Actor Tom Hanks has been snubbed after a West Point event honouring him was cancelled on the same day that President Trump ordered the renaming of the Defense Department to the War Department.
The Department of Defense was known as the Department of War previously, but Trump made the decision to revert the name, noting that the DOD had become "very politically correct or wokey."
The decision to cancel the event honouring Hanks likely comes from Hanks's portrayal of a Trump supporter as a dimwitted racist on Saturday Night Live, which ignited outrage among conservatives around the nation.
The Department of War is going to be a strictly nonpartisan organization and cannot be associated with leftist ideologues who smear half the country as racist idiots for supporting President Trump.
Hanks was slated to be awarded the Sylvanus Thayer Award from the West Point Association of Graduates, given to non-alumni, in recognition of his work with veterans. But clearly, Hanks would rather set himself up as a political figure and attack half the country in a degrading manner.
Retired Army Col. Mark Bieger, the president and CEO of the West Point Association of Graduates, sent an email out announcing the decision to cancel the ceremony for Hanks.
That email read, "This decision allows the Academy to continue its focus on its core mission of preparing cadets to lead, fight, and win as officers in the world’s most lethal force, the United States Army."
The focus on lethality and fighting effectiveness has been the top priority for the Trump administration after years of politicization and woke politics infecting American fighting forces.
The Pentagon has become notoriously political in recent years, and it's long been known that America's military leadership is comprised of charlatans more interested in setting up their post-military careers with the military industrial complex.
Speaking on changing the culture in America's military, Trump explained, "It has to do with winning. We should have won every war. We could have won every war. But we really chose to be very politically correct or wokey and we just fight forever."
He continued by saying, "We just fight to sort of tie,' the commander-in-chief continued. 'We never wanted to win wars. Every one of them we could have won easily with just a couple of little changes. We just didn't fight to win. We didn't lose anything, but we didn't fight to win."
The Trump administration doesn't want to politicize the military with a right-leaning political bias, even as it purges leftist infection. The military is at its best when it is non-partisan and represents the nation with a blindness to political affiliation.
Leftists have been shrieking about Trump politicizing the military, an ironic claim, accusing him of simply replacing leftist ideologues with rightwing ideologues. The reality is that the left has lost after years of domination, and returning to a non-partisan culture feels like being replaced with more of the same.
Trump's changes will ultimately be healthier for America's armed forces, and anyone who has witnessed the rise of racial grievance politics in the armed forces will quickly agree.
The Jeffrey Epstein situation continues to remain interesting with new twists and turns by the week, it seems. That was especially the case this week after House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) raised new questions about President Donald Trump's involvement with Epstein.
According to the Daily Mail, while speaking to reporters about the situation, Speaker Johnson seemed to suggest that Trump once worked as an FBI informant regarding his relationship with the convicted child sex-trafficker.
Johnson made the comments in the halls of Congress this week after a CNN reporter pressed him on why the president continues to call the Epstein situation a Democrat-led "hoax."
Johnson's comments regarding Trump's possible role as an "FBI informant" sparked immediate questions.
What's happening?
The Republican House speaker attempted to explain the president's take on the Epstein situation, which has proven to be a challenge for his administration.
"What Trump is referring to is the hoax that the Democrats are using to try to attack him," Johnson said.
He added, "I’ve talked to him about this many times, many times. He is horrified. It’s been misrepresented. He’s not saying that what Epstein did is a hoax. It’s a terrible, unspeakable evil. He believes that himself."
That's when he dropped the potential bombshell regarding the president's alleged former role as an FBI informant.
"When he first heard the rumor, he kicked him out of Mar-a-Lago. He was an FBI informant to try to take this stuff down," Johnson said.
Ever since the president's Department of Justice concluded that there was no conspiracies behind Epstein's death or some kind of secret "file" filled with the names of celebrities and power players, the president has essentially downplayed the entire situation.
On more than one occasion, Trump has written it off as a "hoax."
"From what I understand, I could check, but from what I understand, thousands of pages of documents have been given. But it's really a Democrat hoax because they're trying to get people to talk about something that's totally irrelevant to the success that we've had as a nation since I've been president," Trump said recently.
The MAGA base hasn't been thrilled with the administration's seeming lack of interest in the matter.
Only time will tell if Johnson accidentally let something slip as far as Trump's possible former role as an FBI informant.
An unprecedented immigration raid at a Hyundai battery plant in Georgia saw the detention of 475 individuals, unveiling a complex legal scenario entangled with the U.S. push for advancements in electric vehicle technology, Fox News reported.
The operation has propelled an intricate probe into labor practices linked with significant American construction projects.
Early this week, a substantial DHS intervention took place at a Hyundai factory under construction near Savannah, Georgia. Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) confirmed the arrest of nearly half a thousand people, primarily hailing from South Korea.
The factory is a crux in the partnership between Hyundai and LG Energy Solution, aimed at bolstering the U.S. capacities in electric vehicle (EV) production. Slated for battery production, this facility has been a beacon of industrial progression, as highlighted by numerous public figures.
Despite the arrests, Hyundai has been quick to clarify its position, stating that the detained individuals were not on its direct payroll but were instead employed by various subcontractors engaged at the site. The company reiterated its commitment to compliance with all applicable laws and workplace safety standards.
Construction activities at the site have been put on hold following the raid. Nevertheless, operations at a nearby existing EV manufacturing campus run by Hyundai remain unaffected, emphasizing the localized nature of the enforcement action.
In May 2022, during a notable visit to South Korea, former President Joe Biden praised the initiative, foreseeing it as a monumental contributor to the U.S. job market with the potential to create over 8,000 jobs. He accentuated the investment of approximately $5.5 billion into the new facility and its paramount role in pioneering advanced automotive technology.
Georgia Governor Brian Kemp has also been a staunch supporter of the project, previously highlighting its substantial impact on the state's economic impetus during a speech in February.
Biden further emphasized, "Our administration is setting ambitious standards to cut pollution in cars and trucks and boost fuel economy standards for those continuing to operate on gasoline."
The raid comes amidst the Trump administration's extensive crackdown on illegal labor practices across various sectors. This strategic focus included a recent intervention at a California cannabis farm where child labor was reportedly utilized, amassing widespread criticism and further examination of labor laws enforcement.
This specific enforcement action at the Hyundai site required a robust collaboration among multiple federal agencies and the Georgia State Patrol to address the complications associated with the case, described by a DHS spokesperson as "complex."
A social media video caught an officer declaring the immediate cessation of construction activities: "We need construction to cease immediately... We need all work to end on the site right now," an enforcement directive that underscores the immediacy and severity of the government's response.
The fallout from this raid stretches beyond the immediate legal implications, hinting at broader questions regarding the recruitment and employment of international labor in major U.S. industrial ventures.
As investigations continue, the focus remains on how such significant projects can balance rapid development needs with strict adherence to national immigration and labor laws, a challenge that might redefine future foreign collaborations in U.S. industries.
The unfolding events will likely influence not only the future of Hyundai's operations in Georgia but also the broader conversation around immigration, labor laws, and international cooperation in American industrial expansion.
During President Donald Trump's first term in the White House, he made massive inroads in the quest for American energy independence -- and dominance. Of course, former President Joe Biden's administration completely ruined that.
However, according to the Daily Caller, President Trump is once again making impressive strides in getting America back to an independent state as far as energy is concerned, and energy policy experts agree that he's winning huge.
Notably, data collected from the Energy Information Administration revealed that the United States hit a new record for domestic oil production over the summer.
The data revealed that the U.S. produced more oil in the month of June than ever before -- even more than any other country on Earth.
Energy policy experts told The Daily Caller that Trump's pro-energy agenda is paying off, and it's bringing the United States much closer to energy independence -- more so than ever before.
Travis Fisher, director of energy and environmental policy studies at the Cato Institute, was especially excited about the news.
"We should celebrate the ‘drill baby drill’ mantra because the record production we’re seeing now is a huge help to consumers," he said.
Fisher added, "In addition to obvious benefits like lower-cost gasoline for drivers, abundant oil production lowers the cost of everything by reducing transportation costs for virtually every product on the market."
The DC added:
American oil production has been on the rise, but several energy experts noted that the thriving and record-setting supply of oil demonstrates the importance of Trump’s American energy dominance agenda.
Trisha Curtis, a macroeconomist with expertise in U.S. shale markets and an economist for the American Energy Institute, also explained the data and how important it is is continue down that path.
She insisted that Trump's energy policies -- and results -- are vital to national security.
“The U.S. is producing 13.6 million barrels per day, more than any nation on earth, ever. The importance of this production to the economy as well as energy security and national security is profound," she said.
Curtis added, "The U.S. is now not only the largest oil and natural gas producer in the world, but it is the largest crude and product exporter in the world, enabling greater U.S. and global energy security. The next two largest producers in the world, Russia and Saudi Arabia, are both producing around 10 million barrels per day by comparison."
It's exciting to know that Trump is bringing this great nation back to a state of energy independence, which we will all benefit from.
It seems like Democrats switching to the Republican Party is a more frequent occurrence in the last several years than it has been in decades, and this week brought another example of it happening.
According to Breitbart, Garfield, New Jersey Mayor Everett E. Garnto, Jr. presumably shocked his supporters and colleagues by announcing his exit from the Dem Party in order to join the other side.
What makes his switch especially notable is the fact that he not only left his party, but immediately endorsed Republican Jack Ciattarelli for governor.
The move undoubtedly tossed a massive wrench in the upcoming election cycle, and will make for a major shift in one Bergen County’s largest municipalities.
Garnto made the announcement during Ciattarelli’s Garfield Rally last week, sending shockwaves through the community and the New Jersey political world.
Michael Casey, the New Jersey State Director for Early Vote Action, announced the bombshell news in an X post.
"Democrat mayor of Garfield NJ has officially SWITCHED parties 🔵->🔴 and ENDORSED Republican Jack Ciatteralli for Governor MAJOR endorsement for @Jack4NJ in a city that has been a longtime Democrat stronghold. Standing room only as hundreds of Garfield residents were in attendance," he wrote.
🚨NEW JERSEY
Democrat mayor of Garfield NJ has officially SWITCHED parties 🔵->🔴 and ENDORSED Republican Jack Ciatteralli for Governor
MAJOR endorsement for @Jack4NJ in a city that has been a longtime Democrat stronghold
Standing room only as hundreds of Garfield residents… pic.twitter.com/NdLhYX76FA
— Michael Casey (@MichaelCasey_) September 4, 2025
Breitbart noted:
Garnto, a retired Garfield police officer who served 29 years on the force and 12 years as president of the local Police Benevolent Association, was elected to the city council in November 2024 as a Democrat. He later became mayor after his colleagues selected him for the position.
While the county has had a Democratic stronghold, Trump won the county by nine points in the 2024 election.
Garnto also admitted that he supported President Trump during the election.
Users across social media weighed in on the news of the party switch.
"Welcome to the family!" one X user wrote.
Another X user wrote, "Maybe the other sensible Democrats should too."
President Donald Trump and his administration have been forced to turn to the U.S. Supreme Court probably more often then they had anticipated when they took over the White House earlier this year.
According to Newsweek, the high court received its latest emergency request from the White House, this time revolving around the attempted termination of a member of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).
Earlier this year, the president tried to fire Commissioner Rebecca Slaughter, an appointee of former President Joe Biden, and the issue was immediately litigated.
On Tuesday, a lower court finally weighed in on the matter and, as usual, gave the Trump administration bad news.
The lower court ruled against the Trump administration having the authority to fire Slaughter, "ruling that commissioners can only be removed for reasons such as misconduct or neglect of duty."
Newsweek noted:
The lower court ordered her reinstated by finding that statutory protections limit removal to causes such as "inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office." Both the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit and district courts have issued rulings in the dispute.
Trump's Department of Justice has argued that such firings fall within the authority of the president, insisting that Trump has the ability to fire commissioners "at will."
However, lower courts have not agreed, and the rulings have forced Trump and the White House to seek relief at the highest level -- the Supreme Court, which they've had to do multiple times in similar situations.
Trump has had a great success record with emergency requests filed with the high court on such issues.
Depending on how the high court rules in this case, it could have broader implications as far as presidential authority is concerned.
Newsweek noted:
If the Court does rule for the administration, presidents could gain broader authority to remove members of multimember agencies, reshaping enforcement across multiple policy areas. If the Court upholds the lower-court rulings, existing statutory shields for independent agencies would remain intact.
Earlier this year, when Trump announced the firing, several high-profile Democrats were triggered, including Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA).
"Donald Trump just illegally fired two independent commissioners at the FTC who fight big corporations that abuse consumers and workers. Why? Trump's billionaire donors expect a return on their investment. He works for them, not you. The courts must reinstate the commissioners," she wrote at the time on X.
Social media users were quick to respond to Warren at the time.
"Sounds like something you would have said 8 years ago. Trump did nothing illegal and he is not aligned with billionaires against workers and consumers. Your analogy is grossly simplistic outdated and nauseatingly repetitious!" one X user wrote.
The National Rifle Association disagrees with President Donald Trump's Department of Justice in its push to prohibit gender-confused individuals from owning guns following the shooting at Annunciation Catholic Church in Minneapolis, Minnesota, last week, the Washington Examiner reported. The gun rights group made it clear that it objects to any limits on the Second Amendment without exception.
The NRA has been supportive of Trump and his agenda, but it is drawing a line in the sand as the DOJ seeks to disarm disturbed individuals like the cross-dressing man who shot schoolchildren during Mass on Aug. 27. "“The NRA supports the Second Amendment rights of all law-abiding Americans to purchase, possess, and use firearms," the NRA said in a post to X, formerly Twitter, on Friday.
"NRA does not, and will not, support any policy proposals that implement sweeping gun bans that arbitrarily strip law-abiding citizens of their Second Amendment rights without due process. The Second Amendment isn’t up for debate," the organization concluded.
The Second Amendment isn’t up for debate. pic.twitter.com/AQwouV4VDd
— NRA (@NRA) September 5, 2025
The Trump administration is considering restricting gun ownership for transgender individuals "to ensure that mentally ill individuals suffering from gender dysphoria are unable to obtain firearms while they are unstable and unwell," one official told the press. The question comes on the heels of a fifth case of a transgender or nonbinary individual committing mass violence against schoolchildren in as many years.
This has opened the door to discussion about taking guns from people who are, by definition, mentally disturbed. "The DOJ is actively evaluating options to prevent the pattern of violence we have seen from individuals with specific mental health challenges and substance abuse disorders," a spokesperson for the Justice Department told the Washington Examiner.
However, Second Amendment advocacy groups are objecting to this as they believe that any excuse to ban guns could eventually result in all Americans losing their rights. Another gun-rights group, Gun Owners of America, is similarly committed to protecting gun rights for everyone, regardless of their mental health status or gender confusion.
"GOA opposes any & all gun bans. Full stop," the group posted to X on Thursday.
Other criticisms of a potential ban cite an unfair prejudice against a minority group, with transgender individuals especially feeling that they have been targeted under Trump. While it's admirable that these groups are concerned about Constitutional rights, there seems to be a growing problem with gender confused shooters.
The New York Times claims that the right is ginning up this ire against transgender people by pointing out the fact that the Assumption Catholic Church shooter, who changed his name from Robert Westman to Robin Westman, struggled with his gender and self-hatred. "I am tired of being trans, I wish I never brainwashed myself," Westman wrote.
The Times pointed out that this line was something conservatives "focused on" too much, as Westman seemed at other times content to indulge in his fantasy of being a girl even amid the uncertainty. "I don’t know if I am a trans girl. It is undeniable that I like how I look in girl clothes. I like thinking about being a girl," he added.
Nashville's Covenant Christian School similarly struggled with her biological reality while claiming to be a man. Although authorities fought legal battles to cover up these inconvenient facts about the shooter, it's clear that the deep-seated conflict about the most fundamental aspect of identity is a red flag that signals how disturbed the person is.
However, activists who fight for transgender rights insist this disorder has nothing to do with the violence and is instead an excuse to target these individuals. "To scapegoat an entire marginalized community in a moment of such intense national grief is wrong, dangerous, and dehumanizing," Human Rights Campaign spokesman Brandon Wolf said.
There's nothing wrong with using this evidence of disordered behavior and mental disturbance to identify people who are a threat to themselves or others. It's understandable that some believe the Second Amendment is sacrosanct, but there may be arguments to be made that some individuals deserve more scrutiny than others when it comes to their right to keep and bear arms.
Former President Barack Obama and his wife, former first lady Michelle Obama, dined at the same restaurant as former Vice President Kamala Harris and her husband, Doug Emhoff, but in separate rooms, Jim Geraghty of the National Review reported. Many believe this signals a rift between the two couples, following dashed hopes for a Harris presidency in 2024.
Harris was a last-minute swap out for the Democrats after then-President Joe Biden withdrew from his re-election bid. Democrats were eager to hold onto the White House, and Obama thought he could work his magic by stumping for her at the last minute after initially declining to do so.
In a video shared to X, formerly Twitter, in October 2024, Obama said that "Kamala Harris is ready for the job." Unfortunately, the American people did not agree and instead elected President Donald Trump, and Democrats have not forgiven Harris for losing to him.
.@KamalaHarris has spent her life fighting on behalf of people who need a voice and a champion. She was raised in a middle class family, and actually cares about what other people are going through.
That’s the kind of president we need. pic.twitter.com/2vDkqrAmUg
— Barack Obama (@BarackObama) October 25, 2024
Anonymous sources reported that both couples were spotted dining out at the State Road restaurant on Thursday night. At one point, they greeted each other and chatted briefly, but chose not to dine together, which Geraghty pointed out is a sign that tension still exists between the Democrats.
"Life comes at you fast. One moment you’re leading in the polls and on the path to be the next president of the United States," Geraghty wrote.
"The next minute, the Obamas are hoping you won’t notice they’re in the same restaurant as you." Geraghty believes the tension dates back to 2013, when Barack Obama called Harris the "best-looking attorney general in the country."
This remark reportedly upset Michelle Obama, not just because her husband made it but because Harris refused to comment publicly about it. Barack Obama eventually called Harris to apologize, but the damage was already done long before Harris lost the White House.
"Apparently, in the interim decade, the Obamas never grew that impressed with the vice president and didn’t think Harris should be handed the Democratic nomination without a fight," Geraghty went on. "Harris called Barack Obama the afternoon that Joe Biden withdrew from the race, hoping for an endorsement; he declined. The Obamas eventually endorsed her in a video that was entirely stage-managed by the couple," the senior political correspondent and author noted.
After Election Day in November, the truth about former President Joe Biden's mental health began to seep through, as did the unpopularity of Harris among Democrats. According to News Nation, Democratic megadonor John Morgan said that Barack Obama and former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi objected to Harris taking over for Biden as the eleventh-hour replacement, which is precisely why he nominated her on his way out.
"He did not want to go gently," Morgan said of Biden on Cuomo in November 2024. "He nominated her, basically, Obama did not want her. Obama did not endorse her for five days, Pelosi did not want her," Morgan went on.
In fact, Morgan believes Biden thumbed his nose at Obama and Pelosi by endorsing his vice president and thus closing off the possibility of another primary. "'I think it was to say, F you to Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama and every representative that was pushing him out… and I think he was pissed," Morgan told the host Chris Cuomo.
"Pelosi told her California delegation, there will be a conference, there will be a caucus, there will be a convention. We basically ran on this deal where ‘democracy, democracy!’ And then we didn’t have democracy in picking our nominee," Morgan noted.
Harris was not the candidate that anyone asked for, and her unpopularity led to a spectacular loss. Barack Obama likely believes his own hype that he was a transformative leader who set the Democrats up for success for generations to come, and now he blames Harris for squandering that.
House Speaker Mike Johnson said that President Donald Trump is committed to cracking open the files on Jeffrey Epstein's crimes and acted as an "FBI informant against him," the UK Daily Mail reported. Trump promised during his 2024 campaign that he would release the disgraced financier and sex trafficker's client list, but has yet to do so.
The media has slammed Trump for using the word "hoax" when describing the controversy over the Epstein files. When asked about it on Friday by Manu Raju of CNN, Johnson explained what Trump meant by the word and made the stunning revelation.
"What Trump is referring to is the hoax that the Democrats are using to try to attack him. I’ve talked to him about this many times, many times. He is horrified. It’s been misrepresented. He’s not saying that what Epstein did is a hoax. It’s a terrible, unspeakable evil. He believes that himself," Johnson recounted
"When he first heard the rumor, he kicked him out of Mar-a-Lago. He was an FBI informant to try to take this stuff down," Johnson added, which puts a new spin on the issue.
Commentator Brian Kressenstein shared Johnson's words in a video post to X, formerly Twitter, on Friday. "BREAKING: Mike Johnson just claimed that Trump 'was an FBI informant' to help take down Jeffrey Epstein. If this is the case, then Trump would be a hero after it’s all released in the Epstein Files. Release the files!" Krassenstein urged.
BREAKING: Mike Johnson just claimed that Trump “was an FBI informant” to help take down Jeffrey Epstein.
If this is the case then Trump would be a hero after it’s all released in the Epstein Files.
Release the files! pic.twitter.com/rftV7WYUhX
— Brian Krassenstein (@krassenstein) September 5, 2025
This report comes on the heels of Trump's repeated insistence that the issues around the Epstein files are a "hoax" cooked up by Democrats after the Department of Justice said in July that Epstein's client list simply did not exist and that the disgraced financier indeed killed himself in prison. However, even some on the right have cried foul after Attorney General Pam Bondi stated that the files were "sitting on my desk" before the administration reversed its claim and said they did not exist.
Nevertheless, Trump has stuck to the story that it's just another scheme cooked up by his political opponents to smear him. "This is a Democrat hoax that never ends," Trump said of the scandal on Wednesday.
"From what I understand, I could check, but from what I understand, thousands of pages of documents have been given. But it's really a Democrat hoax because they're trying to get people to talk about something that's totally irrelevant to the success that we've had as a nation since I've been president," Trump said.
If Trump were an FBI informant, it would make sense for him to have a sudden change of heart, as even his staunchest supporters are left unsatisfied with his handling of the issue. Now that Congress is back in session, the Epstein issue is once again at the forefront, especially because Democrats believe they can smear Trump with allegations about his association with him.
Just before the summer recess, Reps. Thomas Massie (R-KY) and Ro Khanna (D-CA) sought to circumvent Johnson by introducing a congressional vote to release the files, Fox News reported. The issue was one of the first priorities in the new session after victims of Epstein spoke with lawmakers at the Capitol.
"It is very much a possibility that Jeffrey Epstein was an intelligence asset working for our adversaries," Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-FL) said following the meetings. "I think this is going to be a criminal investigation for sure. I will say that what's been released, obviously, the American people have wanted for a long time."
Epstein victim Chauntae Davies testified about some of the horrible things she experienced and even name-dropped a former president. "I was even taken on a trip to Africa with former President Bill Clinton and other notable figures. In those moments, I realized how powerless I was," Davies said.
It's unlikely that Trump had anything to do with Epstein's horrific activities, as his political enemies would have released the files already. Still, it's one of the many reasons the public deserves answers about it. The truth about Epstein must come out, and let the chips fall where they may.
Ten federal judges complained about the Supreme Court's rulings that cut in favor of President Donald Trump and overturned lower courts' rulings, Fox News reported. The judges, who chose to remain anonymous, were part of a 12-member panel that included both Democratic and Republican appointees.
The judges spoke with NBC News about the spate of rulings that overturn lower courts' decisions when they get to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court has a 6-3 conservative majority, and many attempts to block Trump's agenda have been thwarted once the decision works its way up to Washington, D.C.
These decisions come in the form of emergency rulings, which were previously rare but have become more common as judges repeatedly attempt to undermine the president's agenda. The judges who were asked about this trend stated that they believe it's a criticism of the lower courts and demonstrates disloyalty to their authority.
"It is inexcusable. They don’t have our backs," one of the judges interviewed said of the Supreme Court. However, the president sees it differently, as he has repeatedly warned that federal judges are intentionally chipping away at his agenda with their rulings, rather than examining the laws.
The judges believe that Trump's outspoken criticism of their conduct has led to a dangerous situation. White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller indeed stated that rulings blocking Trump's tariffs amounted to a "judicial coup," and the president has repeatedly criticized the judiciary for what he believes is bias against him.
Still, the ominous predictions some made about Trump's habit of freely criticizing them are out of proportion. One judge said that "somebody is going to die" because the Supreme Court has decided to overturn the lower courts' rulings, while another judge claimed they were being "thrown under the bus" by the high court.
"It's almost like the Supreme Court is saying it is a 'judicial coup,'" yet another judge chimed in. Despite these criticisms from the three judges, a fourth, who was an Obama appointee, acknowledged that some of what Trump has said about the lower courts' agenda-driven decisions has merit.
"The whole ‘Trump derangement syndrome’ is a real issue. As a result, judges are mad at what Trump is doing or the manner he is going about things; they are sometimes forgetting to stay in their lane," the judge said.
"Certainly, there is a strong sense in the judiciary among the judges ruling on these cases that the court is leaving them out to dry. They are partially right to feel the way they feel," the fourth judge conceded. Nevertheless, Trump has a point about how the courts are being used against him.
The president believes his agenda has been unfairly attacked using litigation, and it's no secret that his opponents have intentionally filed lawsuits where the court overseeing the matter would reliably rule against him. According to the Washington Examiner, legal experts say it's a practice Democrats and Republicans employ, but it has gone into overdrive during Trump's presidency.
"Many of these lawsuits are being filed in places like California, Washington State, New York, Boston, other courts around the country where I suspect litigants are more likely to get a favorable with those challenging these policies, expect to get a more favorable judge who might be more inclined to rule in their favor," said Zack Smith, Senior Legal Fellow at the Heritage foundation and former Assistant U.S. Attorney in the Northern District of Florida. The court will then issue injunctions that apply nationwide, a practice which was halted by the Supreme Court's 6-3 ruling in Trump v. CASA.
During a news briefing in May, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt explained the extent of the problem. "Nationwide injunctions ordered against the first Trump administration, Trump 1.0, account for more than half of the injunctions issued in this country since 1963. And President Trump had more injunctions in one full month of office, in February, than Joe Biden had in three years," she pointed out at the time. The courts even "prohibited the Trump administration from eliminating federal funding for child transgender surgery and mutilation, a practice that the American people overwhelmingly reject."
The Supreme Court is meant to be a stopgap against rogue judges, and it appears that's precisely what it has been doing. The federal judges who were asked about this practice are incensed about being overruled by the high court because they have been caught in the act and stopped from carrying out this cynical mission. Even if they don't like it, this is precisely how the judiciary is supposed to work.