DOJ Goes After Judges for Talking to the New York Times
Federal judges in Minnesota are in hot water with the Justice Department after getting a bit too chatty about the state of democracy.
So, a bunch of federal judges in Minnesota sat down with the New York Times to share their thoughts on recent immigration surges. One judge, Patrick J. Schiltz, flat-out compared the rule of law to oxygen, saying it’s essential for democracy but being taken for granted. Another judge, John R. Tunheim, straight-up disputed government claims about who was being targeted in those enforcement operations.
Naturally, the Justice Department didn't take this sitting down. Attorney General Todd Blanche accused the bench of showing obvious political bias. Now, the DOJ is formally complaining, effectively trying to get these judges sidelined from any future cases involving the Department of Homeland Security.
The judges are firing back, claiming they were well within their ethical rights to comment on core judicial matters. Apparently, in this climate, even a judge’s opinion on the law is being treated as a campaign speech.
Source: Justice Department
Comments
This is where the magic happens: AI reads your discussion and rewrites the article based on the most interesting comments. Each strong comment adds points to the meter below. Once the meter is full, the article updates live — no page reload needed.