiscal 2026 state budget preparations Tuesday. 'We literally worked to, like, 15 minutes ago to do this budget,' House Speaker K. Joseph Shekarchi told reporters at a press briefing on the $14.33 billion spending plan that began after 9 p.m. Tuesday night. He cited a figure of nearly $2 million needed because of an adverse ruling against RIDE, but details were unavailable at the time. The case of K.L. v. Rhode Island Board of Education is close to a settlement, Victor Morente, a RIDE spokesperson, confirmed via email on Wednesday morning. He said officials were still drafting a 'tentative' agreement that is still subject to approval from Rhode Island District Court as well as the Council on Elementary and Secondary Education, RIDE's governing body. The settlement comes nearly seven years after a federal appeals court ruled that RIDE shortchanged students with disabilities in the 2010s. The class action suit began in 2014 with a single plaintiff: A Warwick parent filing on behalf of their daughter, a Rhode Island student on the autism spectrum who also had ADHD and severe anxiety. But the student, named K.L. in the lawsuit, aged out of state-sponsored educational accommodations at age 21, before she could finish her high school diploma — something she should have been eligible to receive until age 22 under federal disability laws, her attorneys argued. K.L. had an individualized education program (IEP), which tailors learning for students with disabilities and helps to address their needs. These support programs are the roadmaps to ensure local schools education agencies supply students with a free and 'appropriate' public education per mandates derived from the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Students 'who were over 21 and under 22 as of February 10, 2012, or turned 21 before July 1, 2019,' Morente wrote, would be eligible for relief under the draft settlement if they did not receive their high school diploma and aged out of support services under previous Rhode Island law. When the case came before the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island, it ruled in favor of RIDE by determining that 'public education' under the federal law would not include adult learning for students with disabilities over age 21. The class members then took their case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit in Boston, which vacated the lower court's judgment. We literally worked to, like, 15 minutes ago to do this budget. – House Speaker K. Joseph Shekarchi during a press briefing Tuesday Senior Judge Kermit Victor Lipez wrote in the first circuit's October 2018 majority opinion that the lower court had relied on too 'narrow' a definition of public education. 'At present, if a 21-year-old student in Rhode Island does not complete high school for a non-disability related reason — say, because she was previously incarcerated — the state will provide her the services needed to attain a secondary-school level of academic proficiency and a route to obtain a high-school level degree,' Lipez wrote. 'However, if the same 21-year-old does not complete high school due to a qualifying disability, the state currently does not offer her ability-appropriate services to attain the same level of educational achievement.' That imbalance violated disability law, the First Circuit decided, and the court boomeranged the case back to the District of Rhode Island for the two parties to determine remedies for class members. Sonja Deyoe, the attorney representing class members since the suit's inception, wrote in an email Wednesday that the First Circuit ruling was pivotal for disability rights in Rhode Island. 'The law previously had limited that education until the age of 21,' Deyoe wrote. 'This was a major change for disabled individuals in Rhode Island.' The First Circuit's ruling predates current RIDE leadership, and in August 2019, then-new education Commissioner Angélica Infante-Green issued a memo instructing how state education officials should comply with the ruling. 'It is now clear that if they have not already done so, school districts … must comply with the recent First Circuit decision and should make services available and give careful consideration to the cost of prospective compliance,' Infante-Green wrote, adding that it was still unclear 'how appropriate remedies will be provided to those eligible class members.' Deyoe echoed that sentiment, saying that determining damages under the lawsuit 'did span a very long time,' with both parties trying to avoid forcing a legal decision as to whether individual class members could receive relief for damages. 'Whether individualized compensatory education damages could be awarded to the individual class members was always disputed by the RI Department of Education,' Deyoe said. The settlement also needs to be approved by the members of the class, Deyoe said. The currently draft spares class members from having to undergo individual trials to determine compensational education benefits. 'We are very hopeful the settlement will be approved, but the class members always have the opportunity to object and the Court may approve the settlement only with certain changes,' Deyoe wrote. 'We cannot predict that yet…While all of this took a long time to achieve, we do believe this is a good resolution for the class members.' The funding source to resolve the settlement was not immediately available from RIDE or the House on Wednesday. But Shekarchi detailed in a statement over email that the sudden news had cost the House some time on Tuesday. 'After the budget is posted for consideration by the House Finance Committee 48 hours in advance, there are always a number of policy decisions, options and calculations that must be finalized,' wrote the Speaker. 'The notification of a $1.86 million additional expense on the morning of the budget adoption certainly complicated the final process.' SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
