James Boasberg is not the only federal judge WorldNetDaily has targeted for ruling against President Trump. Bob Unruh started out a June 24 article with a lecture-slash-screed:
Moving to the national level, leftists long have complained that President Donald Trump disagrees with and doesn’t follow the rulings of the federal court system.
On the first point, they’re right, and Trump never has concealed his disagreements with some of the outlandish rulings – like the order to turn jets deporting illegal alien criminals around while they were in the air to return to America. And other entry level judges who claim to control the executive branch’s decisions nationwide.
On the second point, wrong. As Trump does follow even the rulings to which he has legitimate objections.
But now a leftist and “activist” judge in Boston has decided the Supreme Court rulings don’t apply to him and his court, and the outrage from leftists would compete with crickets for silence.
But the fireworks soon are expected.
It was in a 6-3 decision on Monday that the high court gave Trump’s administration a huge victory: deciding that illegal aliens could be deported via “third countries” without requirements that they be allowed to present their case against that.
The fight is over what Trump’s officials have called “the worst of the worst,” violent criminals accused of crimes in America but who were refused permission to return to their home countries.
Several leftist organizations in America fought in the courts on their behalf, claiming they could not be moved to third countries. A leftist judge, the Biden-nominated Brian Murphy, agreed, but the Supreme Court stayed that order.
Some of the criminals have been held in a makeshift room in Africa, guarded constantly by federal officers, because the Trump administration is not allowed to finish the deportation process there.
Unruh fgailed to explain why it’s not Trump’s fault that deported immigrants are being “held in a makeshift room in Africa,” or why they apparently deserve that fate.
Unruh spent a Feb. 27 article freaking out again about Murphy:
A federal judge whose anti-Trump deportation order months ago was struck down by the Supreme Court, which then scolded him for insisting it still was in effect, is issuing another ant-Trump order on immigration and deportation.
The central figure in the drama now developing is Judge Brian E. Murphy.
He ruled this week that the third-country deportation practice of the administration of President Donald Trump was barred because he wants the illegal aliens, some of whom have criminal records besides their offense of violating federal law to break into the U.S., to have the opportunity to argue against deportation.
Fox News reported last year a 6-3 Supreme Court ordered a stay on Murphy’s injunction over the same deportation policy.
Just days later, the justices issued a 7-2 order admonishing the judge because he flouted the decision, taking it on himself to overrule the Supreme Court.
Murphy had claimed because of a technicality that his order was still “in full force and effect.”
[…]Murphy’s claims were that the DHS deportation process was invalid because it violated the migrants’ due process by not giving them enough time to raise fears that they could be tortured in the country they are sent to.
Unruh didn’t explain why, exactly, Murphy is wrong here, noting only that the Supreme Court — operating under a right-wing majority — ruled differently.
Unruh melted down over Murphy again in a March 6 article:
The Supreme Court has ruled on one deportation mess twice already, cleaning it up each time.
But it looks like another sweeping out will be needed, as a district court judge has stepped in yet again in apparent defiance of the justices.
The issue is the White House plan to deport illegal aliens to countries not designated in their paperwork, a “third-country” deportation.
Brian Murphy, a judge, issued a nationwide injunction against such plans. He demanded information about assurances from the nations to which deportees would go.
“Whom do they cover? What do they cover? Why has the government deemed them credible? How can anyone even know for certain that they exist? These are basic questions that the Constitution permits a person to ask before the government takes away their last and only lifeline,” he charged.
And was overturned by the Supreme Court, which issued a stay of his injunction in an emergency ruling. The justices then followed that with a 7-2 ruling that Murphy had tried to enforce his order anyway even though he’d been barred from doing that.
Now Murphy has yet again defied the high court, and the Department of Justice is going back to the appellate level.
Again, Unruh refused to explain Murphy’s reasoning or let him or a supporter explain it. He ruled against Trump, and that’s apparently all Unruh needs to know.