Roberts rejects Trump’s call to an accusing judge who ruled against his deportation plans | News, sports, jobs

Washington – In an extraordinary exhibition of conflict between the executive and judicial branches, the president of the Supreme Court John Roberts Called rejected from accusing judges shortly after the president Donald Trump demanded the elimination of someone who ruled against their deportation plans.

The reprimand of the Supreme Court leader demonstrated how about the controversy Recent flights of Venezuelan immigrants They have become spiral in a constitutional shock between two of the most powerful men in the country.

“For more than two centuries, it has been established that the accusation is not an appropriate response to the disagreement of a judicial decision,” Roberts said. “The normal appeal review process exists for that purpose.”

The rare statement occurred only a few hours after a position on Trump’s social networks, who described the American district judge James E. Boasberg as a “uprising and stirring” not chosen. Boasberg had issued a deportation flight blocking order that Trump was carrying out invoking the authorities in times of war of a law of the 18th century.

“He won anything! I won for many reasons, in an overwhelming mandate, but fighting illegal immigration may have been the number one reason for this historical victory,” Trump wrote on his social media platform, social Truth. “I’m just doing what voters wanted me to do. This judge, like many of the crooked judges, is forced to appear before, should be accused!”

Although Trump has routinely criticized judgesespecially as They limit their efforts to expand presidential powerHis last position increased his conflict with a judiciary that has been one of the few restrictions on his aggressive agenda. The political trial is a rare step that is usually taken only in cases of serious ethical or criminal misconduct.

The relationship between Roberts and Trump has changed over the years. Roberts emphasized judicial independence during Trump’s first mandate, Disagree with The description of the president of a judge who rejected his migrant asylum policy as a “Obama Judge” in 2018.

Before Trump has sworn for his second term, Roberts warned against Threats to the Judiciary and even requested the decisions of the unpopular court to be respected.

The president of the Supreme Court also had an outstanding role in A great failure last year That said, the presidents have a wide immunity of criminal prosecution. The decision helped Trump avoid one of his criminal trials before the elections that returned him to the White House.

Trump greeted Roberts hotly earlier this month, thanking him and saying “I will not forget it”, since the judges attended their speech to a joint session of the Congress. The president later said he was thanking Roberts for curseing him in office.

The last dispute involving the Judiciary occurs after a court challenged its invocation of the 1798 alien enemies law. It has been used only three times before in the history of the United States, all during the declared wars of Congress. Trump issued a proclamation that the law was recently in force due to what he said it was an invasion of the Venezuelan gang Aragua train. His administration is paying El Salvador to imprison alleged members of the gang.

Boasberg, who was appointed by President Barack Obama, summoned a hearing on Monday to discuss what he called “possible challenge” of his order after two deportation flights continued to El Salvador despite his verbal order to be given to the United States.

The Trump administration lawyers defended their actions, saying that Boasberg’s written order was not explicit, while an American lawyer for civil liberties said “I think we are approaching a lot” to a constitutional crisis.

The Department of Justice is also pressing in the Court so that Boasberg has eliminated the case.

The Constitution gives the House of Representatives, where Republicans have a thin majority, the power to accuse a judge with a simple majority vote. But, as a presidential political trial, any elimination requires a vote of a two -thirds majority of the Senate.

The last publication of social networks of the president aligns him more with allies such as the billionaire ELON ALMIZCLEwhat he has done similar demands.

“What we are seeing is an attempt at a government branch to intimidate another branch to carry out its constitutional duty. It is a direct threat to judicial independence,” Marin Levy, a professor at the Law Faculty of the University of Duke who specializes in federal courts, said in an email.

Only one day before, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt He said: “I have not heard the president talk about accusing judges.”

Only 15 judges have been accused in the history of the Nation, according to the government courts of the US courts, and only eight have been eliminated.

The last judicial trial was in 2010. G. Thomas Porteous Jr. of New Orleans was accused of charges that accepted bribes and then lied about it. He was sentenced by the Senate and withdrawn from office in December 2010.

The calls to the dismissal judges have been increasing as Trump’s radical agenda faces rejection in court, and at least two members of the congress have said online that they plan to present articles of political trial against Boasberg. Republicans of the House of Representatives have already presented articles of political trial against two other judges, Amir Ali and Paul Engelmayer, for decisions they have made in demands related to Trump.

Leavitt is one of the three administration officials who face a claim of Associated Press for reasons of first and fifth modification. The AP says that the three are punishing the news agency for the editorial decisions they oppose. The White House says that the AP does not follow an executive order to refer to the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America.