California judge’s nakedly political ruling against Pentagon border funding is a great opportunity for Trump

Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

Over the weekend, we observed an annual memorial for those who sacrificed to protect our freedoms. Did they make the ultimate sacrifice for us to be ruled by a judicial oligarchy? Or so that we can preserve our constitutional republic, where judges decide individual cases and political decisions are left to the elected branches of government? In light of the latest “ruling” from a California judge, President Trump has an opportunity to answer that question once and for all.

On Friday, District Judge Haywood Gilliam of the Northern District of California issued a preliminary injunction against the Pentagon transferring $1 billion in defense funding for the construction of fencing in Yuma and El Paso. This judge has as much power to issue such an injunction over military and national border policy as I do to dictate where he sends his daughter to college, but the other branches of government refuse to remind these judges of “their impotence,” as Scalia predicted. Instead of announcing that judges have no power to grant standing over questions of military spending, the president merely responded by saying he will file an expedited appeal, thereby legitimizing this toothless order.

Another activist Obama appointed judge has just ruled against us on a section of the Southern Wall that is already under construction. This is a ruling against Border Security and in favor of crime, drugs and human trafficking. We are asking for an expedited appeal!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 25, 2019

It is quite evident that the time has come for the executive branch to assert its power over these injunctions, as Alexander Hamilton understood it. The Supreme Court has “neither Force nor Will, but merely judgment; and must ultimately depend upon the aid of the executive arm” and the States, “even for the efficacy of its judgments,” predicted Hamilton in Federalist 78. Yet, here we are today, where even lower court rulings over our border are treated as gospel by the other branches of government.

This case would be the perfect time for the president to draw that line, for a number of reasons: --->

Read the rest from Daniel Horowitz HERE.

If you like what you see, please "Like" us on Facebook either here or here. Please follow us on Twitter here.