Politicususa is without advertising thanks to the support of readers like you. Please consider supporting our work by becoming a subscriber.
Thanks to the majority of the Supreme Court, the President of the United States has immunity for official acts and cannot be prosecuted. Trump and the members of his administration considered the decision to signify that they are untouchable.
Although the Trump administration has released and openly admitted that it challenges the courts, there have been clear indications, in particular with regard to the freezing of federal funding, that the Trump administration challenges judicial orders.
What can we do about it?
Instead of going after Trump, the courts can punish members of his administration.
The classification member of the Judicial Committee of the Raskin Chamber (D-MD) wrote In a letter to Trump:
On your credit, you have indicated that your administration would obey the courts, declaring: “I always respect the courts and that I will have to appeal.”
It may therefore be for the member to remind members of your administration that the violation of judicial orders personally exposes them to potential criminal and civil sanctions. Federal judges do not need the help of the executive power to impose civil or criminal sanctions for violation of a court order.
The Supreme Court has declared unequivocally that: [T]The power to punish for contempt is inherent in all courts, has been on several occasions and can be considered as an established law. It is essential to the administration of justice. The United States courts, when they were called and invested with jurisdiction on any subject, immediately became power.
Thanks to a civil or criminal outrage procedure, judges can impose monetary fines on government officials who violate judicial orders and may ensure that fines must be paid by the individual government official, rather than allowing such a person to be compensated by his employment agency employing.
Judges may even impose terms of imprisonment or confinement.
In fact, in a 1997 thesis on the DC circuit, the American prosecutor’s office in DC recognized that the imprisonment of agency officials was a viable option to guarantee the compliance of executive branches with the law.
The inherent authority of the judges includes the power to appoint a private lawyer to carry out the pursuit of a criminal contempt procedure if the government has decreased and is reflected in rule 42 of the federal rules of criminal procedure, which set out the criminal outrage procedure.
Rule 42 (A) (2) indicates that: [T]The court must request that the outrage be prosecuted by a lawyer for the government unless the interest of justice needs the appointment of another lawyer. If the government refuses the request, the court must appoint another lawyer to continue the outrage.24 This is not an unkinded hypothetical.
As recently in 2019, a district court followed this procedure to appoint a private lawyer who then succeeded in continuing a criminal contempt procedure after the American lawyer for the South District of New York refused to do so.
In addition, there may be collateral consequences to refuse to obey a court order in addition to contempt, in particular for government lawyers who may be faced with disciplinary procedures and the suspension or the revocation of their license to practice law.
Raskin also underlined in the declaration provided to Politicususa which accompanies his letter:
In addition, Trump may be unable to forgive Elon Musk or other officials of the administration or federal employees if they have been found in accordance with the inherent authority of the Court, because under the American Constitution, such an offense may not be considered as an “offense against the United States”. In addition, Trump’s forgiveness is not applied to civilian sanctions.
If it is true that the Trump administration could decide to ignore the decisions of the courts, the judicial system also has the capacity to retaliate and enforce their decisions.
This possibility is to know why Trump administration officials are always appointed in prosecution.
These officials have no immunity, and if the courts decide to punish them with their direct authority, Trump may not be able to forgive them.
The courts may not be able to stop Trump personally, but they can punish members of his administration.
The representative of the representative Raskin was that the deviation of a court order would have consequences for his administration and the persons.
What do you think of Raskin’s letter? Share your ideas in the comments below.