Texas Weekly Online

Menu
Menu
Facebook Twitter Youtube

Author:

Federal judge appointed by Trump quits group over statement on threats

Federal judge appointed by Trump quits group over statement on threats

A federal judge appointed by President Donald Trump in 2018 announced that he had resigned from the largest association of federal judges, decrying how the group issued a rare statement last week condemning recent alleged threats against judges but stayed quiet for years while conservative members of the judiciary faced scrutiny and attack.  Judge James C. Ho, of the New Orleans-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, announced his departure from the Federal Judges Association during a speaking event Saturday hosted by the conservative Federalist Society at the University of Michigan Law School. It comes in response to the 1,100-member group issuing a statement on March 5 saying in part that “judges must be permitted to do their jobs without fear of violence or intimidation of any kind.” Trump and his allies have grown increasingly critical of judges who have blocked the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) and other aspects of the administration’s agenda, while DOGE leader Elon Musk last month called for an “immediate wave of judicial impeachments.”  “I was very surprised by that statement. And the next morning, I sent an email to the organization saying that I wanted to resign,” Ho said of the Federal Judges Association. “I researched for myself, and I also asked the association if they ever issued any such statements when Justice Thomas received attacks, or Justice Alito. Justice Kavanaugh dealt with an assassination attempt. We’ve had federal district judges in Texas and in Florida – as well as, I’m sure, other states, but those are the ones that come to mind immediately – all faced the kinds of things that that statement was complaining about and more. Did we see these statements in 2024 or 2023 or 2022? From what I can tell, no.”  WHO IS JUDGE AMIR ALI? THE BIDEN-APPOINTED FEDERAL JUDGE AT THE CENTER OF TRUMP’S USAID BATTLE “You can’t say that you’re in favor of judicial independence only when it comes to decisions that you like. That’s not protecting the judiciary, that’s politicizing the judiciary,” Ho said, arguing that such statements actually harm the cause they try to further. “Because one of two things turns out to be true when you’re selective in this way. And either of these options, I think, is a bad thing. Option number one is that you’re basically lying, that you actually don’t care about this principle because you didn’t stand up for it when the shoe was on the other foot, and so you’re telling the world essentially we’re not seriously committed to judicial independence.”  “The alternative is perhaps even worse, which is that you are telling the truth – you do care about this, this principle, whether it’s judicial independence or free speech. I think this concept applies to a lot of things,” Ho continued. “If you’re telling the truth, you really care about this principle, but there are just some people who have views that are so anathema to you that you don’t think they are worthy of this principle that you expound on.”  “And so what you may think is a statement born of righteousness I think is perceived by a lot of people as merely sanctimonious,” he concluded.  Fox News Digital reached out to the Federal Judges Association for comment, but they did not immediately respond. JUDGE RULES DOGE LIKELY SUBJECT TO PUBLIC RECORDS REQUESTS, SAYS DEPARTMENT OPERATING IN ‘UNUSUAL SECRECY’ The president of the Federal Judges Association, U.S. Circuit Judge J. Michelle Childs, who was appointed by former President Joe Biden, wrote in an email to members last week that the “judiciary faces growing threats, including violence, intimidation, disinformation, and unprecedented impeachments that challenge its independence,” according to Reuters.  The Federal Judges Association then released a lengthier public statement the next day that did not elaborate on specific threats against specific judges.  It began by saying that “recent events are a clear and urgent reminder that federal judges play a crucial role in upholding our democracy as guardians of the rule of law.”  “In the history of our Republic, there has always been tension between the three separate and equal branches of the federal government, including criticism of judicial interpretations. The FJA strives to ensure that accurate information is shared with all American citizens regarding the role of the judiciary as defined in the U.S. Constitution: to impartially interpret the laws that have been created by the U.S. Congress and enforced by the Executive branch,” the group said. “Specific decisions issued by judges are not formed from individual opinions, but rather are prepared against evaluation of what the ‘laws on the books’ require.”  The group commended those, including Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, “who have commented recently on the rise in criticism, threats and violence aimed at members of the judiciary.” “Irresponsible rhetoric shrouded in disinformation undermines the public’s confidence that our justice system can fulfill its constitutional duties,” the statement said. “The security of federal judges and all those serving in the judicial branch of our government is fundamental to their ability to uphold the rule of law, and to fulfill their constitutional duty without fear or undue influence. Any erosion in the independence of the judiciary is a threat to our Constitution and to democratic rule of law. Ensuring judicial security is not just about protecting individuals, it is about preserving the integrity of our legal system and the public’s trust in an impartial judiciary.” 

GOP lawmaker calls trans Dem ‘Mr. McBride,’ abruptly ends hearing after ultimatum from another Dem

GOP lawmaker calls trans Dem ‘Mr. McBride,’ abruptly ends hearing after ultimatum from another Dem

Rep. Keith Self, R-Texas, abruptly adjourned a congressional hearing on Tuesday after Rep. Bill Keating, D-Mass., vehemently objected to Self recognizing Rep. Sarah McBride, D-Del., as “the representative from Delaware, Mr. McBride.” McBride, who identifies as a transgender woman, responded to Self — who chairs the House Foreign Affairs Committee’s Europe Subcommittee — by saying, “Thank you Madam chair.” As McBride sought to continue speaking, ranking member Keating interrupted, asking Self, “could you repeat your introduction again please?” HOUSE REPUBLICAN INTRODUCES TRANSGENDER LAWMAKER AS ‘THE GENTLEMAN … MR. MCBRIDE’ FOR FLOOR SPEECH “Ah, yes,” Self replied, adding, “we have set the standard on the” House floor. “What is that standard Mr. Chairman?” Keating questioned, before again asking Self to repeat what he had said when introducing McBride. “I will,” Self replied. “The representative from Delaware Mr. McBride,” Self repeated. “Mr. Chairman you are out of order,” Keating declared. “Mr. Chairman, have you no decency?” he asked, going on to say “this is not decent.” Self said they would continue the hearing. “You will not continue it with me unless you introduce a duly-elected representative the right way!” Keating declared. In response to the ultimatum, Self announced, “This hearing is adjourned.” GOP LAWMAKER SCRAPS WITH DEMOCRAT IN HEARING OVER TRANSGENDER ‘SLUR,’ BATHROOM RIGHTS: ‘NOT GOING TO HAVE IT’ Last month Rep. Mary Miller, R-Ill., recognized McBride for a House floor speech by saying, “The chair recognizes the gentleman from Delaware, Mr. McBride, for five minutes.” In a tweet after the episode on Tuesday, Miller sided with Self, saying that Self “is right to state the biological reality that Tim ‘Sarah’ McBride is a man. Enough with the lies. As God ordained and President Trump declared, there are only TWO GENDERS: Male and Female!”   Rep. Nancy Mace, R-S.C., said in a post on Tuesday, “You know what’s indecent? A mentally ill man pretending to be a woman. Biology. Science. The Left should try it some time(sic).” AFTER DECLINING TO STATE WHETHER TRANS REP-ELECT IS A MAN OR WOMAN, JOHNSON SAYS ‘A MAN CANNOT BECOME A WOMAN’ CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP McBride stated in a Tuesday post on X, “No matter how I’m treated by some colleagues, nothing diminishes my awe and gratitude at getting to represent Delaware in Congress. It is truly the honor and privilege of a lifetime. I simply want to serve and to try to make this world a better place.”

Oregon legislature weighing trio of bills that could result in less oversight for convicted sex offenders

Oregon legislature weighing trio of bills that could result in less oversight for convicted sex offenders

Lawmakers in Oregon are considering three bills that, if passed, would ease public safety requirements for convicted sex offenders and significantly downsize the state’s backlog for reassessing offenders. Senate Bills 819, 820 and 821 all revolve around creating an easier process for the state Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision to classify convicted sex offenders, but the suggestions in the bills ultimately reduce the number of convicted sex offenders in the community that are being monitored. A letter from the Oregon District Attorneys Association (ODAA), which was listed as public testimony on the state legislature’s website, to the Senate Committee on Judiciary asks that all three bills be reconsidered. LOUISIANA BILL TO CASTRATE SEX OFFENDERS MOVING TOWARD GOVERNOR’S DESK FOR SIGNATURE  Senate Bill 819 aims to eliminate the hearing required when a sex offender’s requirement to report or classification level is changed.  The ODAA said it is concerned that the suggestion would make the process not as thorough as the Parole Board is currently required to consider ten criteria before making such decisions. The association is also worried that victims of sex offenders would not be allowed to give input on the decision if the hearing is no longer required. The bill does state that the attorney general, district attorney or a victim could request a hearing, but the ODAA said lack of resources or notice could result in a hearing not being possible. “For instance, who is going to be tasked with tracking down all the victims years after these cases have been completed and the offender is seeking to get off the sex offender registration list,” the letter states. LAWMAKER’S BILL MANDATES AUTOMATIC DEATH PENALTY FOR CHILD SEX CRIMES FOLLOWING EPSTEIN FILES RELEASE  Senate Bill 820 seeks to change the way sex offenders are currently classified by the state by limiting the criteria for who needs a classification. It suggests only the following sex offenders be classified: those with two or more convictions for sex crimes, those being released from the Department of Corrections and those younger than 35 years old on Jan. 1, 2026. “Some sex offenders may only have one crime conviction date, or one conviction for a sex crime, or a conviction for a lesser sex crime because of consideration from a plea agreement. This does not mean that they did not engage in serious conduct and have multiple sex crimes, victims, or dates of offense,” the ODAA wrote, in part. Lastly, Senate Bill 821 suggests that the Dec. 1, 2026, deadline for the Parole Board to complete all classifications for existing sex offenders be removed. Another deadline is not provided, but the ODAA suggested it be postponed three years. “ODAA understands that handling sex offender relief or classification hearings is only one of the Parole Board’s important duties and there are limited resources to get all the work done. At the same time, these are very important decisions for both the victims of these serious crimes and the community,” the association wrote. Local outlets in Oregon report that the Parole Board is facing a massive backlog of unclassified sex offenders that cannot be handled. Of the 33,000 registered in the state, approximately 18,000 were unclassified in January 2025, according to The News-Review in Roseburg, Oregon. All three bills have received massive backlash from community members, family members of victims, law enforcement agencies and other advocates for women and children. Though a few people have shown support for the suggestions, including Democratic Gov. Tina Kotek. The Senate Committee on Judiciary is set to hold a hearing Thursday afternoon.

First on Fox: House Republican campaign arm targets vulnerable Democrats who ‘voted to shut down’ government

First on Fox: House Republican campaign arm targets vulnerable Democrats who ‘voted to shut down’ government

EXCLUSIVE — The House GOP’s campaign committee is taking aim at congressional Democrats for voting against a measure to fund the federal government through Sept. 30 and avoid a government shutdown at the end of this week.  The National Republican Congressional Committee is launching digital ads against 35 House Democrats who may face challenging or competitive races in the 2026 midterms, when the GOP aims to defend its fragile majority in the chamber. The spots, shared first with Fox News Wednesday morning, are going up hours after the House, almost entirely along party lines, voted 217-213 to pass a Republican-crafted bill that cuts non-defense spending by roughly $13 billion, boosts defense spending by around $6 billion and gives President Donald Trump more leeway in how to spend the funds. Thanks to heavy last-minute lobbying by Trump and his allies inside and outside the chamber, the House GOP didn’t need a single Democrat’s vote to pass the bill. TRUMP-BACKED BILL TO KEEP GOVERNMENT FUNDED CLEARS KEY HURDLE One Democrat, moderate Jared Golden of Maine, who represents a district carried by Trump the past three presidential elections, voted for the Republican measure. And the one Republican to vote against the bill, far right Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky, is being threatened by Trump and his allies with a possible primary challenge next year when he’s up for re-election. CLICK HERE TO READ WHAT’S IN THE FULL BILL  The digital ads by the NRCC, which are identical for all the targets, will run online in the districts of Democratic representatives Josh Harder (CA-09), Adam Gray (CA-13), Jim Costa, (CA-21), Raul Ruiz (CA-25), George Whitesides (CA-27), Derek Tran (CA-45), Dave Min (CA-47) and Mike Levin (CA-49) of California; Darren Soto (FL-09) and Jared Moskowitz (FL-23) of Florida; Eric Sorensen (IL-17) of Illinois; Frank Mrvan (IN-01) of Indiana; Kristen McDonald Rivet (MN-08) of Michigan; Don Davis (NC-01) of North Carolina; Chris Pappas (NH-01) and Maggie Goodlander (NH-02) of New Hampshire; Josh Gottheimer (NJ-05) and Nellie Pou (NJ-09) of New Jersey; Gabe Vasquez (NM-02) of New Mexico; Dina Titus (NV-01), Susie Lee (NV-03) and Steven Horsford (NV-04) of Nevada; Tom Suozzi (NY-03), Laura Gillen (NY-04), Pat Ryan (NY-18) and Josh Riley (NY-19) of New York; Greg Landsman (OH-01), Marcy Kaptur (OH-09), and Emilia Syles (OH-13) of Ohio; Janelle Bynum (OR-05) of Oregon; Henry Cuellar (TX-28) and Vicente Gonzalez (TX-34) of Texas; Eugene Vindman (VA-07) of Virginia; and Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (WA-03) of Washington state. The NRCC says there’s a modest ad buy behind the digital spots. “House Democrats threw a tantrum at the expense of the American people, shutting down the government just to score political points. After months of failure, they’ve learned nothing and doubled down on their embarrassing dysfunction.” NRCC spokesman Mike Marinella said. HOUSE GOP CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE CHAIR MAKES PREDICTION ABOUT 2026 MIDTERM ELECTIONS Democrats disagree. “The strong House Democratic vote in opposition to this reckless Republican spending bill speaks for itself,” House Minority Leader Rep. Hakeem Jeffries of New York, the top Democrat in the chamber, told reporters after the vote. And House Democratic Caucus Chair Rep. Pete Aguilar of California took aim at what he called a “partisan” measure and emphasized that “we put up a strong vote in opposition of this bill because this hurts families.”