Federal judge said prosecutors picked to replace Alina Habba repeated error of bypassing congressional approval

Three prosecutors installed by Donald Trump’s administration to lead the New Jersey attorney general’s office after the president’s former personal lawyer was disqualified from the role in December were also illegally appointed, a federal judge has ruled.

Pam Bondi, the US attorney general, handpicked the three to replace Alina Habba, who resigned after a succession of district and appeals court rulings that she was serving illegally because she never received Senate confirmation.

On Monday, federal judge Matthew Brann said Bondi’s actions repeated the same error of bypassing congressional approval for the appointments. He stopped short of ordering their removal pending a government appeal – but, in a blistering 130-page ruling, said overreach by the executive branch could jeopardise all of its cases before him.

  • FilesForWallabies@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    4 months ago

    We’re not completely screwed until they replace enough judges. The ones in place are able to slow if not fully prevent many of these abuses, primarily ones where the government has to operate through the judicial branch.

      • FilesForWallabies@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        4 months ago

        Oh god, yes. Still, between Habeas petitions, lawsuits against administration hirings and firings, and many others. The litigants are flooding the judiciary and the Supreme Court logistically can’t overrule everything.

          • FilesForWallabies@piefed.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            4 months ago

            As someone inside of this mess, my point is that there are too many legal proceedings in too broad of a range of issues for SCOTUS to be given the opportunity to overturn all of them, barring SCOTUS giving POTUS the explicit power to fully ignore the Constitution and nullifying all state and regional courts and their decisions. Is this impossible? No. However if that doesn’t happen, a rickety frame of rulings and laws supporting the Constitution are likely to still exist in the U.S. when he passes from the mortal coil. The judiciary (SCOTUS and some circuit courts notwithstanding) and the citizens are the only entities who have consistently and successfully stood up to the administration, even if most of those wins have been small.

            We are completely agreed on ICE/DHS.

      • lechekaflan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        I think the Supreme Court was just a means to an end.

        Together with the executive and the legislature, that court served as a third means of what it’s called a system of checks-and-balances which by principle are supposed to limit the powers of either three, and that power is never invested in the person but in the office.

        However, besides they’re holding the position for life, Supreme Court justices are chosen by the president and thus became heavily dependent on party alignment and some personal biases than impartiality.

      • FilesForWallabies@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        Fair. Looking purely at 30k, we were already screwed, and this administration is mostly successful at speed running it. The judiciary is where we have a fighting chance, barring many people getting off their screens (self: guilty) and staying in the streets until we make structural change.*

        *Defined by many different people in many different ways.