[brid autoplay=”true” video=”674505″ player=”23886″ title=”Netanyahu%20And%20Sara%20List%20Trump%20Accomplishments” duration=”51″ description=”undefined” uploaddate=”2020-11-05″ thumbnailurl=”//cdn.brid.tv/live/partners/18168/thumb/674505_t_1604603222.png” contentUrl=”//cdn.brid.tv/live/partners/18168/sd/674505.mp4″]
By Jenny Goldsberry
District of Columbia Judge Dabney L. Friedrich released her ruling Monday that Black Lives Matter cannot sue former President Trump over police clearing Lafayette Square a year ago. The ruling also applies to former Attorney General William Barr. Friedrich was appointed by then President Trump in 2017.
The lawsuit against Trump comes from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) representing BLM. But now it has stopped in its tracks because Friedrich says police cleared the square out of “national security considerations.”
“First, national security—specifically, the country’s national-security interest in the safety and security of the President and the area surrounding the White House—strongly weighs against creating a . . . remedy here,” her decision read.
“In this context, it matters not whether the national security risk actually justified the particular action taken,” the judge wrote. Instead, the real question is about “whether ‘national-security concerns’ were present in the decision-making process the federal officials faced and thus ‘whether the Judiciary should alter the framework established by the political branches for addressing [similar] cases.'”
However, there must still be current national security concerns because Lafayette Square is still on a significant lockdown.
“To this day, over a year after the events of June 1, Lafayette Square remains subject to heightened restrictions that periodically limit protesters’ access to the Square,” Friedrich reminded readers in her decision.
You can follow Jenny Goldsberry on Twitter @jennyjournalism
You may like
Biden Administration Proposes Rule to Fortify Federal Bureaucracy Against Republican Presidency
In a strategic move, the Biden administration has unveiled a proposed rule aimed at reinforcing the left-leaning federal bureaucracy, potentially hindering future conservative policy implementations by Republican presidents. This move has raised concerns about the efficacy of democratic elections when a deep-seated bureaucracy remains largely unchanged, regardless of electoral outcomes.
Key points of the situation include:
Presidential Appointees vs. Career Bureaucrats: Of the 2.2 million federal civil workers, only 4,000 are presidential appointees. The vast majority, made up of career bureaucrats, continue in their roles from one administration to the next. This continuity is facilitated by rules that make it exceedingly difficult to discipline or replace them, resulting in a bureaucracy that tends to lean left politically.
Union Political Affiliation: A striking 95% of unionized federal employees who donate to political candidates support Democrats, according to Open Secrets, with only 5% favoring Republicans. This significant political skew among federal workers raises questions about the potential for political bias in the execution of government policies.
Obstructionism and Challenges for GOP Presidents: Some career bureaucrats have been accused of obstructing Republican presidents’ agendas, leading to policy delays and challenges. For example, during the Trump administration, career lawyers in the Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division declined to challenge Yale University’s discrimination against Asian American applicants, prompting Trump to seek legal counsel from other divisions. The case was subsequently dropped when Joe Biden took office.
Biden’s Countermeasures: President Biden has taken steps to protect the bureaucracy’s status quo. In October 2020, Trump issued an executive order aiming to reclassify federal workers who make policy as at-will employees, but Biden canceled it upon taking office.
Proposed Rule and Congressional Actions: The rule unveiled by the Biden administration seeks to further impede a president’s ability to reinstate Trump’s order. Additionally, some Democrats in Congress are pushing to eliminate the president’s authority to reclassify jobs entirely. This has been referred to as an attempt to “Trump-proof the federal workforce.”
Republican Candidates’ Pledge: GOP candidates such as President Donald J Trump, Vivek Ramaswamy, and Ron DeSantis have pledged to address this issue. According to reports from Fox News, Ramaswamy has gone further, advocating for the elimination of half or more of civil service positions, emphasizing the need for accountability.
Debate on the Merit of the Civil Service: While Democrats and their media allies argue that civil service protects merit over patronage, critics contend that the system has evolved into a form of job security for federal workers with minimal accountability. Federal employees often receive higher salaries and more substantial benefits than their private-sector counterparts.
In summary, the Biden administration’s proposed rule and broader actions to protect the federal bureaucracy have sparked a debate over the role of career bureaucrats in shaping government policy.
Republican candidates are vowing to address these concerns, highlighting the need for accountability and ensuring that government agencies work in alignment with the elected president’s agenda. This ongoing debate raises important questions about the relationship between the bureaucracy and the democratic process in the United States.
You may like
China5 days ago
Electric Vehicle company with Chinese ties awarded $500 million of taxpayer money for 2nd U.S. plant
War on Drugs1 day ago
Kilo of fentanyl found on children’s mats at Bronx daycare, 4 children overdosed, 1 year old boy dies
War on Drugs2 days ago
Children under 14 dying from fentanyl poisoning at ‘faster rate than any other age group’
Healthcare4 days ago
Nebraska woman who detransitioned sues doctors who facilitated removal of ‘healthy breasts’ when she was a teen battling mental health