正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

加载此视频时出现问题。这可能是由于临时网络问题，或视频可能不可用。

🏛️JUDICIAL INSURRECTION Solicitor General John Sauer explains the judicial insurrection, noting that courts have issued forty nationwide injunctions against the Trump administration so far. He explains why these injunctions are an abuse of the judicial power. "Universal injunctions exceed the judicial power granted in Article III which exist only... show more

Tyler O'Neil

19,929 subscribers

70,942 次观看 • 1 年前 •via X (Twitter)

健康养生新闻政治教育

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

11 条评论

Jim Needham 的头像

Jim Needham1 年前

Arguments supporting Birthright Citizenship are largely based upon myths and distortions.

Slingshot News 的头像

Slingshot News1 年前

🚨😱BREAKING EXCLUSIVE: Federal Police Assault Native Americans, Threaten To KILL Their ‘Spirit Horses’ On Trail Of Truth Pilgrimage To D.C. What do YOU think of this assault on the Muwekma Ohlone? Let us know in the comments, and follow @NewsSlingshot for more! ⬇️

Stephen Cline Sr 的头像

Stephen Cline Sr1 年前

Why do judges have a problem with the plain language in our Constitution?

Wes Dean, A Singer & Songwriter. 的头像

Wes Dean, A Singer & Songwriter.1 年前

Suspending habeas corpus gets closer everyday.

Kay Ivey 的头像

Kay Ivey1 年前

Exactly! This is illegal!

Shell Davis 的头像

Shell Davis1 年前

🙏

Mike Jones 的头像

Mike Jones1 年前

Agreed 👍

Elaine Menyhert 的头像

Elaine Menyhert1 年前

We do not have a republic, we have an oligarchy of authoritarian elitist unelected judge/gods. And thats the way the elites like it.

ScrollofTruth 的头像

ScrollofTruth1 年前

Bookmark this for the future - I want Democrats to remember this when they and their media puppets have a complete meltdown in the future when conservatives do this to a Democrat president. Because remember this rule

Theodore 的头像

Theodore1 年前

这些政治流氓什么都明白，就是玩邪恶的法律超现战，破坏7千万人民的意愿。把美国拖入撒旦的共产主义泥潭。便于邪魔们食肉美国乃至世界人民。

Dogpoop 的头像

Dogpoop1 年前

Truly

相关视频

.Tom Fitton: Five federal judicial districts have issued thirty-five of the forty nationwide injunctions trying to curtail the powers of the president. That’s not how our courts are supposed to work.

.Tom Fitton: Five federal judicial districts have issued thirty-five of the forty nationwide injunctions trying to curtail the powers of the president. That’s not how our courts are supposed to work.

Judicial Watch ⚖️

21,741 次观看 • 1 年前

When our founders created the judicial branch, they intended it to settle disputes, not to curtail nationwide executive policy. We need to restore the system of checks and balances and ensure the credibility of our judicial system by prohibiting universal injunctions.

When our founders created the judicial branch, they intended it to settle disputes, not to curtail nationwide executive policy. We need to restore the system of checks and balances and ensure the credibility of our judicial system by prohibiting universal injunctions.

Senator Katie Boyd Britt

87,574 次观看 • 1 年前

BREAKING: Speaker Mike Johnson says judicial impeachments unlikely, says the House is doing everything they can to stop judicial overreach. Johnson said he wants the Senate to take up legislation limiting single district judges' power to issue national injunctions.

BREAKING: Speaker Mike Johnson says judicial impeachments unlikely, says the House is doing everything they can to stop judicial overreach. Johnson said he wants the Senate to take up legislation limiting single district judges' power to issue national injunctions.

Eric Daugherty

773,221 次观看 • 1 年前

The Left is trying to frame today’s nationwide injunctions decision as a new expansion of the executive’s power and a restriction of the judiciary’s power. In reality, the Trump v. CASA decision helps restore the balance of power between the branches, reining in the “imperial judiciary,” as Justice Barrett described it. Nationwide injunctions are a relatively new practice in our nation’s history. As Hans von Spakovsky explained in a previous Heritage Explains podcast, “In the entire history of the U.S., there’s only been a little over 180 nationwide injunctions issued. Almost all of them have been in the last 20 years.”

The Left is trying to frame today’s nationwide injunctions decision as a new expansion of the executive’s power and a restriction of the judiciary’s power. In reality, the Trump v. CASA decision helps restore the balance of power between the branches, reining in the “imperial judiciary,” as Justice Barrett described it. Nationwide injunctions are a relatively new practice in our nation’s history. As Hans von Spakovsky explained in a previous Heritage Explains podcast, “In the entire history of the U.S., there’s only been a little over 180 nationwide injunctions issued. Almost all of them have been in the last 20 years.”

Heritage Foundation

10,688 次观看 • 1 年前

In four months, the Trump administration has seen more nationwide injunctions than the entirety of the 20th century, and more nationwide injunctions than Presidents George W. Bush, Barack Obama and Joe Biden combined. This is not normal. This is not justice. This is an orchestrated campaign of judicial obstruction. As Chair of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Federal Courts, Oversight, Agency Action and Federal Rights, I was proud to lead a discussion on ways to rein in these abusive nationwide injunctions.

In four months, the Trump administration has seen more nationwide injunctions than the entirety of the 20th century, and more nationwide injunctions than Presidents George W. Bush, Barack Obama and Joe Biden combined. This is not normal. This is not justice. This is an orchestrated campaign of judicial obstruction. As Chair of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Federal Courts, Oversight, Agency Action and Federal Rights, I was proud to lead a discussion on ways to rein in these abusive nationwide injunctions.

Senator Ted Cruz

379,648 次观看 • 1 年前

🚨WATCH: I blast the activist judges who are attempting to derail the Trump administration by issuing nationwide injunctions.🚨 Nationwide injunctions are an abuse of power. They represent the judiciary acting as policy decision-makers, and it is incumbent upon the Judiciary Committee and this body to rein in this abuse of power from unelected, radical judges who are trying to overturn the election because they disagree with the voters' decision.

🚨WATCH: I blast the activist judges who are attempting to derail the Trump administration by issuing nationwide injunctions.🚨 Nationwide injunctions are an abuse of power. They represent the judiciary acting as policy decision-makers, and it is incumbent upon the Judiciary Committee and this body to rein in this abuse of power from unelected, radical judges who are trying to overturn the election because they disagree with the voters' decision.

Senator Ted Cruz

117,522 次观看 • 1 年前

JOSH HAMMER: The biggest thorn in Trump’s side has been the judicial insurrection. He faced more nationwide injunctions in one term than the first 44 presidents combined. This Supreme Court ruling is the strongest action yet to rein in these activist judges. Josh Hammer

JOSH HAMMER: The biggest thorn in Trump’s side has been the judicial insurrection. He faced more nationwide injunctions in one term than the first 44 presidents combined. This Supreme Court ruling is the strongest action yet to rein in these activist judges. Josh Hammer

Bannon’s WarRoom

11,084 次观看 • 1 年前

🚨🔥JUDICIAL TYRANNY: Katherine Leavitt on activist judges: They are “usurping the executive authority of president." - In February alone, there have been 50 nationwide blocks of the Trump administration's agenda. - In three years under Biden, there were only 13 injunctions. “These judges are trying to have executive powers. Everything this president is doing is within his executive power, and we are prepared to fight back."

🚨🔥JUDICIAL TYRANNY: Katherine Leavitt on activist judges: They are “usurping the executive authority of president." - In February alone, there have been 50 nationwide blocks of the Trump administration's agenda. - In three years under Biden, there were only 13 injunctions. “These judges are trying to have executive powers. Everything this president is doing is within his executive power, and we are prepared to fight back."

Western Lensman

23,393 次观看 • 1 年前

🚨NEW: Newt Gingrich slams partisan judges abusing nationwide injunctions as a “judicial coup d'état,” warning of "677 alternative presidents" overriding President Trump. "92% of the judges who have issued blanket injunctions against the administration have been appointed by Democrats." "A majority of Americans believe no single district judge should be allowed to issue a nationwide injunction. "You don't have this many district judges, issuing this many nationwide injunctions, all coming from the same political ideological background, and just assume it's all random efforts of justice." "This is clearly a judicial coup d'état and a clear effort to stop the scale of change that President Trump represents." "Random single judges shouldn't be micromanaging the president on national security issues. They have no standing. They have no particular knowledge. They haven't been in the room." "They don't know what the consequences of what they are doing are, and they put Americans and the nation at risk when they intervene to become alternative presidents." "You now have potentially 677 alternative presidents and none of them won an election."

🚨NEW: Newt Gingrich slams partisan judges abusing nationwide injunctions as a “judicial coup d'état,” warning of "677 alternative presidents" overriding President Trump. "92% of the judges who have issued blanket injunctions against the administration have been appointed by Democrats." "A majority of Americans believe no single district judge should be allowed to issue a nationwide injunction. "You don't have this many district judges, issuing this many nationwide injunctions, all coming from the same political ideological background, and just assume it's all random efforts of justice." "This is clearly a judicial coup d'état and a clear effort to stop the scale of change that President Trump represents." "Random single judges shouldn't be micromanaging the president on national security issues. They have no standing. They have no particular knowledge. They haven't been in the room." "They don't know what the consequences of what they are doing are, and they put Americans and the nation at risk when they intervene to become alternative presidents." "You now have potentially 677 alternative presidents and none of them won an election."

KanekoaTheGreat

114,918 次观看 • 1 年前

Official Hearing: Federal Judges are violating the US Constitution with universal injunctions against Donald Trump’s orders “There is clearly a potential constitutional crisis involving the judicial branch's effort to fully override the legislative and executive branches. 15 district judges effectively seize control of various executive branch duties in the first 6 weeks of the current presidency through nationwide injunctions. This is potentially a judicial coup d'etat. It clearly violates the constitution and more than 200 years of American history.” “President Thomas Jefferson's agenda: President Jefferson concluded that impeaching the judges would take too much time. He and the Congress simply abolished the courts in which they served via the Judiciary Act of 1802. This is a constitutional balance of power. The legislative and executive branches can reshape the judiciary branch. It is a useful reminder in considering the current situation unelected lower court judges have been steadily grabbing power for years.”

Official Hearing: Federal Judges are violating the US Constitution with universal injunctions against Donald Trump’s orders “There is clearly a potential constitutional crisis involving the judicial branch's effort to fully override the legislative and executive branches. 15 district judges effectively seize control of various executive branch duties in the first 6 weeks of the current presidency through nationwide injunctions. This is potentially a judicial coup d'etat. It clearly violates the constitution and more than 200 years of American history.” “President Thomas Jefferson's agenda: President Jefferson concluded that impeaching the judges would take too much time. He and the Congress simply abolished the courts in which they served via the Judiciary Act of 1802. This is a constitutional balance of power. The legislative and executive branches can reshape the judiciary branch. It is a useful reminder in considering the current situation unelected lower court judges have been steadily grabbing power for years.”

Wall Street Apes

134,535 次观看 • 1 年前

A Federal court blocked Trump’s tariffs. Judicial coup is trending again and of course the GOP does absolutely nothing America has been SO RIGGED by Democrats “There are nearly 700 federal district court judges across the country. Barack Obama and Joe Biden held the White House for 12 of the last 16 years. They appointed 72% of the federal district court judges. Those are left wing federal district court judges. — Those left wing robed radicals are routinely using nationwide restraining orders against the Executive Office of the United States. - The President, for example, Barack Obama only faced 12 nationwide injunctions during his eight years in office - Joe Biden had 14 injunctions in 4 years - But Donald Trump in his first 60 days, actually, the first Trump term saw 64 judicial injunctions against his agenda And the left's lawfare against Trump's second term is off to a blistering start with more than 120 lawsuits that have been filed against the administration and 15 nationwide injunctions against his orders just in the last 30 days. So the obvious tactic of the left is to cripple the Trump administration. They can't do it with legislation, can't do it in other ways. So they're going to try to prevent you from getting what you voted for by using activist judges. The Supreme Court alone can rein this in. The Supreme Court alone. I worried about Justice Roberts. I'm worried about Amy. I'm worried if we have Supreme Court judges that aren't under pressure in Washington to move to the left, let's be aware that the only tactic they've got now is judicial activism.“

A Federal court blocked Trump’s tariffs. Judicial coup is trending again and of course the GOP does absolutely nothing America has been SO RIGGED by Democrats “There are nearly 700 federal district court judges across the country. Barack Obama and Joe Biden held the White House for 12 of the last 16 years. They appointed 72% of the federal district court judges. Those are left wing federal district court judges. — Those left wing robed radicals are routinely using nationwide restraining orders against the Executive Office of the United States. - The President, for example, Barack Obama only faced 12 nationwide injunctions during his eight years in office - Joe Biden had 14 injunctions in 4 years - But Donald Trump in his first 60 days, actually, the first Trump term saw 64 judicial injunctions against his agenda And the left's lawfare against Trump's second term is off to a blistering start with more than 120 lawsuits that have been filed against the administration and 15 nationwide injunctions against his orders just in the last 30 days. So the obvious tactic of the left is to cripple the Trump administration. They can't do it with legislation, can't do it in other ways. So they're going to try to prevent you from getting what you voted for by using activist judges. The Supreme Court alone can rein this in. The Supreme Court alone. I worried about Justice Roberts. I'm worried about Amy. I'm worried if we have Supreme Court judges that aren't under pressure in Washington to move to the left, let's be aware that the only tactic they've got now is judicial activism.“

Wall Street Apes

29,661 次观看 • 1 年前

The Supreme Court on Friday limited the use of nationwide injunctions, reining in federal judges' ability to issue sweeping orders that have in recent years stymied implementation of policies from Republican and Democratic presidential administrations alike. In a widely anticipated decision stemming from President Trump's executive order seeking to end birthright citizenship, the high court said that universal orders likely exceed the equitable authority that Congress has granted to the federal courts. Justice Amy Coney Barrett authored the majority opinion for the 6-3 court, with the liberal justices in dissent. CBS News' Jan Crawford explains what to know about the ruling.

The Supreme Court on Friday limited the use of nationwide injunctions, reining in federal judges' ability to issue sweeping orders that have in recent years stymied implementation of policies from Republican and Democratic presidential administrations alike. In a widely anticipated decision stemming from President Trump's executive order seeking to end birthright citizenship, the high court said that universal orders likely exceed the equitable authority that Congress has granted to the federal courts. Justice Amy Coney Barrett authored the majority opinion for the 6-3 court, with the liberal justices in dissent. CBS News' Jan Crawford explains what to know about the ruling.

CBS News

23,587 次观看 • 1 年前

That’s when Attorney General Pam Bondi took the stage to drive the message home. She went scorched earth as she reacted to the Supreme Court’s historic decision. “Judges have tried to seize the executive branch’s power. NO longer.” As the nation’s top law enforcement officer, Bondi delivered what was essentially a scorched-earth response to the Court’s ruling that shut down the use of nationwide injunctions by lower-court judges. “Americans are finally getting what they voted for.” She issued a blunt warning to the judiciary: “Two words to the judges: no longer.” She spelled out exactly what that means moving forward: “No longer will we have rogue judges striking down President Trump’s policies across the entire nation. No longer.” Bondi pointed to the Supreme Court’s clear finding in the 6–3 opinion: “Today in the 6-3 opinion, Barrett correctly holds that the district court lacks authority to enter nationwide or universal injunctions.” She highlighted how sweeping these injunctions had become: “These lawless injunctions gave relief to everyone in the world instead of the parties before the court.” She continued, “As the Supreme Court held today, they turned district courts into the imperial judiciary. Activist liberal judges have used these injunctions to block virtually ALL of President Trump’s policies.” Detailing just how concentrated the problem was, she explained, “94 districts and 35 out of the 40 opinions with nationwide injunctions came from five liberal districts in this country. No longer.” Bondi closed with a final, emphatic line: “These injunctions have blocked our policies from tariffs to military readiness to immigration to foreign affairs, fraud, abuse and many other issues.” And her last words left no doubt about the administration’s stance: “The judges have tried to seize the executive branch’s power and they cannot do that. No longer.”

That’s when Attorney General Pam Bondi took the stage to drive the message home. She went scorched earth as she reacted to the Supreme Court’s historic decision. “Judges have tried to seize the executive branch’s power. NO longer.” As the nation’s top law enforcement officer, Bondi delivered what was essentially a scorched-earth response to the Court’s ruling that shut down the use of nationwide injunctions by lower-court judges. “Americans are finally getting what they voted for.” She issued a blunt warning to the judiciary: “Two words to the judges: no longer.” She spelled out exactly what that means moving forward: “No longer will we have rogue judges striking down President Trump’s policies across the entire nation. No longer.” Bondi pointed to the Supreme Court’s clear finding in the 6–3 opinion: “Today in the 6-3 opinion, Barrett correctly holds that the district court lacks authority to enter nationwide or universal injunctions.” She highlighted how sweeping these injunctions had become: “These lawless injunctions gave relief to everyone in the world instead of the parties before the court.” She continued, “As the Supreme Court held today, they turned district courts into the imperial judiciary. Activist liberal judges have used these injunctions to block virtually ALL of President Trump’s policies.” Detailing just how concentrated the problem was, she explained, “94 districts and 35 out of the 40 opinions with nationwide injunctions came from five liberal districts in this country. No longer.” Bondi closed with a final, emphatic line: “These injunctions have blocked our policies from tariffs to military readiness to immigration to foreign affairs, fraud, abuse and many other issues.” And her last words left no doubt about the administration’s stance: “The judges have tried to seize the executive branch’s power and they cannot do that. No longer.”

Vigilant Fox 🦊

169,218 次观看 • 1 年前

Judge Boasberg’s Trump Derangement Syndrome and blatant abuse of judicial power have made one thing clear: he is unfit for the bench. He needs to be impeached by the House and I look forward to his trial in the Senate.

Judge Boasberg’s Trump Derangement Syndrome and blatant abuse of judicial power have made one thing clear: he is unfit for the bench. He needs to be impeached by the House and I look forward to his trial in the Senate.

Eric Schmitt

39,151 次观看 • 2 个月前