We all know about Trumps tweet about the “ridiculous” decision of a " so- called judge" that overturned his executive order. Question: does such a public remark, from an official in function, amount to contempt of the court?
Our own Dutch Trump, Geert Wilders, was recently condemned by a Dutch court ( no sentence issued) for a racist inciting campaign speech AND holding his court in contempt.
Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk Pro
Probably not, unless actively ignoring the order. By the way, this “so-called judge” was appointed by the previous “so-called President” G. W. Bush.
Or ‘Bush the lesser’ to differentiate from Bush I. 
It is certainly contempt of court, but not Contempt of Court. If you take my meaning.
Could Trump just write another executive order worded slightly differently (maybe different countries or taking into account what pissed off the judge in the first place)? And after the ACLU gets a stay on that one, which would take some time, write another and another? I’m sure a judge cannot order a President not to write orders.
Off to GQ.
What “pissed off” the judge was presumably the possible unconstitutionality of the executive order.
If Trump attempted to flank the judicial order by issuing new slightly different executive orders, a judge could issue a blanket order prohibiting any executive orders that change immigration policies.
It will be reversed. National security and legal precedent. No one has the right to enter the United States unless a citizen. Section 221 F of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 says yes he can. every president since Carter, and the Muslim in Chief FBHO used it.
I’ll add that if he really wants to get shitty we are in a “War on Terror” he can seal the borders if he wants.
This is temporary.
Obama wasn’t Muslim, but even if he was, what fucking difference would it make? What benefit do you recieve from calling him a Muslim? What the fuck?
" Muslim in chief?" seriously?
Moderator Warning
arfurvirus, political jabs are not permitted in General Questions. This is an official warning. Do not do this again.
Colibri
General Questions Moderator
Getting back to the point, “disrespect of the Court” or criticism of a judge seem to be something triable under the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.
Presumably, this comes under the “Misbehaviour” clause of 18 USC 401 (1)
Whether, Trump’s tweet comes under that? I don’t know, but if I had to guess; unlikely.
A literal reading of the statute tends to confirm that a contempt charge would be unlikely to succeed. US law seems to lack the requirement to maintain a respectful attitude toward court rulings, which Trump certainly did not.
Nevertheless, “some cases of civil contempt have been perceived as intending to harm the reputation of the plaintiff, or to a lesser degree, the judge or the court.” The insolent attitude of referring to the judge as “so-called” calls into question his legitimacy, and referring to the ruling as “ridiculous” calls into question his competence. If it doesn’t technically qualify as contempt, it’s certainly contemptuous and unethical.
I’ve never been in courtroom…but I always thought that “Contempt of court” means acting rudely or contemptuously inside the courtroom, in the presence of the judge…
If you tell the judge to his face that he should go to hell, you’re in contempt. But if, after the case has been decided, you protest the decsion by standing on a street corner holding a sign telling the judge to go to hell, isn’t that freedom of speech?
An American lawyer would probably be your best bet to answer that question. However, in various jurisdictions a disticntion is indeed drawn between rude or disrespectful behaviour towards a judge inside the Court, which is indeed typically punished, and one which is outside, which usually does not attract punishment.
Furthermore, jurisdictions have differing views on what constitutes “outside” and “usually” . For outside, from what I have seen, the Court acts only when the action begins to affect the process of the Court. Standing out one say and yelling? Meh. Standing out for weeks and making a nuisance of oneself and affecting Court work? Yeah, issue.
Lawyers can, and sometimes do, get in trouble for criticizing judges. I’m not sure about people like Trump. I assume he would have a lot of latitude. (and he should, I hate to admit) However, knowing Judge Robart as well as I do, I think the government lawyers should be prepared for quite a lecture at the next hearing.
True but meaningless. Most federal judges are chosen by the Senators of their states, and the President rubber stamps the Senators’ choices.
In this case, the judge was the choice of liberal Democrat Patty Murray, not of Dubya. Similarly, you’ll find that Obama appointed some very conservative judges in states with two Republican Senators.
Not completely meaningless. Judge Robart is certainly more conservative than anyone Murray would have picked.
I thought that “contempt of court” was something the court did to you; holding you in contempt of court. For example, refusing to answer a question.
Correct. It’s entirely common and legitimate to take a second attempt at writing a new law or order in such a way as to avoid a previously-identified legal or constitutional problem.
He could, but I suspect that even the Ninth Circuit would rapidly reverse such an order, just as it would if a judge ordered Congress not to write immigration laws. A court can enjoin an illegal exercise of executive power, but I don’t think there’s any legal theory that allows a prospective injunction over an entire area of executive authority regardless of legality.