patrick.net

French Court Bars National Rally Leader Marine Le Pen from Office for 5 Years After Embezzlement Conviction

Marine Le Pen Responds to Court Banning Her from Running for President: ‘Millions of French People Have Been Silenced’

In a chilling glimpse of how the U.S. 2024 presidential election could have panned out, French leader Marine Le Pen has been banned from running for president in France by a weaponized court.

Le Pen, head of France’s right-wing National Rally Party and the main rival of liberal French President Emmanuel Macron, reacted to the ruling in a new interview with TF1.

The court accused Le Pen and others in her party of misusing $4.9 million of European Union (EU) funds.

The funds were designated to aid legislators in the European Parliament.

However, the court ruled that Le Pen used the funds to pay party staffers uninvolved in work for the EU parliament.

By convicting Le Pen guilty of the charges, the judges barred the National Rally Party leader from running in the 2027 French presidential election.

She is now banned from running for public office for five years.

“I perfectly understood that the court president was explaining that she was issuing a political ruling,” Le Pen stated.

“The magistrate made it very clear that enforcing the temporary sentence barring me from seeking public office rendered my appeal void and would prevent me from running and getting elected, she said, in the presidential election.

“There are millions of French people who are outraged, outraged to an unbelievable extent when they see that, in France, the country of human rights, judges were implementing practices that we thought were typical of authoritarian regimes,” she continued.

“I think the judges got it wrong,” she said.

“I think they chose to ignore all of the explanations that were given because, in the very first hours of this trial, I had understood that the court was biased against us.

“I did not think the magistrates would go this far against our democratic process and interfere this much with the choice of the French.

“Let’s be clear: I have been silenced but it’s the voice of millions of French people that have been silenced as we speak tonight.”

“I’m a fighter,” she declared.

“I’m not going to let myself be eliminated like that.

“I’m going to pursue every avenue of recourse that I can,” she vowed.

“There’s a small path; it may be narrow, but it does exist.

“In fact, I’m going to ask, in the clearest possible way, for the appeal decision to be handed down enabling me to consider running in the presidential election.

“I will always stand by the French.

“Millions of French people believe in me.

“Millions of French people put their trust in me.

“And I’ve come to tell them, ‘I have been fighting for you for 30 years, and I’ve been fighting injustice for thirty years. And so I’m going to keep doing it. And I will do it all the way.’”

Trump Tells Supreme Court His Presidential Authority Is Under Attack from Activist Federal Judges

President Donald Trump’s administration has issued a plea to the Supreme Court as activist federal judges across the country seek to undermine the authority of the White House.

On Wednesday, the Trump administration told the high court that the president’s authority to protect the nation is under siege from lower court rulings.

White House lawyers used a final brief in a high-stakes deportation case to accuse federal judges of imperiling the executive branch’s core powers.

The brief was the last fling before Supreme Court justices are slated to rule on Trump’s use of a 1798 immigration law to deport Venezuelan nationals.

In the filing, Trump admin lawyers outlined what they call a pattern of judicial overreach.

It comes as Trump is under mounting attacks from Democrat-aligned federal judges seeking to undermine the president’s agenda.

In the Wednesday filing, U.S. Acting Solicitor General Sarah Harris said:

“A single district court cannot broadly disable the President from discharging his most fundamental duties, regardless of the order’s label, and irrespective of its duration.”

‘Should Have Recused Himself’: Legal Experts Sound Alarm On Obama-Appointed Judge Blocking Trump’s Deportations

As U.S. District Court Judge James Boasberg continues to be a thorn in the side of the Trump administration’s effort to deport gangbangers, legal experts have begun to raise questions about his handling of the case.

The Obama-appointed judge in March blocked President Donald Trump from using wartime authorities to send suspected Tren de Aragua gangbangers to a mega-prison in El Salvador, prompting incredible pushback from the president himself. As the challenge to the deportations play out in court, some legal experts have argued Boasberg should recuse himself from the case entirely, while others say he appears to be “making policy from the bench.”

Critics have pointed to the fact that Boasberg’s daughter, Katharine Boasberg, works for an organization whose founder openly celebrated her father’s decision to halt the deportations.

“Under Canon 3 (C) (1) of the ‘Code of Conduct for United States Judges’ it states that judges must disqualify themselves from a case ‘in which the judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned,'” Hans von Spakovsky, a senior legal fellow at the Heritage Foundation, said to the Daily Caller News Foundation. “Given that his daughter works directly for an organization that supports illegal aliens, opposes deportation of aliens, and has voiced its support for Boasberg’s action in this very case, the impartiality of his judgment is obviously open to be reasonably questioned.”

The Supreme Court on Tuesday halted a lower court order requiring the Trump administration to reinstate thousands of federal employees who were dismissed as part of a sweeping effort to shrink the federal workforce.

The decision came in response to the administration's emergency appeal of a California judge's ruling, which had directed the government to bring back 16,000 probationary employees while a lawsuit challenging the legality of the mass firings moves forward. The Supreme Court's action means that affected employees at six federal agencies will remain on paid administrative leave for now.

The U.S. House of Representatives has passed a bill that seeks to limit the powers of “rogue” activist judges attempting to undermine the authority of President Donald Trump.

The No Rogue Rulings Act, led by Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) and backed by Trump, aims to limit federal district judges’ ability to affect Trump administration policies on a national scale.

The legislation passed the House Wednesday evening.

All but one Republican voted for the bill, which passed 219 to 213.

No Democrat lawmakers voted in favor.

The bill limits district courts’ power to issue U.S.-wide injunctions.

Instead, federal judges will be forced to focus their scope on the parties directly affected in most cases.

Since the president took office, the Trump administration has faced more than 15 nationwide injunctions from Democrat-aligned activist judges.

The politically motivated injunctions have been targeting a wide range of Trump’s policies

Sounds like a good law.