• Democrats seek to insulate security for activist judges from executive

    From Bawk! Bawk!@21:1/5 to All on Mon May 26 06:51:22 2025
    XPost: alt.politics.democrats, sac.politics, alt.society.liberalism
    XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh

    Congressional Democrats introduced a bill Thursday that would shift
    control of the U.S. Marshals Service from the executive branch to the
    federal judiciary, in an effort to insulate the agency from political interference and guarantee that judges receive strong security
    protections.

    The move comes as President Trump, Attorney General Pam Bondi, and other
    top government officials this year rain down criticism on judges that
    are ruling against the administration in scores of court challenges. The Marshals protect judges, but they also report to the U.S. attorney
    general, not to the courts themselves.

    Those critiques gave rise to fears that the Marshals could be caught in
    the middle of a power struggle if the White House or Justice Department
    direct them to ignore a court order or to yank security from judges, the Democrats said.

    Judges have faced violent threats and calls for impeachment because of
    their work.

    "Today, independent judges must rely on the executive branch, whose
    cases are often in front of them, for personal security," said Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-Calif., in a written statement. "I have seen how threats of violence to members of Congress pressure them into staying silent or
    influence their votes on the House floor. We cannot allow the same
    calculations to creep into the deliberations of independent judges."

    The legislation would move the Marshals out of the control of the
    Justice Department and create a special board whose members include the
    Chief Justice of the United States and the Judicial Conference, the
    courts' policymaking body. It's modeled on the structure for running the
    U.S. Capitol Police.

    The bill, known as the Maintaining Authority and Restoring Security to
    Halt the Abuse of Law Act, is sponsored by Democratic Reps. Swalwell;
    Jamie Raskin of Maryland; and Hank Johnson of Georgia. A companion bill
    in the Senate is led by Cory Booker of New Jersey; Chuck Schumer of New
    York; Alex Padilla of California; and Adam Schiff of California.

    The legislation may not get through a Congress controlled by Republicans
    but is meant to send a signal about Democrats' concern about the issue
    of judicial security.

    A spokesman for the Marshals declined comment, citing the pending
    legislation.

    Threats against judges are not a hypothetical issue. The son of U.S.
    District Judge Esther Salas of New Jersey was fatally shot in their home
    by a frustrated litigant who had appeared in her courtroom.

    This year, judges and their family members have been receiving hundreds
    of unsolicited pizza deliveries in seven different U.S. states, in an
    apparent effort to intimidate the judges and signal that their home
    addresses are known, lawmakers said. Some of the deliveries have been
    placed in the name of Salas's deceased son, Daniel Anderl.

    "Since 1789, the U.S. Marshals have valiantly protected our nation's
    judges and enforced court orders," Sen. Booker said. "But their dual accountability to the executive branch and the judicial branch paves the
    way toward a constitutional crisis."

    Alex Aronson, a former congressional aide who now serves as executive
    director of the group Court Accountability, said the bill is a "critical bolster for checks and balances."

    https://www.npr.org/2025/05/22/g-s1-68433/judges-security-marshals-democr
    ats

    Activist judges have overstepped their authority. Pay the pipers
    who come knocking.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Siri Cruz@21:1/5 to All on Mon May 26 01:00:39 2025
    XPost: alt.politics.democrats, sac.politics, alt.society.liberalism
    XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh

    On 25/5/25 23:51, Bawk! Bawk! wrote:
    Congressional Democrats introduced a bill Thursday that would shift
    control of the U.S. Marshals Service from the executive branch to the
    federal judiciary, in an effort to insulate the agency from political interference and guarantee that judges receive strong security
    protections.

    That would be unconstitutional. Courts by design have no
    mechanism to enforce their decision.

    courts' policymaking body. It's modeled on the structure for running the
    U.S. Capitol Police.

    Capitol Police have limitted power that diminishes quickly away
    from the Capitol. An independent protective force for judges
    would be sad, but as long as it not given any executive functions
    it would be constitutional.


    --
    Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-999. Disavowed. Denied. @
    'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' /|\
    The Church of the Holey Apple .signature 4.0 / \
    of Discordian Mysteries. This post insults Islam. Mohamed

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)