ADVERTISEMENTs

Indian American Impact issues call to curb Trump's judicial authority

The organizations described what they called an unprecedented attack on the judiciary during the opening months of Trump’s second term.

Donald Trump/IIndian American Impact / Reuters/ IA inpact

Indian American Impact joined a group of over 80 civil society organizations calling for action to check what they described as an unprecedented attack on the judiciary by the Trump administration.

In a joint letter issued April 3, the organizations urged Congress and legal professionals to curb President Donald Trump’s efforts to undermine judicial independence and erode the separation of powers. 

“President Trump has issued public statements and signed dozens of executive orders… to gut our federal government, challenge our system of checks and balances, and undermine our Constitution,” the letter stated. “Our Constitution unequivocally establishes that a president is not a king and that no one stands above the law.”
 



Also Read: Trump asks US Supreme Court to intervene in deportations fight

Highlighting proposed legislation such as the Judicial Understaffing Delays Getting Emergencies Solved (JUDGES) Act (H.R. 1702), the Promptly Ending Political Prosecutions and Executive Retaliation (PEPPER) Act (H.R. 1789), and the No Rogue Rulings (NORRA) Act (H.R. 1526), the organizations expressed concern that they would allow Trump to stack federal courts, shield executive officials from accountability, and limit the ability of judges to block unconstitutional actions.

The signatories also criticized administration figures, including Vice President JD Vance for declaring that 'judges aren't allowed to control the executive's legitimate power' and senior adviser Stephen Miller for supporting legislative efforts to weaken judicial authority. 

Further, their letter points to Elon Musk’s actions, noting that he publicly disclosed personal information about the daughter of a judge who ruled against the administration, escalating tensions over judicial independence.

Comments