The left now have a new ally in their fight against Donald Trump. After the American people rendered congressional Democrats largely irrelevant in the last election, liberal activists have turned to the justice system to help advance their agenda.
They have some high-ranking judges willing to do their bidding.
These judges have already struck down both of Trump’s attempts to enact a ban on travel from terror-compromised countries. Now, they’re setting their sights on Trump’s domestic agenda.
Trump’s promise to cut off federal funding for sanctuary cities is the latest plan to be halted by a liberal judge — and the ruling is no coincidence. A little background research into the judge shows connections to many far-left groups and causes. If there was ever evidence of an activist judge legislating from the bench, this is it.
Read about the ruling and the judge behind the decision on the next page:
Anthony Rickenbach what????
Treason
Sorry excuse for a man
B******t he needs to be removed fro. The bench mow
Suicide possibly
As always leftists are working against their countries best interests
Shame on these judges.
Current credo of progressives: “We want what we want when we want it, and no g*dd*m law or Constitutional provision should stand in our way.” That means that, of course, highly biased judges should neither recuse themselves nor keep their rulings within either law or precedent, and hypocrisy in the right cause is honorable.
Consider rulings against the travel restrictions based, born in what the orders say but, rather, what was said about them. Had that been the ruling precedent, the ACA (“Obama care”) would have been “toast” because: 1) the mandate would have been negated since, prior to the Supreme Court ruling, Democrats insisted the penalty wasn’t a tax, but the court ruled that it was only via Congress’s power to tax that it could be maintained; and, 2) the list of essential coverages would not have survived, since the President himself insisted that you could keep your existing plan if you liked it, but that was clearly not the case. A great many people had opted for major medical coverage only- INEXPENSIVE coverage that protected them from the rare medical catastrophe but left them to pay for the smaller stuff (vaccinations, physicals, the occasional urgent care visit) on their own. That option made a lot of sense for millions, but became illegal, since mere major medical coverage didn’t cover so much of the “smaller stuff.”
Lock him up for breaking USA laws
Get rid of them and disbar