(America Political Report)—Vice President J.D. Vance has recently intensified his criticism of the judiciary, asserting that federal judges are overstepping their authority by impeding President Trump’s executive actions. Following a federal court’s temporary injunction against the Department of Government Efficiency’s (DOGE) access to sensitive Treasury Department records, Vance contended that judges should not have the power to control legitimate executive functions.
“If a judge tried to tell a general how to conduct a military operation, that would be illegal,” Vance said in a post on X. “If a judge tried to command the attorney general in how to use her discretion as a prosecutor, that’s also illegal. Judges aren’t allowed to control the executive’s legitimate power.”
https://twitter.com/jdvance/status/1888607143030391287
This sentiment aligns with broader concerns within the Trump administration regarding judicial interference. Deputy White House Chief of Staff Stephen Miller labeled the recent court ruling as an undemocratic move by unelected bureaucrats, reflecting a growing frustration with legal challenges to the administration’s initiatives.
“These frivolous lawsuits are akin to children throwing pasta at the wall to see if it will stick. … This activist judge has resorted to locking the Senate-confirmed Secretary of Treasury out of his role. It’s absurd and judicial overreach,” White House spokesperson Harrison Fields said in a statement. ““Grandstanding government efficiency speaks volumes about those who’d rather delay much-needed change with legal shenanigans than work with the Trump Administration of ridding the government of waste, fraud, and abuse.”
The administration is currently navigating several legal obstacles, particularly in its efforts to restructure federal agencies and implement significant workforce reductions. Democrats have expressed alarm, likening the situation to a constitutional crisis reminiscent of Watergate. Senator Chris Murphy emphasized the necessity for public and congressional intervention to uphold the balance of power.
Despite these challenges, Republicans continue to back the president’s authority to execute his agenda, even in the face of judicial opposition. The tension between the executive branch and the judiciary underscores a pivotal debate over the separation of powers within the U.S. government.
Article generated from legacy media reports.
Yes, the U.S. Constitution does not set the “inferior courts” (i.e. inferior to the Supreme Court) equal to the Executive authority. They are there to handle the load that the Supreme Court does not have time for or does not deem necessary for it to hear.
Three equal branches of government means only the Supreme Court or the Legislature, through the power of the purse string can legitimately check the Executive authority. We expect the President to abide those mechanisms.
The Attorney General needs to set the rule straight with intent to ignore the illegitimate intrusive rulings, and then the Supreme Court can weigh in if it deems necessary.
Can these judges be indicted, and imprisoned? If so, go to town on them. Judges in their courtrooms think they’re above the law.
IF it’s illegal, ignore them and step on them like insects and put them in prisons without trial….you know…..like they did to us.
All Executive Branch employees serve at the pleasure of the president. If they don’t like the buyout, he should just fire them. If some corrupt judge thinks he can alter the constitutional plenary power of the executive over the executive branch, he or she needs to be impeached and fired. This idiot judge thinks he can interfere with the running of the Executive Branch seems never to have heard of Separation of Powers: It’s NONE of his business how the exec branch runs THEIR business.