Quotes
The Government maintains that there is no justification to order the provision of additional information, and that doing so would be inappropriate,
the Justice Department said in a court filing responding to U.S. District Judge James Boasberg's ruling that it t provide him with more information
For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision. The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose.”
In a statement later Tuesday, John Roberts, the chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, saidIf, however, the Court nevertheless orders the Government to provide additional details, the Court should do so through an in camera and ex parte declaration, in order to protect sensitive information bearing on foreign relations,
the filing saidTwo of those planes departed U.S. territory and airspace before 7:25 PM EDT,
Cerna said, referencing the time the judge's written ruling was entered on the court docketThe third plane departed after that time, but all individuals on that third plane had Title 8 final removal orders and thus were not removed solely on the basis of the Proclamation at issue,
he addedHere, the executive has unilaterally deemed that funds Congress appropriated for foreign aid will not be spent,
Ali said
An American President is not a king – not even an 'elected' one – and his power to remove federal officers and honest civil servants like plaintiff is not absolute,
U.S. District Court Judge Beryl Howell said earlier this month in a court order reinstating a member of the National Labor Relations Board.jpg)
That's his constitutional duty. And that includes weeding out waste, fraud and abuse. That’s what he's doing with Elon Musk and with DOGE,
said Davis, a former Supreme Court clerk for Justice Neil Gorsuch
Judges aren't presidents."
Mike Lee, R-Utah, a frequent critic of the courts, shared Ogles' post and wrote
The courts are not supposed to rule on political issues,
Jacobson saidWe’ve seen it since the beginning of the administration, on every single executive order, certainly on immigration enforcement actions, is to go forum shopping, they look for a federal district judge that they know is going to be sympathetic to try to block an order or action from the administration,
Aguilar saidIt’s incredible that basically a rogue judge is putting our national security at risk when they block this enforcement action without any legal basis,
Alfonso Aguilar, a former chief of the U.S. Office of Citizenship and the director of Hispanic engagement at the American Principles Project, told Fox News DigitalIf you send a clear message to these individuals that if you're coming here to commit crime or engage in terrorism, we will detain you. We will remove you immediately,
he saidNo question they're going to push the limits of our country's immigration laws until a judge, probably the justices of the United States Supreme Court, stops them,
Rahmani said
CBP questioned Dr. Alawieh and determined that her true intentions in the United States could not be determined,
a DOJ prosecutor wroteIt's creative, to put it mildly, maybe just blatantly unlawful,
Neama Rahmani, a former California-based federal prosecutor, told the Washington Examiner of Trump’s recent immigration enforcement movesConflating 'pro-terrorist,' 'anti-Semitic,' and 'anti-American' activity is an incredibly dangerous step to take,
he saidThis has been a habit of the Trump administration to overstate the danger of the people they've arrested,
he said
Where it gets scary and this is what was so frightening about the interview is when he starts saying ‘I don’t care what the courts say – we have the right to do it anyway’ and he wouldn’t even commit to following even a Supreme Court order’ – that’s why we are so obviously in a constitutional crisis,
Brettschneider said
We’re not stopping. I don’t care what the judges think. I don’t care what the left thinks. We’re coming,
Homan told Lawrence Jones of Fox News