Connect with us

The Dictatorship

JD Vance throws down an extremely high-risk gauntlet for America’s judges

Published

on

JD Vance throws down an extremely high-risk gauntlet for America’s judges

The term “constitutional crisis” gets overused. But Vice President JD Vance seems to be inviting one.

On Sunday, the vice president’s comments on social media raised alarm bells across the legal profession. Apparently in response to multiple judges temporarily halting some of President Donald Trump’s executive actionsVance posted: “If a judge tried to tell a general how to conduct a military operation, that would be illegal. 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.”

Wrong. Wrong. And wrong.

Judges are allowed to check the executive branch when it exceeds its authority. In fact, that’s exactly what they are supposed to do.

Courts have ruled against illegal military actions, such as striking down military commissions at Guantanamo Bay after 9/11. Courts have also ruled a prosecutor violated the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment when engaging in selective prosecution. And, in the same way, courts serve as a check on presidents when they exceed their power. The Supreme Court famously struck down President Harry S. Truman’s efforts to seize steel mills during the Korean War on the grounds that his conduct conflicted with the Labor Management Relations Act.

Judges are allowed to check the executive branch when it exceeds its authority. In fact, that’s exactly what they are supposed to do.

Vance’s statement contradicts more than 200 years of Supreme Court precedent. Every first-year law student reads the case of Marbury v. Madisonthe 1803 decision that confirmed the power of the courts to conduct judicial review. In our system of three co-equal branches of government, the role of the courts is to interpret the law. Courts strike down statutes passed by legislatures when they violate the Constitution. Courts also declare executive action illegal when it violates the law.

To date, judges have ruled against a number of Trump’s executive orders, at least temporarily, based on findings that plaintiffs have shown a substantial likelihood to succeed on the merits. The lawsuits include challenges to Trump’s efforts to end birthright citizenshipimpound appropriated funds, shutter USAID, slash the federal workforce and permit Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency to access Treasury Department payment systems. Courts have entered temporary restraining orders to preserve the status quo while the cases work their way through the legal system.

As a graduate of Yale Law School, Vance certainly knows that courts have the power to strike down executive actions that exceed legal limits. But he seems to be planting seeds to undermine public confidence in the courts.

And he is not alone. Posts popped up in an online chorus rebuking the courts that ruled against Trump. Vance quoted another post from conservative Harvard Law professor Adrian Vermeule, who wrote, “Judicial interference with legitimate acts of state, especially the internal functioning of a co-equal branch, is a violation of the separation of powers.”

Both Vance and Vermeule used the word “legitimate” to describe the president’s use of executive power, suggesting that it is the courts that are overstepping their boundaries. While people are free to criticize judges and to appeal their decisions, these attacks imply an abuse of power rather than a difference of opinion.

Musk joined in on the attack, Postg a baseless accusation against the judge who ruled against the DOGE. “A corrupt judge protecting corruption. He needs to be impeached NOW!” In his post, Musk quoted another X user who referred to the judge as “unelected” and lacking a “mandate by the people.” Of course, under our Constitution all federal judges are unelected and are instead appointed by the president for life, for the very reason that they will be insulated from politics.

Whatever electoral mandate Trump enjoys does not give him license to violate the law.

Whatever electoral mandate Trump enjoys does not give him license to violate the law. He certainly has the authority to implement his policy agenda, but he must do so in a way that conforms to the federal statutes and the Constitution. Many of his executive orders seem to deliberately defy the law, perhaps in an effort to invite lawsuits that in turn push the limits of his power. Perhaps he hopes that ultimately a friendly Supreme Court will agree to expand the authority of the executive.

In 2021, while campaigning for the Senate in Ohio, Vance said he would “fire every single midlevel bureaucrat, every civil servant in the administrative state, replace them with our people.” Advocating for replacing federal employees with political loyalists is troubling enough, but Vance went on to advocate for defying court orders as well: “When the courts stop you, stand before the country, like Andrew Jackson did,and say, ‘The chief justice has made his ruling. Now let him enforce it.’” The Jackson quote, which may be a myth, relates to a Supreme Court decision that the Cherokees were an independent nation and entitled to live on their land. It makes the point that courts, unlike the executive branch, have no armies or police officers to carry out their rulings. Instead, they depend on the willingness of the other branches of government to obey their decisions.

The defiance of a court order by the executive branch would indeed be a constitutional crisis. Eventually, the only realistic remedy in that situation would be impeachment, and in recent history, we have seen that members of a president’s own party have been reluctant to vote against him. And if the legislative branch failed to come to the rescue of the courts, then the executive branch would become something the framers of our Constitution would find unrecognizable.

We would have not just a constitutional crisis but a constitutional tragedy.

Barbara McQuade

Barbara McQuade is an BLN columnist and NBC News and BLN legal analyst. She is the author of “Attack from Within: How Disinformation is Sabotaging America,”as well as a professor at the University of Michigan Law School and a former U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan.

Read More

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The Dictatorship

Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer is leaving Trump’s Cabinet

Published

on

Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer is leaving Trump’s Cabinet

WASHINGTON (AP) — Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer is out of President Donald Trump’s Cabinet, the White House said Monday, after multiple allegations of abusing her position’s power, including having an affair with a subordinate and drinking alcohol on the job.

Chavez-DeRemer is the third Trump Cabinet member to leave her post after Trump fired his embattled Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem in March and ousted Attorney General Pam Bondi earlier this month.

In a statement posted on social media, Chavez-DeRemer praised Trump and wrote, “I am proud that we made significant progress in advancing President Trump’s mission to bridge the gap between business and labor and always put the American worker first.”

Unlike other recent Cabinet departures, Chavez-DeRemer’s exit was announced by a White House aide, not by the president on his social media account.

“Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer will be leaving the Administration to take a position in the private sector,” White House communications director Steven Cheung said on the social media site X. “She has done a phenomenal job in her role by protecting American workers, enacting fair labor practices, and helping Americans gain additional skills to improve their lives.”

He said Keith Sonderling, the current deputy labor secretary, would become acting labor secretary in her place. The news outlet NOTUS was the first to report Chavez-DeRemer’s resignation.

Labor chief, family members faced multiple allegations

Chavez-DeRemer’s departure follows reports that began surfacing in January that she was under a series of investigations.

A New York Times report last Wednesday revealed that the Labor Department’s inspector general was reviewing material showing Chavez-DeRemer and her top aides and family members routinely sent personal messages and requests to young staff members.

Chavez-DeRemer’s husband and father exchanged text messages with young female staff members, according to the newspaper. Some of the staffers were instructed by the secretary and her former deputy chief of staff to “pay attention” to her family, people familiar with the investigation told the Times.

Those messages were uncovered as part of a broader investigation of Chavez-DeRemer’s leadership that began after the New York Post reported in January that a complaint filed with the Labor Department’s inspector general accused Chavez-DeRemer of a relationship with the subordinate.

She also faced allegations that she drank alcohol on the job and that she tasked aides to plan official trips for primarily personal reasons.

Late Monday, on her personal X account, Chavez-DeRemer posted, “The allegations against me, my family, and my team have been peddled by high-ranked deep state actors who have been coordinating with the one-sided news media and continue to undermine President Trump’s mission.”

Both the White House and the Labor Department initially said the reports of wrongdoing were baseless. But the official denials got less full-throated as more allegations emerged — and when Chavez-DeRemer might be out of a job became something of an open question in Washington.

At least four Labor Department officials have already been forced from their jobs as the investigation progressed, including Chavez-DeRemer’s former chief of staff and deputy chief of staff, as well as a member of her security detail, with whom she was accused of having the affair, The New York Times reported.

“I think the secretary demonstrated a lot of wisdom in resigning,” Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., said Monday after her departure was made public.

She enjoyed union support — rare for a Republican

Confirmed to Trump’s Cabinet on a 67-32 vote in March 2025, Chavez-DeRemer is a former House GOP lawmaker who had represented a swing district in Oregon. She enjoyed unusual support from unions as a Republican but lost reelection in November 2024.

In her single term in Congress, Chavez-DeRemer backed legislation that would make it easier to unionize on a federal level, as well as a separate bill aimed at protecting Social Security benefits for public-sector employees.

Some prominent labor unions, including the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, backed Chavez-DeRemer, who is a daughter of a Teamster, for Labor Secretary. Trump’s decision to pick her was viewed by some political observers as a way to appeal to voters who are members of or affiliated with labor organizations.

But other powerful labor leaders were skeptical when she was tapped for the job, unconvinced that Chavez-DeRemer would pursue a union-friendly agenda as a part of the incoming GOP administration. In her Senate confirmation hearing, some senators questioned whether she would be able to uphold that reputation in an administration that fired thousands of federal employees.

She was a key figure in Trump’s deregulatory push

Aside from reports of wrongdoing in recent months, Chavez-DeRemer had been one of Trump’s more lower-profile Cabinet picks, but took key steps to advance the administration’s deregulatory agenda during her tenure.

For instance, the Labor Department last year moved to rewrite or repeal more than 60 workplace regulations it saw as obsolete. The rollbacks included minimum wage requirements for home health care workers and people with disabilities, and rules governing exposure to harmful substances and safety procedures at mines. The effort drew condemnation from union leaders and workplace safety experts.

The proposed changes also included eliminating a requirement that employers provide adequate lighting for construction sites and seat belts for agriculture workers in most employer-provided transportation.

During Chavez-DeRemer’s tenure, the Trump administration canceled millions of dollars in international grants that a Labor Department division administered to combat child labor and slave labor around the worldending their work that had helped reduce the number of child laborers worldwide by 78 million over the last two decades.

In her statement Monday, Chavez-DeRemer said, “While my time serving in the Administration comes to a conclusion, it doesn’t mean I will stop fighting for American workers.”

The Labor Department has a broad mandate as it relates to the U.S. workforce, including reporting the U.S. unemployment rate, regulating workplace health and safety standards, investigating minimum wage, child labor and overtime pay disputes, and applying laws on union organizing and unlawful terminations.

___

Associated Press writers Steven Sloan and Will Weissert in Washington and Cathy Bussewitz in New York contributed to this report.

Read More

Continue Reading

The Dictatorship

The Latest: US Navy seizure of Iranian ship casts doubt on fresh talks in Pakistan

Published

on

The Latest: US Navy seizure of Iranian ship casts doubt on fresh talks in Pakistan

MORE

Read More

Continue Reading

The Dictatorship

GOP’s Mills faces expulsion effort launched by one of his Republican colleagues

Published

on

GOP’s Mills faces expulsion effort launched by one of his Republican colleagues

Republican Rep. Cory Mills of Florida was already dealing with multiple, overlapping scandals when a judge issued a restraining order against the congressman last fall after one of his ex-girlfriends accused him of threatening and harassing her. Soon after, Mills found that even some of his allies were keeping him at arm’s length.

In December, Rep. Byron Donalds, a fellow Florida Republican, conceded“The allegations against Cory, to me, are very troubling. I’m concerned about him. I hope he gets his stuff worked out and cleaned up, but it has to go through ethics [the Ethics Committee]. And he has to, you know, basically do that hard work to clear his name, if it can be cleared.”

Donalds, a leading gubernatorial candidate in Florida, had previously suggested he saw Mills as a possible running mate, making the comments that much more potent.

It didn’t do Mills any favors when The Washington Post published a new report a few days ago highlighting body camera footage that showed police officers in Washington, D.C., who were prepared to arrest the GOP congressman after a woman accused him of assault last year, before a lieutenant ultimately ordered them not to when she changed her account. (Mills refused to comment, except to say that the woman’s initial claim was “patently false.”)

Two days after the Post’s report reached the public, one of Mills’ Republican colleagues announced an effort to kick the congressman out of office. NBC News reported:

Rep. Nancy Mace, R-S.C., introduced a resolution Monday to expel Rep. Cory Mills, R-Fla., from Congress over accusations that include sexual misconduct.

Mills is being investigated by the House Ethics Committee in connection with allegations of ‘sexual misconduct and/or dating violence’ and campaign finance violations. He has denied any wrongdoing.

“The swamp has protected Cory Mills for far too long and we are done letting it slide,” Mace said in a statement. “We tried to censure him and strip him from his committee assignments. Both parties blocked it, but we are not backing down.”

By way of social media, the Floridian expressed confidence that he’d prevail if Mace’s resolution reached the floor, encouraging the South Carolinian to “call the vote forward.”

Time will tell whether the expulsion vote actually happens, but in the meantime, after NOTUS reported that Mills intends to respond with an expulsion resolution of his own targeting Mace, the congresswoman wrote online“Cory Mills lied about his military service, has been accused of beating women, has a restraining order against him, and has allegedly been stuffing his own pockets with federal contracts while sitting in Congress. As a survivor, I will always stand up and right the wrongs of others. He is only coming after me because he knows he’s next.”

It’s not often that Americans see members of Congress launch dueling efforts to kick each other out of office, but this is proving to be an unusually awful term.

Indeed, amid growing GOP anxieties about the upcoming midterm elections, there’s fresh evidence that the House Republican conference is both divided and unraveling.

Steve Benen is a producer for “The Rachel Maddow Show,” the editor of MaddowBlog and an MS NOW political contributor. He’s also the bestselling author of “Ministry of Truth: Democracy, Reality, and the Republicans’ War on the Recent Past.”

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending