現在法官們是不是在瑟瑟發抖?萬斯和馬斯克要對付他們了?

Vance and Musk question the authority of the courts as Trump’s agenda faces legal pushback

Top Trump administration officials are openly questioning the judiciary’s authority to serve as a check on executive power as the new president’s sweeping agenda faces growing pushback from the courts.

Over the past 24 hours, officials ranging from billionaire Elon Musk to Vice President JD Vance have not only criticized a federal judge’s decision early Saturday that blocks Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency from accessing Treasury Department records, but have also attacked the legitimacy of judicial oversight, a fundamental pillar of American democracy, which is based on the separation of powers.

“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,” Vance wrote on X on Sunday morning.

That post came hours after Musk said overnight that the judge who ruled against him should be impeached.

“A corrupt judge protecting corruption. He needs to be impeached NOW!” said Musk, who has been tasked by President Donald Trump with rooting out waste across the federal government.

所有跟帖: 

nobody is above the law, including judge -odamae- 給 odamae 發送悄悄話 (0 bytes) () 02/10/2025 postreply 06:25:33

some of these judges overreached -odamae- 給 odamae 發送悄悄話 (0 bytes) () 02/10/2025 postreply 06:35:56

新皇帝登基,任何意見不同者都會瑟瑟發抖 -redpanda- 給 redpanda 發送悄悄話 (0 bytes) () 02/10/2025 postreply 06:27:03

真的有皇帝了。美國三權分立休也 -gccard- 給 gccard 發送悄悄話 (0 bytes) () 02/10/2025 postreply 06:31:42

太棒了 -FollowNature- 給 FollowNature 發送悄悄話 FollowNature 的博客首頁 (0 bytes) () 02/10/2025 postreply 06:51:00

濫用法律權力迫害別人的同樣應該被法律製裁 -Sandcity2000- 給 Sandcity2000 發送悄悄話 (0 bytes) () 02/10/2025 postreply 06:53:44

美國也要定於一尊了?三權分立說垮就垮啊,民主製度真的很脆弱 -爬山看秋葉- 給 爬山看秋葉 發送悄悄話 (0 bytes) () 02/10/2025 postreply 06:54:50

不讓judge幹涉才是維護三權分立 -凊荷- 給 凊荷 發送悄悄話 凊荷 的博客首頁 (82 bytes) () 02/10/2025 postreply 07:22:55

Vance法學位還是有用的,Cotton也是律師,說話都扛扛的 -abzy10- 給 abzy10 發送悄悄話 (0 bytes) () 02/10/2025 postreply 07:19:00

三權分立也不應該允許一個小破法官就能block總統令;隻有最高法院才應該有這種權限 -過來人2- 給 過來人2 發送悄悄話 (0 bytes) () 02/10/2025 postreply 07:22:32

三權分立就是法官不能幹涉行政 -凊荷- 給 凊荷 發送悄悄話 凊荷 的博客首頁 (39 bytes) () 02/10/2025 postreply 07:23:55

本來check and balance是指司法係統可以裁定行政命令違法因而block,但是應該隻有最高法院才有資格裁定 -過來人2- 給 過來人2 發送悄悄話 (140 bytes) () 02/10/2025 postreply 07:28:12

美國是海洋體係,法官的權力都是從以前案例來的,包括最高法院的釋憲權 -cn_abcd- 給 cn_abcd 發送悄悄話 cn_abcd 的博客首頁 (0 bytes) () 02/10/2025 postreply 07:37:35

三權分立本意就是國會和法院對政府實施監督,政府做得不合法的地方法院實施幹預 -天青水藍- 給 天青水藍 發送悄悄話 天青水藍 的博客首頁 (0 bytes) () 02/10/2025 postreply 09:22:46

最高法院處理不了那麽多案子,所以聯邦地方法院一審,不服的上訴聯邦巡回上訴法院再不服才能上訴最高法。沒任何國家最高法是一審 -天青水藍- 給 天青水藍 發送悄悄話 天青水藍 的博客首頁 (0 bytes) () 02/10/2025 postreply 07:51:05

從程序公正來說,如果最高法是一審法院,那所有判決都是最終裁決,任何一方都無權上訴,判決如果有錯誤根本沒有糾正的機會 -天青水藍- 給 天青水藍 發送悄悄話 天青水藍 的博客首頁 (0 bytes) () 02/10/2025 postreply 07:53:55

這不是主要的原因,最高法院隻有9個法官,根本沒有這個能力去審判這麽多案件 -cn_abcd- 給 cn_abcd 發送悄悄話 cn_abcd 的博客首頁 (0 bytes) () 02/10/2025 postreply 08:00:50

請您先登陸,再發跟帖!