What the Constitution Suggests about Nationwide Injunctions
Apparently this 6-3 decision allows a Federal Judge to issue nationwide injunctions but only within the scope of the plaintiffs “standing.” Class action comes to mind.
I have yet to hear a valid argument for a federal judge to issue orders to the President through a nationwide injunction. But this decision appears to allow some nationwide injunctions, although it rightfully restricts this malfeasance.
Nationwide injunctions by a district judge seems to bestow too much power in a federal judge, since they are appointed by Congress, it concentrates too much power in the legislative branch.
Hand it to the far left as they attempt to dim our hearing the sacred voice within.
They lost the Executive and Legislative branches to republicans, but that didn’t stop their pursuit for centralizing power. They expanded lawfare against Trump using federal judges to hinder executive decisions.
When unelected officials (Federal Judges) restrain elected officials (President) it negates the principle on which our nation was founded: One of the greatest safeguards given us in the Constitution is that only those officials who must regularly stand before the citizenry, in elections, are allowed to assess fines and taxes or issue regulations (laws) that bind citizens and negate their inalienable right to ownership of property.
This lawfare through injunctions is similar to the administrative (deep) state’s control exercised by bureaucrats through regulations. My objection in both instances is concentration of power in an unelected (not accountable to the citizens) government entity that confiscates private property, and individual right to choose, through injunction, taxation and regulation, is wrong.
If the executive branch is committing an unconstitutional act, then it is up to the legislative branch to clarify law and the judicial branch to render injunctions and opinions that stop such abuse. The expansion of powers through lawfare is wrong and I appreciate SCOTIS clarifying that point.
Jay Davidson is founder and CEO of a commercial bank. He is a student of the Austrian School of Economics and a dedicated capitalist. He believes there is a direct connection between individual right and responsibility, our Constitution, capitalism, and the intent of our Creator.