Once Again Biden Uses The DOJ AS A Political Cudgel

1. 84

   Sharlee01posted 2 years ago

   
   Biden once again uses the DOJ  to interject on the right of a state to have sovereignty. Abortion is a hot political topic, and this interference of the DOJ shows clear partisan behavior.
   
   The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit late Thursday rejected the Justice Department's request to lift a stay on an order from a federal judge in Texas that had temporarily blocked the law. This ruling prompted The Biden administration to ask the DOJ  to ask the Supreme Court to block the Texas new abortion laws.
   
   The Justice Department asked the high court Monday to lift an order imposed by a conservative federal appeals court that has allowed Texas to continue enforcing the nation's strictest curbs on abortion through a novel law that was written to make it hard to challenge in the federal court system. The department had announced its intentions last Friday."
   https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/jus … w-80538924
   
   The Biden Administration continues to politicize the DOJ, ignore the rule of law, and undermine state sovereignty.  More overreach from this White House...Biden violating his campaign pledge, not to politicize the DOJ to do his bidding, as he accused the prior president of doing. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TxJXfn2RiYs
   
   -- What is your feeling about the overreach that the current White House has used, now on several occasions to promote the DOJ to intervene in State sovereignty?
   
   -- Is the Biden administration using the DOJ as a political cudgel?
   
   ( I hope this thread will not be seen as a thread to evoke opinions on abortion.  We all have strong opinions on that subject.   This thread is meant to deal with government overreach, and an administration that is clearly using the DOJ as a political tool in my view.)    Hopefully, you will share your opinion.

   replyreport
   1. 94

      wildernessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      I can see it as a political tool only if it is the abortion issue that is considered.
      
      But the Texas law was constructed and carefully written to violate federal law, as decided by the Supreme Court, and get away with it.  As such, the DOJ and a call to the SCOTUS  is certainly a valid method of enforcing federal law.

      replyreport
      1. 84

         Sharlee01posted 2 years agoin reply to this

         It will be interesting to see what the Supreme Court will rule in the latest appeal. Just last month, in a 5-4 vote, it refused to block the law. But the court's decision at the time left open the option for abortion providers to challenge the Texas law in other ways in the future.
         https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/01/us/s … rtion.html
         
         IT does appear the law was written the Supreme Court could get involved.  Texas only changed the law with a stipulation of a time limit to when it was legal for a woman to obtain an abortion. It is in opposition to Roe versus Wade.
         
         Roe verse Wade Supreme Court rule involves by 12-week trimesters.
         
         During a pregnant woman's first trimester, the Court held, a state cannot regulate abortion beyond requiring that the procedure be performed by a licensed doctor in medically safe conditions.
         
         During the second trimester, the Court held, a state may regulate abortion if the regulations are reasonably related to the health of the pregnant woman.
         
         During the third trimester of pregnancy, the state's interest in protecting the potential human life outweighs the woman's right to privacy. As a result, the state may prohibit abortions unless an abortion is necessary to save the life or health of the mother.
         
         So, the new Texas law bucks their ruling.
         
         So, once again Texas will fight to keep the right to make their own laws on abortion.  Back to 1973s  Texas versus federal Government.
         
         So, should individual States have the right to write their own laws on abortion?  One must consider "we the people" vote in our State  Governments.  Should the "people" of a given state have the right to dictate their values on abortion in a given state or should Fed Gov make abortion laws?   Again back to my subject -- Federal Government overreach.

         replyreport
         1. 94

            wildernessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

            If the feds overreached, it did so in 1973 when it protected the rights of the minority.  Do states have the right to override that decision, and take those rights away?
            
            I would submit that the framers of the Constitution took great pains to protect ALL the people, while states, to a much larger degree, do not.  Instead it is "rule of majority", with the majority simply running roughshod over the wants of minorities.
            
            But whether that is true or not, the fact remains that Texas is attempting to violate federal law by taking rights away from the minority, and that that should not be permitted.  Were it a matter of banning Big Gulps at 7-11, it wouldn't matter so much, but it goes so far beyond that that it is imperative that the feds step in and enforce federal law.  IMO.  I put this in the same category as states banning gun ownership; our constitution allows that and states may not infringe on that right.

            replyreport
            1. 84

               Sharlee01posted 2 years agoin reply to this

               really good point. It would appear Texas is pushing to change its abortion law while g to perhaps hoping to set precedence for other states to follow.  It will be interesting to see where this ends up.

               replyreport
               1. 94

                  wildernessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                  Indeed it will.  Personally I will be extremely disappointed if our new "conservative" SCOTUS decides that the one in 1973 was incorrect, and that the government cannot, after all, decide what is legal and what is not where abortion is concerned.  Because that would indicate, to me at least, that Trump's appointees are no better than what was in there; that they will legislate from the bench rather than interpret law.  I have much higher hopes for them.

                  replyreport
   2. 84

      Sharlee01posted 2 years agoin reply to this

      Congress is questioning AG Garland. on many subjects. Most questions that have been asked of Garland have been in regard to how the AG and FBI became involved with a letter sent to Biden by the National School Board Associaton. The letter requesting Biden's help with what they called threats and violence from parents at the Board meeting.
      
      Turns out the White House was in discussion with the National School Board Association in the weeks leading up to the NSBA  sending a letter that demanded federal law enforcement crackdown on the alleged harassment of school officials. An email showing the school board group drew on conversations with White House staffers in drafting the letter.
      Source to view email mentioned ---   https://defendinged.org/press-releases/ … e-release/
      
      Once again  Biden appears to be using the DOJ  to do his bidding. Using the AG as a strong arm to scare and threaten parents from becoming involved in their children's education.

      replyreport