by Judicial Overreach Meets Power Fantasy
A federal judge has apparently forgotten which branch of government she works for, issuing a ruling so legislative it practically comes with committee assignments and C-SPAN coverage. Judge Patricia Thornton’s latest decision doesn’t just interpret lawit rewrites it, edits it, and then adds footnotes about how she would have written the Constitution better.
The controversial ruling, described by one constitutional scholar as “a judge discovering she can just make stuff up,” addresses immigration policy by essentially declaring that judges can now write their own laws if Congress isn’t doing it fast enough or correctly enough. It’s separation of powers meets “I’ll do it myself.”
“We were concerned Judge Thornton was overstepping,” explained one appeals court clerk. “Then we realized she’s not oversteppingshe’s completely abandoned the judicial branch and is now just freelancing as a one-woman legislature. At least she’s efficient.”
The ruling spans 247 pages, most of which read less like legal analysis and more like a congressional bill drafted by someone who watched too much West Wing. Judge Thornton cites precedent, then ignores it, then creates new precedent, then probably goes home and dreams about gavels and standing ovations.
According to actual constitutional law, federal judges interpret laws written by Congressthey don’t write those laws themselves. But Judge Thornton apparently missed that day in law school, or attended one of those online universities advertised during daytime television.
“The separation of powers is a suggestion, not a rule,” Judge Thornton reportedly told clerks. “Besides, have you seen Congress lately? Someone needs to do their job, and it might as well be me. I have a gavel and strong opinions. That’s basically the same as being elected, right?”
Legal experts are divided, which is lawyer-speak for “everyone agrees this is insane but some people are too polite to say it.” Constitutional scholars note that Judge Thornton’s ruling essentially claims judicial authority over immigration policy, budget allocation, and probably foreign relations if given enough coffee and validation.
The ruling has sparked predictable political responses. One party celebrates it as “judicial heroism,” while the other condemns it as “tyrannical activism”positions that will completely reverse the next time a judge rules in the opposite direction. It’s constitutional consistency meets partisan convenience, and nobody wins except lawyers billing hourly.
Judge Thornton’s colleagues have expressed concern through carefully worded statements that translate to “please stop this before we all get hauled before Congress to explain why judges are now writing immigration policy between ruling on traffic violations and divorce proceedings.”
According to federal court guidelines, judges have specific roles that don’t include “becoming a unilateral legislative body because you’re frustrated with Congress.” But Judge Thornton apparently interpreted that guideline as more of a challenge than a limit.
The case is expected to be appealed, overturned, and used in law school classes as an example of “what not to do unless you want to be referenced in textbooks with words like ‘controversial,’ ‘unprecedented,’ and ‘Did she actually think this would stand?'”
Meanwhile, actual members of Congress expressed mixed feelings about a judge doing their jobs for them. Some appreciate the help, noting they’ve been busy with fundraising and Twitter feuds. Others resent the implication that a single appointed judge could do in one ruling what they haven’t accomplished in years of committee meetings and grandstanding.
As the legal community processes this judicial fever dream, one thing is clear: Judge Thornton has redefined “activist judge” from “interprets law liberally” to “completely abandons judicial role and starts legislating from the bench like it’s a competitive sport.” The founders are rolling in their graves so fast they could power the entire Eastern Seaboard.
SOURCE: https://bohiney.com/federal-judge-dreams-shes-congress/
SOURCE: Federal Judge Dreams She’s Congress (Aisha Muharrar)
