Drag to reposition your photo

Don Christenson

Report this User

Status Update

Don Christenson shared

March 18, 2025 2:33 am

Texas Girl USA shared a photo

March 18, 2025 1:56 am

The DOJ might as well send similar letters to all the judges, particularly those who have already tried to obstruct the President’s constitutional authority. The President answers to the Constitution.... View MoreThe DOJ might as well send similar letters to all the judges, particularly those who have already tried to obstruct the President’s constitutional authority. The President answers to the Constitution. The left would have us believe the President is subservient to these judges on issues of national security. Congress should write to the state supreme court and inform them that unless they sanction this activist judge they will remove the entire bench and all funding too. 🚨 𝗕𝗥𝗘𝗔𝗞𝗜𝗡𝗚: The DOJ responds to Judge Boasberg: Bondi highlights immediately "the Court lacks the jurisdiction" to interfere with Trump's national security and foreign affairs authority. They also say Trump's role as Commander in Chief is "not subject to judicial review or intervention." In a significant legal response filed recently, the United States government firmly asserted its constitutional authority in matters of national security, particularly regarding presidential actions involving foreign terrorist threats. In a response to a lawsuit challenging President Donald J. Trump's national security proclamation, the Department of Justice argued persuasively that judicial interference with presidential powers in military and diplomatic matters poses significant constitutional problems. The government's filing emphasizes that actions involving the removal of individuals deemed threats to national security fall squarely within the President's inherent Article II powers. It underscores established legal precedent, noting that judicial oversight in military or diplomatic operations abroad is both unprecedented and inappropriate. Quoting multiple Supreme Court rulings, the DOJ states clearly that presidential actions in such matters are constitutionally protected from judicial review. Furthermore, the response clarifies misunderstandings related to the timing of recent flights involving removed individuals, pointing out that all actions took place before the court's injunction was officially issued. The government stresses the careful compliance with judicial orders while underscoring that ongoing operations and diplomatic efforts overseas remain beyond the purview of judicial restraint. Ultimately, the DOJ's stance is a strong reminder that the separation of powers requires courts to avoid encroaching upon critical executive functions, especially during sensitive national security and foreign policy operations. Upholding the government's position here ensures not only the effective operation of executive authority but the broader integrity and safety of the nation.

View Less

Gregory Corcoran

WE THE PEOPLE DID NOT FOR THE JUDGE WE VOTED FOR TRUMP..... MOVE ALONG LITTLE DOGGIE AND LET THE MAN DO HIS JOB ❤️

2 March 18, 2025

Recent Photos

View More Photos