Federal Judge Blocks Trump’s Education Department Layoffs
“dramatically overstepped his authority”
Is anyone else completely sick of these judges overriding the will of the people?
The College Fix reports:
Federal judge strikes down Trump’s efforts to dismantle Education Department
A federal judge blocked President Donald Trump’s efforts to dismantle the U.S. Department of Education Thursday.
“The record abundantly reveals that defendants’ true intention is to effectively dismantle the department without an authorizing statute,” District Judge Myong Joun wrote, according to Reuters.
The plaintiffs “have provided an in-depth look into how the massive reduction in staff has made it effectively impossible for the Department to carry out its statutorily mandated functions,” Joun wrote.
Further, the lawsuits presented a “stark picture of the irreparable harm that will result from financial uncertainty and delay, impeded access to vital knowledge on which students and educators rely, and loss of essential services for America’s most vulnerable student populations,” the judge wrote, according to the Associated Press.
The judge also mandated that the Trump administration reverse the mass layoffs in the department. However, the administration said it “will immediately challenge this on an emergency basis,” according to The Hill.
Madi Biedermann, Education Department deputy assistant secretary for communications, criticized the “far-left” judge’s decision, stating he “dramatically overstepped his authority.”
She also stated the complaints came from “biased plaintiffs,” resulting in an “injunction against the obviously lawful efforts to make the Department of Education more efficient and functional for the American people.”
“President Trump and the Senate-confirmed Secretary of Education clearly have the authority to make decisions about agency reorganization efforts, not an unelected Judge with a political axe to grind. This ruling is not in the best interest of American students or families,” Biedermann stated.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Of course.
In fact, I hear a federal judge is preparing to order Trump to reinstate everyone he fired on The Apprentice.
just fire them no pay unless a contract provides for that
“the massive reduction in staff has made it effectively impossible for the Department to carry out its statutorily mandated functions”
Funny. When Biden did precisely the same thing, you judges didn’t do $#1+.
“Further, the lawsuits presented a “stark picture of the irreparable harm that will result from financial uncertainty and delay, impeded access to vital knowledge on which students and educators rely, and loss of essential services for America’s most vulnerable student populations,” the judge wrote, according to the Associated Press.”
Go on, pull the other one!
Removal from the judiciary is a weak but well deserved response to these Soros approved wack jobs. Charges and prison are needed to set a precedent.
Myong Joun…yes, this autopen appointed loser sounds like a real America First guy.
Or maybe a CCP appointee?
Regardless of what you think of this particular decision, or indeed of any of these decisions, this is not a valid argument against them. This judge may be wrong in finding that these layoffs are against the law, but the fact that the people want them laid off is irrelevant. What the people want is often against the law, and when that happens it is a judges job and sacred duty to tell the people that they can’t have what they want.
If (as in this case, according to the judge) the obstacle is a statute, then the people can ask their representatives to change it, and then they can get what they want. But sometimes the obstacle is the constitution, in which case the people must simply accept that what they want is wrong, and they shouldn’t have it.
If they want it badly enough they can ask their representatives to change the constitution, but in 99% of cases that would be the wrong thing to do, and it would be the representatives’ duty to tell the people so, and to refuse their request.
None of which is to say that this judge got it right. He’s right that without a change in the law Trump has no right to abolish the department. He’s also right that Trump clearly wants to abolish it (as he should). But he’s out on a limb when he blocks measures that are in themselves lawful, just because they are part of a long-term plan to have Congress abolish the department.
Just because the law now says the department must function doesn’t mean it’s going to still say that in a few months. So while the judge has every right to say what the law is now, he shouldn’t be speculating about what it will be in the future.