Judge William Young has had a distinguished career since his appointment by President Ronald Reagan in 1985, including serving as Chief Judge of the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts. At 85, his career includes notable cases such as the Boston Strangler and the Shoe Bomber. However, his 161-page opinion declaring the Trump Administration in violation of the First Amendment over visa denials is nothing short of bizarre. It starts as a type of letter to an anonymous person who sent the judge a postcard.
Here is how the caption appeared in
Here is a closer image:
The opinion then ends with this conclusion:
With all due respect to Judge Young (who warrants considerable respect after his remarkable career), the captioning and conclusion are improvisational, impulsive, and injudicious. The court injected a political dialogic element in an opinion with sweeping implications for our constitutional system.
I have previously disagreed with some of these measures and agree with some points in this opinion. For those currently in this country, I have long supported free speech protections. That said, I expect that the Administration has the advantage on visa applicants outside of the country. The courts are already working to sort this out and it is likely to result in a split resolution. However, the tenor and odd elements of this opinion take away from these points.
It is an example of yielding to impulse, a problem that I have previously addressed with district court judges after the Trump inauguration. The trend has even reached the Supreme Court on occasion.
Take District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan, an Obama appointee who had previously presided over Trump’s election interference case. Chutkan 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.
Chutkan later decided to use the bench to amplify her own views of the pardons and Jan. 6. 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.”
Chutkan’s colleague Judge Beryl Howell, also an Obama appointee, lashed out at Trump’s actions, writing, “[T]his Court cannot let stand the revisionist myth relayed in this presidential pronouncement.”
Other judges have engaged in extrajudicial commentary from the bench that undermines the integrity of the court system and their own authority.
The bizarre captioning and conclusion in this case is another such example. It only served to undermine the opinion itself and the legal points raised by the court. It may have been cathartic, but it was also tedious and prejudicial. It has a certain chest-pounding element that is neither necessary nor compelling for a court to insert into an opinion.
Judge Young would be wise to issue a corrected opinion without the novel captioning and conclusion . . . and simply send a postcard to this curious penpal.
Turley has previously expressed his own dislike of Trump’s visa policy restrictions and scrutiny. This is simply an illustration of the odd swerving of judicial decisions and opinions coming from the Left-appointed judges which has now spilled over into a Reagan-appointee’s official documents. He is basically editorializing from the bench alongside his legal opinion, perhaps he’s taking a cue from Trump himself in this regard, but i find it oddly more honest when these judges spout emotion and add postcards to their rulings and emote their personal human impulses no matter how very quirky, flawed, or unrelated to the law.
Judge Chutkin bloviated, “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.”
Cringe. First, she undermined the judiciary. Now, she’s murdering prose.
Hopefully, the military is no longer being undermined, the same way the judiciary has –
I’m feeling better about it 🙂
I hear the Navy has already removed “Blow the Man Down, Boys! from the official Navy songbook. 🙂
(FWIW, somewhere around here, I have a book, Sodomy and the Pirate Tradition, or something like that. IIRC, I found out what a Rear-Admiral is. )
😀
Before dementia afflicts this judge further … retire. Otherwise he is subject to the nonsensical writing of a clerk or someone not even having that job and to opportunities to influence a federal district court judge.
At first I thought the good professor was making a joke about the postcard. Nope! Reads like something out of the Bee, but not nearly as humorous. Why did this judge think that was a good idea?
Because he’s 85 years old!
I would comment, but I am too busy trembling with fear over the government shutdown.
How can we tell?
NOT ME…. firing time baby
Yep, I look for Trump to “not let this crisis go to waste. . .” 🙂
HAHAHA. Love it
“I am too busy trembling with fear over the government shutdown.”
In between attacks of trembling, the stock market is up nicely today. What do those investors know about the effect of a large and active FedGov on the economy that Democrat voters do not?
One fact of life to consider:
In the very near future Democrats will be as lawless as Republicans, thanks to Trump.
If Trump illegally amended the 14th Amendment through Executive Order (January 2025). Democrats can amend 2nd Amendment gun rights in literally 5 minutes in a single day through Executive Order as soon as January 2029.
Based on over 200 years of history, presidents abuses of power rarely end with reforms ending the lawlessness. The next president of the other party expands the abuse of power.
Don’t blame Democrats, since Trump created this precedent for future Democrats to use against Republicans.
I was more concerned by Biden’s unlawful and unconstitutional shift of student debt to tax payers than Trump raising the question of birthright citizenship. I’ve seen the birth tourism business upclose.
What do you mean “In the very near future Democrats will be as lawless”? They already are. They are the ones who promote and defend illegal immigration. They are the ones who defend criminals and blame victims. They are the ones who cheered on the Summer of Love, George Floyd violent, destructive and even deaths riots. They are the ones who provided bail money to those same rioters. They are the ones who want to see ICE agents doxxed and their families put in danger to protect illegal criminals.
You mean lawlessness like this?
Trump administration confirms another federal agency involved in weaponization: the TSA
“Biden’s TSA Administrator Pekoske and his cronies abused their authority and weaponized the federal government against the very people they were charged with protecting,” DHS Secretary Kristi Noem said on X on Tuesday. “Biden’s TSA wildly abused their authority, targeting Americans who posed no aviation security risk under the banner of political differences. President Trump promised to end the weaponization of government against the American people, and we are making good on that promise. I am referring this case to the Department of Justice and for Congressional investigation.”
https://justthenews.com/government/federal-agencies/dhs-says-biden-tsa-was-weaponized-against-americans-and-refers
Ano
You are so full of it.
Bill Clinton had a good friend who was a terrorist and yes bombed government building (Ayers)
Bill Ayers… who was The Accidental Neighbor who then slipped Barack Obama into American politics. Why… Obama barely knew him… just some guy in the neighborhood, no idea he was an American terrorist and political operative for the Clintons. (but how did that work out for Hills, years down the road?)
What are the chances an unrepentant American terrorist and murderer could be so successful at achieving his dreams of destroying America! And doing so without having to go back to personally dangerous tactics like planting bombs and having to shoot it out with police!
Bill Ayers is just one of the many terrorists here in America who have found a welcoming home under the Democrat roof, with pardons and commutations provided as necessary. Ayers and his terrorist wife are considered quite the heroes and celebrities within both the DNC and university faculty lounges.
Three facts of life to consider:
1. Anyone beginning their fairy tale be claiming Democrats are not yet lawless has already lost their credibility. But… keep trying.
2. When you try to claim Trump “illegally amended the 14th Amendment”, we go back to point one and you have now confirmed you don’t know what ‘lawless’ and ‘illegal’ mean.
3. Feel free to try amending the 2nd Amendment through Executive Order – while expecting that won’t be tested before SCOTUS as Trump denying the validity of “birthright citizenship” will be.
The biggest tell of all is that Democrats shriek about the Second Amendment – but not one of them has the balls to make eliminating the Second Amendment a campaign promise while running for election. Just as they don’t have the balls to do something about the slaughter in their gun banning utopias like Chicago, where Identity Politics Democrats slaughter other Identity Politics Democrats by the thousands, with a mortality rate greater than our KIA rate for our troops in all the years in Afghanistan.
Professor Turley ignored the majority of the 161-page opinion and instead focused on a small part of it. He provided no context or analysis of the ruling and chose to criticize the judge instead.
A more relevant question is whether the judge’s overall opinion is correct.
What is particularly concerning is Turley’s failure to discuss the President’s use of visa denials as a means to silence dissent, which is clearly an attack on free speech. Rather than defending the rights of those targeted by the President, Turley is preoccupied with one strange aspect of a lengthy opinion without providing any context.
Perhaps Professor Turley should address the merits of the ruling as a whole, rather than fixating on a specific introduction. Once immigrants or resident aliens are in the country, they have the right to free speech. The Constitution does not state that these rights are reserved only for citizens. You do not have to be a citizen to enjoy the right to free speech. However, President Trump and his administration are openly attacking the free speech rights of immigrant students in an effort to silence them, which goes against our fundamental values.
Opinion, opinion, opinion! You ignore so much. I wonder if that is from ignorance, or more sadly from a terrible sense of self-grandizing, which we see way too much of these days? Give yourself a rest & step down from your high horse long enough to admit there may well be truth & value in an opinion other than your own, & that often there are two sides to a subject for a good, & obvious reason. Because two things can be true at the same time. I know it is difficult to do from personal experience, but attest to the value & wisdom gained by the effort.
X, you missed it: The judge is stricken with TDS! The ruling has no merit as it’s not based on anything but orange man bad.
Remember this is his personal blog. He’s a busy man and writes this in his free time. Writing a quick note about the strangeness of a judge’s opinion fits better within his schedule than an in depth analysis of those 161 pages. I too am sometimes frustrated that he doesn’t address things I’m interested in more fully, but Im not paying for this content, so I can’t really complain.
X
Hey dummy. If you come from another country. That doesn’t mean we are forced to let you in
Another comment from the Know it all X. The central theme of the judges comments has been properly provided by Professor Turley. Has anyone noticed that X has posted no source for his declaration.
Then X turns from the actions of the judge to the rights of illegal immigrants to speak in America while providing no supporting documentation that such incidents have occurred. Someone in his head tells him what he should think about and he dutifully signals his ten digits to type anything that comes to his TDS infected mind. Science should work on an antibiotic to treat his condition. There’s millions to be made. P.S. I think the someone in his head is the infamous Know it all George.
Think
posted no source for his declaration.
______________________________
Yep X never does.
And him/her/it not posting their source is a good thing! Because the source is somewhere deep up inside their own bowels, and they have just pulled it out of their a$$. No telling what else is up there – corn cobs, cucumbers, bananas, large pieces of furniture, gerbils, etc. So, I am grateful that it is left unattributed!
If I went to Paris on a student visa and stood in front of the Paris Opera screaming death to France, death to western civilization (in French of course) would I be invited to stay because of freedom of speech ? doubt it. In England criticizing immigration policy will land you in prison, so not even a question there. Non citizens advocating violence against American society should not be tolerated.
George/X: have you ever taken a moment to reflect on just how enormous your failure is? No, not as a human being, you must be aware of that by now.
Not that, but your failure as a wannabe blogger Democrat social influencer. You are The Democrat Karen Of A Thousand Whining Complaints.
You are so penniless and unable to afford publishing your own blog, that the only way you can see your words in print is to come here daily as a parasite on this blog to publish your mumblings as just another post. Where you are then invariably mocked, jeered, and treated with derision. The only one accepting your mumblings here is you, George/X.
Alternatively, you actually can afford your own blog (there are sites that will host them for free, of course). But that won’t work because your fraudulent opinions have so little appeal that nobody would follow you and read them – leaving you, once again, staring another life’s failure in the face.
We come back to why you’re here in the first place?
A sexual attraction to Professor Turley?
Or a masochist who gets sexual gratification from the daily beatdowns you get – all while you declare victory.
George Svelaz keeps writing the same junk so I will respond here with my previous response.
“Once immigrants or resident aliens are in the country, they have the right to free speech. The Constitution does not state that these rights are reserved only for citizens.”
Once again, George Svelaz, you’ve drawn a conclusion without reference to law or evidence. You wrote: “was revoked because”—a definitive claim implying that is the official reason. It is not. You have no verified source, and under U.S. immigration law, some revocation grounds are classified and not publicly released.
The law governing visa revocations is clear, even if the underlying evidence is not.
• INA §221(i), 8 U.S.C. §1201(i): grants the Secretary of State broad discretion to revoke a visa after issuance.
• 22 C.F.R. §41.122: implements that discretion, allowing revocation “at any time,” including provisional or silent revocations.
• 9 FAM 403.11: outlines procedures (notice “when practicable,” physical cancellation, etc.).
• 8 U.S.C. §1227(a)(4)(C)(i) and §1227(a)(1)(B): cover grounds of deportability, including associations or activities that ICE may determine inconsistent with U.S. foreign policy.
Thus, associations or speech that ICE determined could undermine U.S. foreign policy were cited as the reason under the statutes above—not your claimed “op-ed” theory.
You have been told this before, yet you continue substituting emotion for evidence. Opinions without law are not arguments. They are misrepresentations—and when repeated despite correction, they become lies.
AluTrump AluTrump AluTrump AluTrump AluTrump death to the infidels. Death to the infidels.
It is strange opinion rendered in a strange way. Maybe he should retire before he befouls himself further. I suspect that this will be appealed.
More and more the reason for term limits in all branches of the government seems to grow.
With all due respect to Senator Grassley, this justice should have rendered is last opinion.
His postcard is not even as nicely printed up as Joe Biden’s cheat sheets
As for terms limits, listen old man time to sign off, go read the obituaries.
Poor annony moron!! GEB writes a interesting comment, and of course annony moron cannot stand it. So, annony moron has to whine and cry.
How marvelous!
GEB
Joe Biden’s cheat sheets
____________________
Did you see the nice photos on them cheat-sheets. Most of all Billarys
Yes – term limits in all branches of government!
Now all you have to do is amend the Constitution to achieve that.
Maybe the 85 year old judge has lost his marbles.
The judge is 85 years old, he knows better. I would believe he needs a bed next to Fauci and Potato head Joe at the “Happy Pillows” old Swamp Grifters retirement home. I hear they have great chocolate pudding and Monday special meatloaf!
“intentionally to chill the rights to freedom of
speech and peacefully to assemble of the non-citizen plaintiff
members of the plaintiff associations. ”
Non-Citizens HAVE NO RIGHTS!
Add him to the list of impeached judges when the US Senator gets to major majority of Republicans!
Does the Assoc of crazy people at Harvard have standing?
As stated many times, it is way past time that major sanctions be issued with every reversal of a Judicial Branch member!!!!! Insane, comes to mind on this one.
live in liberal land long enough you BRAIN ROTS
I want these JUDGES arrested!
Judges like Chutkan are among the many reasons some view we have a constitutional crisis. When Judges drag their schoolboy politics upon the bench they challenge their credibility to decide anything beyond the shoes they might wear.
Respecting the Constitution is no longer a requirement of a liberal appointed judge, only politics rules in the liberal world. It is the decay and rot of woke liberalism. Classic liberals at least had respect for the Constitution. I am old enough to remember when there were liberal Republicans and Conservative Democrats who could work across the aisle. The split then was then Republicans were more business and the Democrats were more labor. Now it is the Republicans are commonsense and the Democrats are lunacy.
“Xenix showed the side of the story no one dared to touch — well done!”check this out 👇
👉👉👉👉👉 xenixnews.com
Never heard of xenis news. Seeing you are an Anon, I will consider it a computer virus site or a whacked out liberal site, which is a virus to society.
NEXT he will find Seashells telling him what to do. TOO OLD-RETIRE!!!
The left has gone bonkers
_________________
Libs Now Say That Touting the Stay-at-home-mom Norm Reflects “Fascism”
PS.. This judge is a fool.