Are Biased Judges Abusing Their Authority?

Members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are taught that the Book of Mormon – Another Testament of Jesus Christ was written for our day. Therefore, it may be a promising idea to look to the Book of Mormon for guidance as we near the Second Coming of Jesus Christ.

The book of Helaman in the Book of Mormon tells of a situation happening about 20-25 years prior to the birth of Jesus Christ. Helaman 8 tells us that the judges were members of the secret combination who had gained control of the government. It also tells us that the judges sought to destroy the authority of church leaders. Helaman 9 tells us that one judge sought power so much that he killed another judge.

This background takes us to the situation currently in the United States – explained by Hans von Spakovsky, a Constitution expert at The Heritage Foundation. A duly elected President of the United States is seeking “to make major changes in government policies and root out the pervasive waste, fraud, and diversity, equity, and inclusion [DEI] poisoning our government and its programs.” Yet, he is being “hampered by a handful of biased judges who abused their authority to keep him from implementing the policies the American people voted for.” The author continued with his explanation as follows: 

Jurisdiction is limited to the federal districts where the hundreds of district court judges reside. However, some of these judges arrogantly assert that they can override the president in areas of core executive branch competency and issue sweeping injunctions that affect the entire nation. They even claim they can act on behalf of people who aren’t parties in the cases before them.

These judicial tyrants seem to believe that the Constitution gives them more power than the president to make decisions on the size of the federal government, how it spends its money, and whom it can hire and fire. They say they have a right to overrule the president’s national security judgment on issues that affect our relations with foreign governments, our military readiness, and the safety of the public from unchecked illegal immigration.

The Constitution does not give that authority to the judiciary. Perhaps these judges would like to rewrite President Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address to say we must preserve “government of the judges, by the judges, for the judges.”

Make no mistake: These judges are acting far outside their authority, and their actions are unprecedented.

Last year, the Harvard Law Review noted that of the 127 nationwide injunctions issued since 1963, 64 were against the first Trump administration. Similarly, Justice Clarence Thomas noted in Trump v. Hawaii (2018) that district courts had issued such injunctions in recent years “without considering their authority to grant such sweeping relief.”

Thomas said these injunctions “did not emerge until a century and a half after the founding” and are “inconsistent with long-standing limits on the equitable relief and the power of Article III courts.” …

Over the past 100 days, we have again witnessed numerous injunctions against actions well within Trump’s constitutional authority as the chief executive and commander in chief….

The lawfare against the administration is undoubtedly frustrating, but we’ll see what happens when these cases reach the Supreme Court.

In Trump v. Hawaii, Thomas said that if the “popularity” of nationwide injunctions continues, “this Court must address their legality.”

Let’s hope the justices do that soon.

If the Supreme Court doesn’t take steps to do that, Congress may remove it from the court’s hands and deal with the problem itself.

Rogue judges in our day are acting outside the boundaries of their authority – just like the judges in Helaman. The U.S. Constitution was written in 1787, ratified in 1788, and in operation since 1789. Constitution Day 2025 will celebrate 236 years of operating under the U.S. Constitution. However, the United States will be damaged if judges continue to usurp authority from the Executive Branch and the Legislative Branch of the federal government.

Why Are Three Independent Branches of Government Essential for Liberty?

            The topic of discussion for this Constitution Monday is the importance of maintaining three separate branches of government. The Framers of the Constitution established a government that resembles a three-headed Eagle with three branches of government – Executive, Legislative, and Judicial. The Legislative branch has the authority to make laws, the Executive branch has the responsibility to enforce the laws, and the Judicial branch has the charge to determine that laws are constitutional.

            Recent administrations have legislated laws by executive orders because Congress fails to do its job to pass laws. Congress should have legislated and funded a wall on the southern borders decades ago. Because it failed to do so, President Donald Trump signed executive orders to build the wall and secure the border. The policies worked and limited illegal immigrants to entering the United States. Then President Joe Biden, by the use of executive orders, cancelled the successful policies and opened the borders to millions of illegal immigrants.

            This year, the Supreme Court will hear challenges to several presidential mandates and court decisions. The justices will hear arguments about two vaccine mandates on January 7, 2022. If the court intervenes and stops the mandates, it will mean liberty for many Americans.

            Other cases before the Supreme Court will challenge the 1973 decision of Roe v. Wade, affirmative action (Students for Fair Admission v. Harvard), the right to concealed carry (New York Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen), and the “Chevron deference” adopted in 1984 (AHA v. Becerra). A fellow Alaskan, Fritz Pettijohn, wrote the following about these cases. 

Roe v. Wade is one of the worst decisions in the history of the Supreme Court, right up there with Plessy v. Ferguson, which authorized legally sanctioned racial discrimination. On the subject of abortion policy, the Court writes the rules. But there is no right to an abortion in the Constitution. They just made it up. This has been a constitutional travesty from the day it was decided….

Affirmative action is well intended, but it’s still racial discrimination. In Harvard’s case, it’s mainly Asian-Americans who are the victims, and I fully expect Justice Thomas to write the opinion declaring such discrimination unconstitutional. As a proud, highly intelligent black man, Thomas is viscerally opposed to being treated as if he were incapable of making it on his own….

Practically speaking, you can’t get a concealed carry permit in New York. Does this violate the 2^nd Amendment’s guarantee of “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms”? Emphasis on bear. That’s the question before the court in NYR&PA v. Bruen). There is an excellent chance that the majority will rule that there is a right to “bear,” or carry, arms. After all, it’s specifically guaranteed in the language of the Bill of Rights. If so, this case will be the most important advance in 2^nd Amendment law since District of Columbia v. Heller (2008).

This country and this economy are practically strangling in over-regulation. The administrative state is a constitutional abomination. Overturning Chevron deference will be the first step in reining in this bureaucratic monster. AHA v. Becerra is the perfect case to start rolling back burdensome regulations.

            Pettijohn expects the conservative-majority Supreme Court to overturn several cases. Liberals must expect the same because they are threatening to pack the court with more liberal justices. My desire is for our laws to be constitutional. This requires Congress to make the laws, the Executive branch to enforce the laws, and Judicial branch to determine constitutionality.

Three Branches

The liberty principle for this Freedom Friday is that the powers of government should be divided into three branches: Legislative, Executive, and Judicial. Throughout the history of mankind, there have been many types of governments. Some nations have been ruled by a single powerful ruler in a monarchy. Other nations were ruled by an aristocracy or the wealthy. Still other nations operated under a pure democracy where all the people joined together to make decisions. The Roman Empire operated as a republic and ruled over millions of people. All of these types of governments have some merit that was taken into consideration when our government was organized.

In a monarchy, the government is administered by an executive head. An aristocracy represents the wealth and resources of the nation. A democracy represents the people. The Founders of our nation created a three-headed eagle with all three types of government to control our republic. They created a three-branch government - executive, legislative and judicial - and divided the powers of government among the three branches. The doctrine of "separation of powers" was not readily accepted by Americans.

John Adams was apparently the first of the Founders to recognize the need to separate the powers of government. He was advocating for separation of powers even before the Declaration of Independence was written. Somehow, Adams was able to convince his state to adopt a constitution based on separation of power. Consequently, the constitution of his state was the first in history to read: "In the government of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts the legislative, executive and judicial powers shall be placed in separate departments, to the end that it might be a government of laws and not of men…."

Benjamin Franklin was one of the last to be won over to the idea, but he "finally acknowledged that the Constitution of the United States with its separation of powers was as perfect as man could be expected to produce." (W. Cleon Skousen).

John Adams said it was his goal "… to see rising in America an empire of liberty, and the prospect of two or three hundred millions of freemen, without one noble or one king among them."

The three-headed eagle has served the United States well for over two hundred years. If the executive, legislative and judicial continue to operate separately, we will be able to protect the liberty of Americans. If they join their powers into one head, it will be as though we live under a tyrant. It appears to me that our three branches of government are being merged into one that operates directly under the authority of the President. The current administration and Congress are making laws and regulations that take away the benefits of the separation of powers. For the good of our Republic, we must seek out and elect leaders who are good and honest men and women and understand and support the Constitution.

Ideas and quotes for this post came from The Five Thousand Year Leap by W. Cleon Skousen.