Vice President JD Vance isn’t one to mince words.
And he just created the perfect 3-line social media post.
Vance posted possibly the perfect analogy to make a much needed point on the CORRUPTION of judges overstepping their legitimate authority, and trampling on the legitimate authority of the President.
He basically gave a masterclass in basic division of federal powers in just a few lines posted to his X account, but first… we need to set the stage.
We recently brought you the story of federal Judge Paul Engelmayer and his own brand of lawfare against President Trump and the work of DOGE.
The case in question was filed in New York City, by the New York Attorney General’s office.
You know — good old Letitia James’ office, who has made her living off of harassing President Trump at every turn.
The lawsuit led to Judge Engelmayer restricting DOGE’s ability to access the payment system of the U.S. Treasury Department.
Here’s our initial report on that:
Judge Engelmayer's restrictions were couched in terms of privacy and a need to protect the Social Security and bank account numbers found within the system, as the New York Post reported:
Early Saturday, a federal judge blocked Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency from accessing Treasury Department records that contain sensitive personal data such as Social Security and bank account numbers for millions of Americans.
US District Judge Paul Engelmayer issued the order after 19 Democratic attorneys general sued President Donald Trump.
The case, filed in federal court in New York City, alleges the Trump administration allowed Musk’s team access to the Treasury Department’s central payment system in violation of federal law.
The payment system handles tax refunds, Social Security benefits, veterans’ benefits and much more, sending out trillions of dollars every year while containing an expansive network of Americans’ personal and financial data.
New York Attorney General Letitia James, whose office filed the lawsuit, said DOGE’s access to the Treasury Department’s data raises security problems and the possibility for an illegal freeze in federal funds.
So basically a federal judge stopped DOGE -- working under the auspices of the President -- from accessing the payment system in the Treasury Department.
Of course, even a rudimentary understanding of the powers of the Executive branch would be enough to know there's probably something wrong with that ruling.
Elon Musk, though he definitely has more than a rudimentary understanding of the subject, chimed in first -- as soon as the ruling came down.
This ruling is absolutely insane!
How on Earth are we supposed to stop fraud and waste of taxpayer money without looking at how money is spent?
That’s literally impossible!
Something super shady is going to protect scammers. https://t.co/7Eyy9ZsN7A
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) February 8, 2025
Keep in mind -- the judge didn't even stop at restricting DOGE's access to the payment system.
He specifically forbade all political appointees from accessing the system, which would obviously include Scott Bessent -- the Secretary of the Treasury!
That ought to be all the proof anyone needs that this isn't a pushback against the perceived privacy danger of DOGE accessing the payment system, but a political stunt designed to thwart the political agenda of the President because they disagree with it in principle.
Tough -- get elected President... and then you can push a political agenda. Until then, those operating in the judiciary and court system are supposed to be apolitical in nature.
Maybe that judge need to be restricted from accessing his court room, and that Attorney General needs to be restricted from prosecuting cases?
That would be a more JUST use of authority, truth be told.
At any rate, today... JD Vance entered the chat.
And he brought the sort of pinprick logic that made me wish for the chance to binge watch season after season of an imaginary reality show featuring JD Vance debating every "woke" progressive that could be tempted into the ring with him.
Here's his logic:
If a judge tried to tell a general how to conduct a military operation, that would be illegal.
If a judge tried to command the attorney general in how to use her discretion as a prosecutor, that's also illegal.
Judges aren't allowed to control the executive's legitimate power.
— JD Vance (@JDVance) February 9, 2025
If a judge tried to tell a general how to conduct a military operation, that would be illegal.
If a judge tried to command the attorney general in how to use her discretion as a prosecutor, that's also illegal.
Judges aren't allowed to control the executive's legitimate power.
Not only is that a masterclass in the American version of the division of federal powers...
It's also a masterclass in LEGITIMATE authority.
But we have normalized the concepts of manipulation on emotional grounds to the point we can't really even grapple with the concept of simply recognizing legitimate authority versus illegitimate authority -- and treating them accordingly in each case.
But that's exactly the point JD Vance is making.
There is legitimate authority held by a military General, for example. And it would be an example of illegitimate authority for a judge to OVERSTEP his legitimate authority in such a way that presumes upon the legitimate authority of the General.
So as with a judge, an Attorney General, and as he ultimately includes -- a Executive.
Simply put, to usurp the legitimate authority of another is to exercise illegitimate power yourself.
And for a judge to presume to restrict the legitimate authority of a president -- the executive -- is in itself the illegitimate use of the judge's authority.
It is an overstep... which is exactly what the Trump administration called it, according to reporting by CNN:
A federal judge, citing a risk of “irreparable harm,” has temporarily restricted Elon Musk’s government efficiency team from accessing a critical Treasury Department payment system.
The judge’s order, issued early Saturday, temporarily halts access to a sensitive payment system that distributes Americans’ tax returns, Social Security benefits, disability payments and federal employees’ salaries.
US District Judge Paul Engelmayer ordered the destruction of any downloaded information from the payment system by anyone given access to it since January 20, citing “the risk that the new policy presents of the disclosure of sensitive and confidential information and the heightened risk that the systems in question will be more vulnerable than before to hacking.”
A hearing on the matter was set for February 14.
The White House called Saturday’s order “judicial overreach.”
To which case, I agree with Elon Musk's line of thinking when he attempted to come up with a solution that might weed out the most corrupt and incompetent Judges -- which they surely are if they presume to have the authority to overstep the legitimate authority of the Executive Branch of our government.
A judge who doesn't understand that literally knows nothing about the judiciary system in which he works.
Or, else... as Musk allowed for... he might just be corrupt, and not care.
Here's Elon's idea:
I’d like to propose that the worst 1% of appointed judges, as determined by elected bodies, be fired every year.
This will weed out the most corrupt and least competent.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) February 9, 2025
While that may not fix the problem as it is in this moment... it might actually be a worthwhile avenue to explore in coming up with some type of mechanism for the future.
Then again, stupid is hard to fix.
And a stupid judge is probably harder to fix than a regular stupid person... simply because they're going to be more prone to arrogance; being that they're a judge and all.
Which is why you need a system for voting out the inept alongside the corrupt.
From my vantage point, they seem to be one and the same -- particularly those appointed by democrats.
Funny how that works.
Join the conversation!
Please share your thoughts about this article below. We value your opinions, and would love to see you add to the discussion!