U.S. District Court Judges and America’s Legal System

One of the most important concepts set forth in the United State Constitution is that of the establishment of three branches of government – Legislative, Executive, Judicial – and the idea of “separation of powers” among these three branches. This idea is germane to the proper functioning of America’s representative form of government and rule of law.

However, when those elected (or unelected) to positions of trust and power do not adhere to the rule of law as set forth in our Constitution and in our various federal statutes, we end up with the current federal government we have today, which not only includes daily examples of incredible fraud, waste, and abuse of our tax dollars but more and more examples of serious abuse and misuse of our judicial system. This is a BIG problem for all Americans.

This past week the American public learned about the arrest of two federal district court judges for “helping” two illegal immigrants evade law enforcement. The first incident involved ICE agents arresting former district court judge Joel Cano and his wife in New Mexico on April 24 for “hiding” an alleged Venezuelan gang member in their guest house. It seems reasonable to assume that Cano understood that he was doing something unlawful by allowing this illegal immigrant to live on his property (and also shooting his daughter’s guns for fun) because Cano resigned his judgeship about a month before his arrest.

Just as we Americans were digesting this news, another district court judge in Milwaukee, Wisconsin was arrested on April 25 for actively helping an illegal immigrant in her own courtroom evade arrest by ICE agents by sneaking him out of the courtroom through a special juror door. Fortunately, ICE was able to arrest the man just outside the courthouse.

So, what in the world was Judge Hannah Dugan thinking? Dugan was an experienced judge, who had once been a law school professor. How does someone who has sworn to uphold the law suddenly decide they can break the law? I find her actions somewhat baffling because there was no real “upside” for Dugan in making this seemingly snap decision. 

Her actions will not only have an impact on her future career but have become one more example of why Americans no longer believe our judicial system is an honorable institution.

During Joe Biden’s presidency, he nominated an extraordinary number of potential district court judges, most of whom the U.S. Senate ended up confirming and appointing. I remember thinking at the time that something potentially “not good” was going on, but I had not imagined what we are seeing today with the Democrats “judge shopping” to set in motion even more obstructive lawsuits against President Trump, his Executive Orders, and various federal government agencies.

Article III of the U.S. Constitution sets forth the qualifications to be nominated and confirmed as a U.S. District Court Judge. The nominee must be a U.S. citizen at least 18 years of age, a resident and member of the bar in the state the judgeship is in, and “a person of good moral character.” The nominee must also possess the required legal expertise and abilities.

The process involves the U.S. President in submitting a list of nominees to the Senate Judiciary Committee, who will then conduct hearings to review the nominee’s background and qualifications. The Senate Judiciary Committee will also query the nominee about their “judicial philosophy.” The Committee then issues a report to the full Senate with their recommendations (confirm or not confirm). The Senate then votes on each nominee, and the confirmation only requires a simple majority. A confirmed nominee will then serve as a District Court Judge for a renewable eight-year term.

The qualifications I enumerated above are all well and good, but they certainly do not assure that a nominee has the best interests of the United States or our legal system at heart, and that is why the Senate Judiciary Committee, if they do their job, holds hearings to better get to know the nominee to determine if he or she will do an honorable job if confirmed.

There was a time in our nation’s history where anyone who was a U.S. citizen was “presumed” to have America’s best interests at heart, but I think that ship sailed a long time ago due to serious philosophical and ideologue differences between Democrats and Republicans. Personally, I do not believe any American judge should allow their personal political views to affect their interpretation of city, county, state, or federal law. A judge’s job is “to apply the law” as fairly and evenly as possible. We are not seeing this in the lawfare that President Trump and his federal agencies are facing today.

So, what can the Trump Administration do to try to bring the U.S. District Court system back to what it was originally created by Congress to do? I believe the District Court system serves a legitimate purpose in our country, but the types of cases to be adjudicated in the District Court system need to be better defined by Congress. 

It makes no sense that a local district court judge should have the power to rule and/or issue an injunction on a case involving the federal Executive branch. Allowing this to happen effectively “neuters” the power of the Presidency, which, of course, is exactly what the Left wing of the current Democrat Party wants to happen.

The Trump Administration – specifically Attorney General Pam Bondi – is already taking actions to “fight back” against gross abuses of lawfare, but I believe this issue needs the intervention of Congress, and the sooner the better. The role of district court judges and the scope of their rulings need to be clarified, and preferably codified, to stop the practice of “judge shopping.” If Congress is not willing to take this matter up, then the U.S. Supreme Court needs to do so because our legal system cannot handle the number of district court judge “rulings” on clearly federal matters, such as those affecting immigration, that are occurring.

After 250 years, it is high time that there is a serious review of America’s legal system. Not only does the district court system need to be reviewed, but there also needs to be a review of the many district attorneys who seem to be either under the influence of George Soros’ Open Society money or Trump Derangement Syndrome. If we don’t have honest and impartial district attorneys, we certainly cannot expect unbiased trials or legal adjudications.

Support Canada Free Press