The Trump administration notched another victory this week when U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta in Washington granted a motion to dismiss a case brought by five organizations to stop the cancellation of more than 360 grant awards by the Justice Department. However, in reaching this relatively straightforward conclusion, Judge Mehta opted to follow a pattern set by other judges in adding his own personal commentary on the wisdom of the policy change.
Judge Mehta easily found that he lacked jurisdiction over such questions. However, he then vented his own personal views on the policy:
“Defendants’ rescinding of these awards is shameful. It is likely to harm communities and individuals vulnerable to crime and violence. But displeasure and sympathy are not enough in a court of law.”
Actually, neither the court’s displeasure nor sympathy should be part of the decision of a court of law. With all due respect to Judge Mehta, some of us find it shameful that judges are using these opinions to express their political viewpoints.
I previously wrote about this pattern of extrajudicial commentary, particularly among the judges of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.
District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan, an Obama appointee who previously presided over Trump’s election interference case, was criticized for failing to recuse herself from that case after she made highly controversial statements about Trump from the bench. In a sentencing hearing of a Jan. 6 rioter in 2022, Chutkan said that the rioters “were there in fealty, in loyalty, to one man — not to the Constitution.” She added then, “[i]t’s a blind loyalty to one person who, by the way, remains free to this day.” That “one person” was still under investigation at the time and, when Trump was charged, Chutkan refused to let the case go.
Later, Chutkan decided to use the bench to amplify her own views of the pardons and Jan. 6. Like Judge Mehta, she conceded that she could not block the pardons but used the cases to express her personal disagreements with President Trump and his policies. She proclaimed that the pardons could not change the “tragic truth” and “cannot whitewash the blood, feces and terror that the mob left in its wake. And it cannot repair the jagged breach in America’s sacred tradition of peacefully transitioning power.”
Judge Mehta has also been criticized for conflicted rulings in Trump cases and a bizarre (and ultimately abandoned) effort to banish January 6th defendants from the Capitol.
I fail to see how being assigned this case gives a judge license to hold forth on their own views of the merits of these grants or the implications of their suspension. He is tasked with deciding the legal questions in the case, which he did so correctly.
Darren – Oh, bitter dictum!
Can we please not use the term “rioter” when referring to those who were present at the Capitol on 1/6/2021?
Was it not a riot?
It meets the legal definition, but most of the gathering was a peaceful protest.
Ronald Reagan’s torture treaty was codified into federal law, governed by Article VI, outlawed under the 8th Amendment and based on decades of case law prohibiting torture. Christian organizations denounced America betraying it’s own values.
Today in 2025, none of America’s blacklisting torture victims or other torture victims have even received an official apology from Pam Bondi or any previous attorney general.
Trump could actually do some good here by publicly apologizing to innocent native born Americans tortured here in the USA! Few if any even had criminal records. We used to call that “tyranny”!
21st Century America is the Wild West but with fewer laws!
And how do your hallucinations relate to the topic of today’s article?
Christian organizations denounced America betraying it’s own values. Today in 2025, none of America’s blacklisting torture victims or other torture victims have even received an official apology from Pam Bondi or any previous attorney general.
The Catholic Church values that allow Biden and Pelosi to attend confession while they advocate for elective birth control abortion up until the moment the umbilical cord is cut? The Anglicans and others cashing in on Biden encouraging foreigners to violate the law and illegally enter America as criminal Illegal Aliens? Rapists and child molesters welcome Christian values – or Salafist-Wahabbist Muslim values?
All of our Armed Forces warfighters that get waterboarded, sleep deprivation, etc in DECADES of SERE type training going back to before Reagan… are every one of them “blacklisted torture victims” as well? Do we call SERE training “tyranny” now?
Predictable, not unusual, that words get new definitions and meanings when doing so may provide advantage to the Soviet Democrat Borg i.e. “torture”, “fascism”, “undocumented migrants” versus Illegal Aliens.
What happened to the Jeffery Epstein files? They were there then their not? Deepstate is not only alive and well under trump, it is thriving.
Hey look everyone, loser here is trying to execute her orders from troll central. Everyone point and laugh at the loser for her irrelevant post.
Don’t forget loser, no matter what happens, you’ll still be a loser. You’ll always be a loser. Take care.
In fairness Trump NEVER said there was a list. He promised to investigate and findout. And that he did.
Ask Alina Habba.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/4YMSusLEgYI?feature=share
Why didn’t the video appear here?
So much for voter fraud…
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2025/07/mike-lindells-lawyers-fined-after-using-ai-in-brief-riddled-with-mistakes/
I see that you’re still a loser. And you’ll always be a loser. Keep rocking!
Turley–“With all due respect to Judge Mehta, some of us find it shameful that judges are using these opinions to express their political viewpoints.”
It is shameful and further degrades the judiciary.
But I have to give him points for actually following the law rather than his ideology in this case. Adherence to the law is increasingly unusual in Obama-type judges.
Ethical complaints against the judges need to be made and enforced to stop this shameful loss of objectivity.
Judges Mehta and Chudkin, as well as Professor Turley, are all fellow Democrat paid members of the Washington DC Bar Association. As are Professor Turley’s good friend Merrick Garland and other notables like James Comey, Andrew McCabe, Loretta Lynch, Peter Strzok, Robert Mueller, etc. The Washington DC Bar Association has a code of ethics that directs members of that Bar Association to take action where there are ethics complaints regarding a bar association member who is a judge as well as a lawyer.
If this judge (or previous Attorney Generals like Merrick Garland, Loretta Lynch, Sally Yates, Eric Holder or FBI Directors like Mueller and Comey) had committed any ethics violations, obviously Professor Turley would have complied with his Bar Associations code of conduct and already made those ethics complaints you are demanding be made now.
DC Bar Rules of Professional Conduct
https://www.dcbar.org/For-Lawyers/Legal-Ethics/Rules-of-Professional-Conduct/Maintaining-the-Integrity-of-the-Profession/Reporting-Professional-Misconduct
Rule 8.3: Reporting Professional Misconduct
…
(b) A lawyer who knows that a judge has committed a violation of applicable rules of judicial conduct that raises a substantial question as to the judge’s fitness for office shall inform the appropriate authority.
So… Nothing To See Here, Please Believe Us, Don’t Believe Your Lying Eyes™
Huh? BTW, it’s attorneyS general.
*. Mehta got jawboned by the law. He whimpered. Someone take a look at all his cases looking for bias.
He dismissed the case. Is there an appeal of a dismissal? Nevermind, Google. 😏
Jonathan Turley ‘baffled’ by courts ‘intruding significantly’ on Trump’s authority
https://www.foxnews.com/video/6368643943112
Professor Turley: you posted another notice that your brethern and fellow Democrat members of the Washington DC Bar Association, Mehta and Chudkin, are once again putting the stench and contamination of Democrat lawyers and judges on what used to be the American justice system.
You never miss a chance to declare some of Trump’s statements when he verbally attacks those attacking him through the justice system as an assault on your constitutional sensibilities – but when your fellow Washington DC Bar Association Democrat lawyers turned Democrat Activist Kings In Black Robes continue going after Trump using their black robed work attire, you just can’t figure out why they would do that!
No, you tell the world that you are completely baffled as to why your fellow members of the Washington DC Bar Association would do that!
Can’t even make a guess as to why Mehta, Chudkin, your close personal friend Merrick Garland, etc do this Professor Turley?
Keep riding that Democrat bar association fence, cowboy! Your Bar Association’s Code Of Professional Conduct has yet to buck a single one of you off, whether the name was Mueller, Holder, Lynch, Comey, McCabe, Strzok, Garland, etc!
Your analysis proves just one of two things, Never-Miss-a-Chance-ANON: the D.C. Bar is captured and owned, via a system that is operating on the basis of control files, OR Turley’s “constitutional sensibilities” ARE truly offended [by a turncoat party he hardly recognizes anymore].
You have to consider that there are many traditional democrats who don’t like the extremist-Marxist path many are forcing into their party. They’re angry.
Dianna Bec says: OR Turley’s “constitutional sensibilities” ARE truly offended [by a turncoat party he hardly recognizes anymore].
First, the third option you didn’t recognize among the several others you skipped over by offering only two options: Professor Turley has REPEATEDLY refused to comply with his professional lawyer obligations as a member of the Washington DC Bar Association: to inform his Washington DC Bar Association of his fellow members who are either or both lawyers and judges of their violation of their Bar Association’s Code Of Professional Conduct.
He saw his fellow Washington DC Bar Association members exposed for repeatedly committing the felonies of perjury and uttering false documents to Judge Boasberg’s FISA courts: Attorney Generals Loretta Lynch and Sally Yates, FBI Directors Mueller, Comey and McCabe, FBI agents like Strzok and others. That’s a lot more than unprofessional commentary in a judge’s decision.
That serial felony crime wave was detailed in Inspector General’s reports and Congressional hearings. That’s just ONE example of where Professor Turley and his fellow Democrat lawyers in the Washington DC Bar Association have chosen NOT to comply with their individual legal obligations as members of the Washington DC Bar Association. Democrats first – ethical members of the bar at the very last.
So it is hard to believe that he is having a problem recognizing a previous Democrat party that he still is a member of today, when this has been going on with his fellow members FOR YEARS before Trump ran for the Republican nominee.
He’s been watching this since his fellow Democrat Washington DC Bar Association member, Jack Smith, was sent by Obama/Biden to take out their greatest threat to reelection, Republican Governor Bob McDonnell in 2011. The Obama DoJ/Smith’s conviction of McDonnell, overturned by SCOTUS, in a unanimous decision where they listed Obama DoJ prosecutor Jack Smith as a threat to separation of powers, as he made up his own version of the law out of whole cloth to convict McDonnell.
If that isn’t a terrible violation of Turley/Smith’s Bar Association Code of Professional Conduct for members of that bar association, what is?
You have to consider that there are many traditional democrats who don’t like the extremist-Marxist path many are forcing into their party. They’re angry.
Professor Turley has had well over 15 years to actually get angry and we haven’t seen him show it yet with a column devoting to naming and shaming those he rubs elbows with in the Bar Association they belong to, no matter what malfeasance and felonies he watches them commit. Perhaps he could escape liability by terminating his membership in that bar association – but perhaps that would end his teaching career at Georgetown. Or perhaps do as Allan Dershowitz did – leave the Democrat party and announce he’s now an independent.
But you can’t explain away his refusal to ethically comply with his bar association’s published Code Of Professional Conduct. Nor continuing to shore up his DNC party with faint criticism instead of full throated condemnation for both the felonies and the malfeasance.
You have to consider doing something other than trying to dream up excuses for why our constitutional expert host, Professor Turley, will NOT comply with his Bar Association’s Code Of Professional Conduct. Hasn’t complied with it as he and this audience have watched the police state fascists within the Washington DC Bar Association wreaking havoc on their political opponents and the civil rights of THOUSANDS of ordinary Americans.
“Third-Option-“ANON!,
Hear-hear. You’ve certainly called DBEC on the carpet, and good for you. It may be “judicious” to concede that, surely, Professor Turley has deeper connections and more obscure professional dealings than I considered, in reviewing his article about U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta injecting personal opinion into his ruling. As Turley says, “Judge Mehta easily found that he lacked jurisdiction over such questions. However, he then vented….”
My comment [1 of 2 things] was made in relation to political polarization in the current rulings of leftist-judges and the spate of “democrats” (here) who fault Turley for much less than you describe. But you’ve made a clear point in showing that the armchair judgments, lawyering by unstudied onlookers, can be quite a farce.
However, I stand by my pivotal point: “…there are many traditional democrats who don’t like the extremist-Marxist path many are forcing into their party.” — Judges opining from the bench, IN SPITE of their Bar Associations, and their own refusals to “ethically comply,” can be no better than what you say about Turley.
As I mentioned to Olly below, Judge Mehta is in need of some basic toilet training.
There is an anecdote attributed to the great Oliver Wendell Holmes. He was walking down the steps of the courthouse at the end of the day, when a friend approached and said, “Judge, did you do justice today?” Holmes adeptly replied, “No, I did law today.”
The fact of the matter is that a judge rules over a court of law, not a court of justice or a court of fairness or a court of political progress. All that matters in the courtroom is how to correctly understand and apply the law. Concerns with fairness, equity, and political results are out of place. Those are for the political branches.
Great story and appropriate 👍
Hence, democrat appointments are in direct conflict with the purpose of the courts.
U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta must be impeached and convicted for his egregious judicial overreach and act of the insinuation of bias and partiality into a case, attempting to usurp and exercise the exclusive executive power of the executive branch, or to influence the exercise of exclusive executive power of the executive branch.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
“…courts…must…declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the Constitution void.”
“…men…do…what their powers do not authorize, [and] what [their powers] forbid.”
_________________________________________________________________________________________
“[A] limited Constitution … can be preserved in practice no other way than through the medium of courts of justice, whose duty it must be to declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the Constitution void. Without this, all the reservations of particular rights or privileges would amount to nothing … To deny this would be to affirm … that men acting by virtue of powers may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid.”
– Alexander Hamilton
Impeached? Yes, that option along with defunding of their offices and staffing exists. But you’d also be asking that Republicans perform as more than mere paid observers, you’d be asking them to participate in political process beyond strongly worded letters. Good luck to us all on that front.
Executive power is vested solely and exclusively in the president; military power is vested solely and exclusively in the commander-in-chief, or president.
Legislation and adjudication that include any aspect, facet, degree, or amount of executive power are unconstitutional.
The control regarding a high-criminal president is impeachment.
The same is true of legislators, judges, and “all civil Officers of the United States.”
Legislation and adjudication that include any aspect, facet, degree, or amount of executive power are unconstitutional.
The control regarding a high-criminal president is impeachment.
The same is true of legislators and judges.
Presidents, legislators, and judges may engage in executive, legislative, and judicial overreach.
Enforcement against egregious overreach by the official in question is impeachment and conviction.
Presidents, legislators, and judges may engage in executive, legislative, and judicial overreach.
Enforcement against egregious overreach by the official in question is impeachment and conviction.
Impeached? Calm down. This need to impose the most drastic sanction over an alleged indiscretion does none of us any good.
These comments by the honorable “judges” seems to me to open another can of worms. May I ask, as a defendant showing up in front of one these judges who have uttered their political ideologies in rulings, can I ask them to recuse themselves because I think I won’t get a fair and impartial decision based on MY political ideologies?
Yes, you can ask as well as be certain of both a refusal and maximum retribution by the ideologue.
I’d like to hear their judicial opinions on Biden 90+ blanket pardons on his supporters for crimes not charged or defined?
*. I read this blog as a curiosity having no meaningful end for me. I simply wonder what the Constitution actually says and how the government functions. American history is enjoyable and a late requirement of citizenship.
Thanks PT
The arrows of outrageous fortune. …
A hindu
Nevertheless, even though I opposed the seditious conspiracy charges on legal grounds, I did not support the pardoning of violent offenders who attacked police officers. The court system plays a key role in either tamping down or fueling rage in society.
Cf. Judge Amit Mehta comments when he ordered an 18-year prison sentence for the leader of the Oath Keepers, Stewart Rhodes re: January 6, 2021 US Capitol riot
Peril to our democracy’: Chilling lines from the judge who sentenced the Oath Keepers’ leader
– CNN
“I dare say, Mr. Rhodes – and I never have said this to anyone I have sentenced – you pose an ongoing threat and peril to our democracy and the fabric of this country,” Mehta said. “I dare say we all now hold our collective breaths when an election is approaching. Will we have another January 6 again? That remains to be seen.”
“A seditious conspiracy, when you take those two concepts and put it together, is among the most serious crimes an American can commit. It is an offense against the government to use force. It is an offense against the people of our country,” the judge said. “It is a series of acts in which you and others committed to use force, including potentially with weapons, against the government of the United States as it transitioned from one president to another. And what was the motive? You didn’t like the new guy.” “What we absolutely cannot have is a group of citizens who – because they did not like the outcome of an election, who did not believe the law was followed as it should be – foment revolution.”
Mehta echoed these warnings later Thursday, when addressing a second Oath Keepers defendant, Kelly Meggs. “You don’t take to the streets with rifles,” he said. “You don’t hope that the president invokes the insurrection act so you can start a war in the streets… You don’t rush into the US Capitol with the hope to stop the electoral vote count.” “It is astonishing to me how average Americans somehow transformed into criminals in the weeks before and on January 6,” the judge said.
Yes, it is astonishing that Democrat Senators, Congresscritters, Governors, Mayors and Council Members have “transformed into criminals” since Democrats lost the White House, US House, US Senate and SCOTUS. Astonishing!
10 suspects charged in July 4 attack on Texas ICE detention facility
WASHINGTON — Nearly a dozen violent assailants equipped with tactical gear and weapons attacked U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Prairieland Detention Facility in Alvarado, Texas, on July 4, shooting a local law enforcement officer in the process. The officer is expected to recover.
“This escalation in violence is incomprehensible, and those responsible will be held accountable to the fullest extent of the law,” said acting ICE Director Todd M. Lyons. “This is precisely what we have been warning against, as disinformation and dangerous politically-motivated rhetoric spreads. We are thankful to Alvarado Police Department responding officers and that the officer injured has been discharged from the hospital. We will continue to work with the FBI and Texas Rangers as they investigate and prosecute those involved.”
https://www.ice.gov/news/releases/10-suspects-charged-july-4-attack-texas-ice-detention-facility
A link. He’s a dirty judge.
I don’t like that guy—motive. 😂
Are these justices using “The View” as their template for Courtroom Decorum.
Might as well have Whoopi Goldberg presiding.
This jelly of a judge doesn’t want to get reversed, nor to miss out on appointment to a Circuit Court of Appeals under a future Democratic administration. Hence, the correct ruling, plus a note of personal protest.
Ethical complaints against the judges need to be made and enforced to stop this shameful loss of objectivity.
This statement by Judge Mehta should be grounds for disqualification on any matter involving the Trump administration for the reason he has demonstrated bias and prejudice which calls into question his ability to serve as an impartial judge on those issues.
Just maybe it’s time to call out the DNC.
Yes they have gone to far.
_________________
Democrat terrorists are now putting bounties on JD Vance.
This has to stop!
Why won’t democrats denounce this?
Pardon me while I laugh.
Criminal Illegal immigrant at Alligator Alcatraz complains about the mosquitoes being the size of ELEPHANTS..
Haha they probably are but they will be inside and won’t be there long!!
Probably Chicom spy drones… The big ones. 🙂
https://dronelife.com/2025/07/09/china-unveils-mosquito-sized-drone-for-stealth-surveillance/
-Oddball
Governor Ron DeSatan did it!