GOP hits back after judges demand Trump allies be condemned for targeting judiciary

FIRST ON FOX: The GOP lawmaker leading a collective response to more than 100 judges and attorneys who demanded condemnation of Trump allies said Tuesday she and her delegation won’t be “pushed around” amid ongoing attacks on left-wing judges.

Wyoming’s congressional delegation responded to dozens of Cowboy State jurists, including a former governor who issued an open condemnation of lawmakers’ failure to defend judges under fire from conservatives over sweeping nationwide injunctions hindering President Donald Trump’s foreign policy and homeland security actions.

The response, led by Sen. Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyo., rejected the basis on which the jurists were calling for the state’s Republicans to vociferously intervene in support of what the White House describes as rogue judges, citing the Founding Fathers’ words.

“In Federalist [Paper] 78…  Alexander Hamilton wrote that “the judiciary, from the nature of its functions, will always be the least dangerous” and that judges “have neither force nor will,” the letter states. 

WYOMING SHERIFF’S BOLD BILLBOARD RECRUITING DENVER OFFICERS OUT OF LIBERAL CITY CREATES STIR

“In recent years, we have become increasingly concerned with how our country has strayed from this Hamiltonian aspiration. We have seen judges across the political spectrum assume both “force” and “will” — Many Americans are worried judges are misusing their independence by imposing policy preferences on our country — all with no accountability.”

They also noted Georgetown Law professor Brad Snyder “said it best” – “The Court does not have the last word on the Constitution.”

‘TRAITOR’ LIZ CHENEY WALLOPED BY WYOMING VOTERS FOR HARRIS ENDORSEMENT, BREAK FROM GOP

In comments to Fox News Digital, Lummis said Americans elected Trump and did not select “liberal judges.”

“I represent the people of Wyoming, and they have made it clear that they support President Trump’s agenda and want a government where their elected representatives make the laws,” she said.

“Our delegation stands with President Trump and won’t be pushed around by far-left judicial activists who wish to further divide our country.”

The jurists objecting to the Republicans’ silence cited calls to reject disinformation after the Jan. 6 Capitol riot and similarly recounted critiques from administration allies of judges, like James Boasberg, who have issued nationwide injunctions blocking Trump’s homeland security measures.

In a missive entitled “The Rule of Law Matters,” they cited more virulent critiques of such judges, as well as a conservative op-ed decrying that “if impeachment is the remedy for every adverse judicial ruling, we wouldn’t have a judiciary left.”

“These attacks are part of a growing effort to discredit, not just judges, but seemingly the American Rule of Law as we know it,” the original letter states. It was signed by about 100 jurists, including former Wyoming Democratic Gov. Michael Sullivan, former President Bill Clinton’s Irish ambassador.

“Recent executive orders targeting prominent national law firms disfavored by the administration with severe retribution… has, as night follows day, resulted in yet more incendiary social media postings attacking the judiciary and openly encouraging the executive branch to disobey court orders.”

In their response to the scores of jurists, Lummis, Sen. John Barrasso and Rep. Harriet Hageman condemned the fact the direct letter had also been distributed to the media and that the lawmakers would have collectively appreciated direct discussion.

“We are disappointed you failed to express your concerns with us directly before rushing to publish your letter,” they wrote.

“A robust discussion about addressing the challenges and concerns facing our nation would be more beneficial than attempting to score political points through the press.”

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

The complainants wrote that while there is populist sentiment for “radical change,” the “growing reckless disdain for the independence and security of our judiciary must be resisted by anyone sworn to uphold our Constitution.

“That includes us, and it certainly includes you.”

The lawmakers stood firm, however, on the idea that they are acting responsibly and within their legislative role.

They cited their co-sponsorship of a bill that would ban most nationwide injunctions effecting change “across the ideological spectrum,” and not just those against Trump’s actions.

Legislation highlighted by the lawmakers cited both conservative and liberal Supreme Court justices issuing criticisms of such nationwide injunctions.

“The Supreme Court has consistently noted that political questions should be kept at arm’s length by the judiciary,” they wrote, as a Senate Judiciary Committee statement on the Judicial Relief Clarification Act quoted reservations from both Justices Clarence Thomas and Elena Kagan.

Other jurists have, however, echoed Trump’s criticisms, including George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley, who told Fox News’ “The Ingraham Angle” that judges must remember they’ve been “appointed, not anointed.”