update: Wall Street Journal
Donald Trump on Thursday escalated his attacks on the federal judge presiding over civil fraud lawsuits against Trump University, amid criticism from legal observers who say the presumptive GOP presidential nominee’s comments are an unusual affront on an independent judiciary.
In an interview, Mr. Trump said U.S. District Judge Gonzalo Curiel had “an absolute conflict” in presiding over the litigation given that he was “of Mexican heritage” and a member of a Latino lawyers’ association. Mr. Trump said the background of the judge, who was born in Indiana to Mexican immigrants, was relevant because of his campaign stance against illegal immigration and his pledge to seal the southern U.S. border. “I’m building a wall. It’s an inherent conflict of interest,” Mr. Trump said.
The New York businessman also alleged the judge was a former colleague and friend of one of the Trump University plaintiffs’ lawyers. The judge and the lawyer once worked together as federal prosecutors, but the lawyer, Jason Forge, in an interview said he had never seen the judge socially.
“Neither Judge Curiel’s ethnicity nor the fact that we crossed paths as prosecutors in the U.S. Attorney’s Office well over a decade ago is to blame” for Mr. Trump’s actions, said Mr. Forge, who is with the law firm Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP.[...]
For judges, being criticized for rulings comes with the territory, but court watchers say it is a degree far different when the critic could win the nation’s highest office, is involved in a pending case and references the judge's ethnicity.
University of Pennsylvania law professor Stephen Burbank said it was “absolute nonsense” that the judge shouldn’t be able to preside over the case because of his ethnicity.
“If this continues, I would hope that some prominent federal judges would set Mr. Trump straight on what’s appropriate and what’s not in our democracy,” Mr. Burbank said.
Ronald Rotunda, a professor at Chapman University School of Law in Orange, Calif., noted that whatever Mr. Trump’s grievances, his lawyers haven’t filed any motion asking for the case to be reassigned to a different judge. If Mr. Trump has a problem with the judge, “that’s the legitimate way” to register a complaint, he said.[...]
The GOP candidate’s comments follow a San Diego speech last week in which he called the judge “a hater of Donald Trump” and “a total disgrace,” while referencing the judge’s ethnicity.[...]
Legal experts agreed that defendants have the First Amendment freedom to express opinions about a judge hearing their case—as long as they aren’t disruptive in the courtroom.
“It is a prized American privilege to speak one’s mind, although not always with perfect good taste, on all public institutions,” Justice Hugo Black wrote in a 1941 Supreme Court decision that threw out contempt convictions of a newspaper publisher and a labor leader for speaking out on pending litigation.[...]
Washington Post
Donald Trump on Thursday escalated his attacks on the federal judge presiding over civil fraud lawsuits against Trump University, amid criticism from legal observers who say the presumptive GOP presidential nominee’s comments are an unusual affront on an independent judiciary.
In an interview, Mr. Trump said U.S. District Judge Gonzalo Curiel had “an absolute conflict” in presiding over the litigation given that he was “of Mexican heritage” and a member of a Latino lawyers’ association. Mr. Trump said the background of the judge, who was born in Indiana to Mexican immigrants, was relevant because of his campaign stance against illegal immigration and his pledge to seal the southern U.S. border. “I’m building a wall. It’s an inherent conflict of interest,” Mr. Trump said.
The New York businessman also alleged the judge was a former colleague and friend of one of the Trump University plaintiffs’ lawyers. The judge and the lawyer once worked together as federal prosecutors, but the lawyer, Jason Forge, in an interview said he had never seen the judge socially.
“Neither Judge Curiel’s ethnicity nor the fact that we crossed paths as prosecutors in the U.S. Attorney’s Office well over a decade ago is to blame” for Mr. Trump’s actions, said Mr. Forge, who is with the law firm Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP.[...]
For judges, being criticized for rulings comes with the territory, but court watchers say it is a degree far different when the critic could win the nation’s highest office, is involved in a pending case and references the judge's ethnicity.
University of Pennsylvania law professor Stephen Burbank said it was “absolute nonsense” that the judge shouldn’t be able to preside over the case because of his ethnicity.
“If this continues, I would hope that some prominent federal judges would set Mr. Trump straight on what’s appropriate and what’s not in our democracy,” Mr. Burbank said.
Ronald Rotunda, a professor at Chapman University School of Law in Orange, Calif., noted that whatever Mr. Trump’s grievances, his lawyers haven’t filed any motion asking for the case to be reassigned to a different judge. If Mr. Trump has a problem with the judge, “that’s the legitimate way” to register a complaint, he said.[...]
The GOP candidate’s comments follow a San Diego speech last week in which he called the judge “a hater of Donald Trump” and “a total disgrace,” while referencing the judge’s ethnicity.[...]
Legal experts agreed that defendants have the First Amendment freedom to express opinions about a judge hearing their case—as long as they aren’t disruptive in the courtroom.
“It is a prized American privilege to speak one’s mind, although not always with perfect good taste, on all public institutions,” Justice Hugo Black wrote in a 1941 Supreme Court decision that threw out contempt convictions of a newspaper publisher and a labor leader for speaking out on pending litigation.[...]
Washington Post
Donald Trump’s highly personal, racially tinged attacks on a federal judge overseeing a pair of lawsuits against him have set off a wave of alarm among legal experts, who worry that the Republican presidential candidate’s vendetta signals a remarkable disregard for judicial independence.
That attitude, many argue, could carry constitutional implications if Trump becomes president.
U.S. District Judge Gonzalo Curiel, who is handling two class-action lawsuits against Trump University in San Diego, has emerged as a central target for Trump and his supporters in recent weeks. The enmity only escalated after Curiel ordered the release of embarrassing internal documents detailing predatory marketing practices at the for-profit educational venture; that case is set to go to trial after the November election.
“I have a judge who is a hater of Donald Trump, a hater. He’s a hater,” Trump said at a campaign rally in San Diego, adding that he believed the Indiana-born judge was “Mexican.”
He also suggested taking action against the judge after the election: “They ought to look into Judge Curiel, because what Judge Curiel is doing is a total disgrace. Okay? But we will come back in November. Wouldn’t that be wild if I am president and come back and do a civil case? Where everybody likes it. Okay. This is called life, folks.”
The courtroom proceedings come with high stakes for Trump, whose likely tough general-election fight against Hillary Clinton will leave him open to intense scrutiny of his character, business practices and temperament. Clinton said Wednesday that the Trump University allegations are “just more evidence that Donald Trump himself is a fraud.”
Trump’s strikingly personal attacks on Curiel are highly unusual and have prompted questions about how he would react to adverse judicial decisions should he become president. Trump’s remarks also stand out because he has a personal financial stake in the case. [...]
One of Trump’s earlier jeremiads came in February, when he told Fox News that Curiel was biased against him because of his controversial immigration comments and proposals, including his promises to build a giant wall on the U.S.-Mexico border and deport 11 million illegal immigrants.
“I think it has to do with perhaps the fact that I’m very, very strong on the border,” Trump said then. “Now, he is Hispanic, I believe. He is a very hostile judge to me.”[...]
As part of the ongoing class-action lawsuit against Trump University that he is overseeing, Curiel ordered the release of internal documents that showed Trump played a key role in the marketing for the business and how staff members were guided to push customers to purchase expensive follow-ups costing up to $35,000 after taking free introductory courses.
The order came in response to a request by The Washington Post, which argued that Trump’s presidential bid made the documents a matter of public interest. In the order, Curiel said that Trump had “placed the integrity of these court proceedings at issue.”
From Rabbi Eidensohn's choice of articles he highlights appears he is in the #nevertrump camp.
ReplyDeletenot true - I am in which one is not as bad as the other camp - I would prefer to be able to check none of the above. Unfortunately it looks like one of them will be the next president.
ReplyDeleteTrump's sister is a very highly regarded federal appeals court judge. He's very close to her (he believes in close family.) Though he said he wouldn't make her a supreme court judge cause of the nepotism involved.
ReplyDeleteOh please. Another hit piece by the left wing media.
ReplyDeleteThe media labels Trump's comments alarming, but when Obama openly attacked the court in 2010 - in the State of the Union speech, no less - these same defenders were silent. And let's not even discuss FDR's attempts to pack the court.
Many in the left are hoping that if you throw enough at him, something will stick. Good luck.
Judge Curiel is a member of the anti American group La Raza who was nominated by Barack Obama to serve on the US district court in Southern District of California in 2011.
ReplyDeleteJudge Gonzalo Curiel even awarded scholarships to illegal immigrants in San Diego in 2014.
Activist Judge Gonzalo Curiel issued an order Friday unsealing various records in the Trump University lawsuit.
Then on Tuesday he ordered records to be sealed again – after the liberal media picked over them.
The Politico reported:
U.S. District Court Judge Gonzalo Curiel issued an order Friday unsealing various records in the suit, citing significant public interest in the matter, driven in part by Trump’s own public attacks on the judge.
However, on Tuesday evening, Curiel tried to roll back his earlier order. He said he had “mistakenly” listed some records to be released in full, when they were actually supposed to be edited or redacted to delete personal information like home addresses and personal emails.
Those records are now restricted again on the court’s docketing system, but they are clearly in the possession of numerous news organizations. For instance, a declaration from former Trump University events manager Corinne Summer was posted online by the New York Times, but is no longer available from the court.
“Instructors were trained to, and witnessed them, asking students during the $1,500 seminars to call their credit card companies and raise their credit limits two, three or four times so that they would be able to invest in real estate. They would tell students to max out their credit card because they would make their money back. They couldn’t raise their limit and use it the same day,” Summer wrote.
The judge told Trump’s lawyers to file redacted copies of the resealed documents by Thursday so they could again be made public by the court.
He is a highly biased and compromised individual. Why shouldn't he be exposed for what he is?
“Donald Trump’s highly personal, racially tinged attacks on a federal judge overseeing a pair of lawsuits against him have set off a wave of alarm among legal experts, who worry that the Republican presidential candidate’s vendetta signals a remarkable disregard for judicial independence.”
ReplyDeleteYes, I’m a strong Trump supporter. To me: Donald Trump’s highly personal, racially tinged attacks on a federal judge overseeing a pair of lawsuits against him have set off a wave of exhilaration of support for Trump. Surely, biased judges throughout the country will be alarmed that Trump is speaking freely about their high-handedness and arbitrariness thinking nobody dares speak up. I quote US SDNY Judge Leonard B. Sand March 6, 2009:
“Plaintiff claims that many of the state court’s decisions were “bad-one sided rulings” and the defendant won’t respond to his inquiries fully and honestly. He brings this instant action against the pension fund in another effort to overturn the terms of the revised QDRO imposed by the state court.”
The saying dog won’t bite dog. One judge won’t criticize another judge. Even lawyers won’t criticize a sitting judge. Don’t we see this, also, in Days Rav Dovid Feinstein's Beis Din has considered Heter, today 114 ? Look at the biased, in my opinion, judges against Netanyahu’s wife! What Trump is doing here should help Netanyahu, and maybe help me, God willing, NYS Ct of Appeals Motion 2016-415.
And your point is?
ReplyDeleteMr hillary was not exactly proper with his legal troubles. 'The vast right wing conspiracy' was a term invented by hillary on national TV, till it was proven true by investigators, but she never took it back, and her husband never was penalized for it, except for losing his law license.
ReplyDeleteTrump's comments were not in the same ball park as Obama's comments. Please read them again.
ReplyDeleteI am shocked, just shocked that Donald Trump could suspect that a Hispanic Judge could harbor racial/ethnic bias! Could a sitting Judge in the United States be guilty of reverse racism, as grievous as its twin, just plain racism? Could the President of the United States be guilty of reverse racism? I think so. Read on.
ReplyDeleteThe President of the United States, Mr. Obama is an unabashed reverse-racist. Please recall the following incidents: the Harvard professor Skip Gates arrest, (which turned out to warranted) leading to the ‘sit down' with the 'racist' Police Officer at the infamous 'Beer Summit', the comments on the Trayvon Martin killing in which a Hispanic/White American killed a Black American in self-defense, the President said, "If I had a son, he'd look like Trayvon,” etc., and on the Ferguson, MO situation where a Policeman shot a criminal in self-defense. The assailant happened to be a Black American, the Policeman a White American. Before any legal determination, Obama framed the situation as racial; he went as far as commenting on the event a month later during a speech at the United Nations, He said, “I realize that America’s critics will be quick to point out that at times we too have failed to live up to our ideals; that America has plenty of problems within its own borders. This is true,” Obama said describing the fatal shooting in Ferguson. “So, yes, we have our own racial and ethnic tensions. And like every country, we continually wrestle with how to reconcile the vast changes wrought by globalization and greater diversity with the traditions that we hold dear".
The Obamas and fellow left-wing travelers have taken the country backwards and divided the population among racial/ethnic lines. Those who know Trump attest to his non-racist attitudes. Mr. Trump may have just cause to say what he said.
excuse me I missed how you went from point A to point C.
ReplyDeleteWhere is the evidence supporting Trump's accusations against the judge? Where is the evidence that he hates Trump? or that because he has Mexican ancestry and therefore presumably opposes Trumps Wall - that he is biased against Trump? Haven't read anything which suggests that Trumps charges are true or even might be true. So are they are coming across as rabble rousing - look at the video
The fact that you don't like Obama does not give carte blanche to attack anyone who disagrees is Trump.
I listened to the tape. Yes, I did make formal application asking my judges to recluse themselves. The judge, as I understand it, has to agree to recluse himself. Good luck.
ReplyDeleteThe judge in deep resentment. He is surely a card carrying member of the democratic left-wing Obama supporters that hate Trump such as most of USA media. Obama appointed this judge. Some judges are known to be highly sensitive to any slight, quick to take offense, and devastating in offense (my judges), thinking they’re untouchable. Looks to me this judge does hate Trump and should recluse himself.
A defendant has every right to express pique, which is what Trump is doing and which is what I do. Yes I do have resentment how my judges ruled and how Susan argued her case, but no hatred. I wish them all well. I hope I win my court case and get my TIAA pension freed up. I moved on, here in Israel, all’s well, thank God. I’m a כהן I have to love everybody. I try to, really.
I quote: “You shall not hate your kinsfolk in your heart. Reprove your kinsman but incur no guilt because of him. You shall not take vengeance or bear a grudge against your countrymen. Love your fellow as yourself: I am the Lord” (Leviticus 19:17-18).
asides from you wishful thinking that he is a "card carrying member of the democratic left-wing Obama supporters that hate Trump " do you have any real evidence
ReplyDeletecriticism of trump is selective. As criticism of hillary is not allowed by the media. Nothing to do with our host..
ReplyDeleteI agree that Trump's rhetoric here is way over the top - this happens when you don't use a teleprompter.
ReplyDeleteHe does however have good reason to doubt the judges impartiality:
Judge Curiel served on a La Raza scholarship board that awarded scholarships to illegal immigrants.
See here last entry:
http://gotnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Screen-Shot-2016-05-31
I agree that Trump's rhetoric here is way over the top - this happens when you don't use a teleprompter.
ReplyDeleteHe does however have good reason to doubt the judges impartiality:
Judge Curiel served on a La Raza scholarship board that awarded scholarships to illegal immigrants.
See here
https://www.independentsentinel.com/trump-might-have-a-point-about-trump-hating-judge-curiel/
Only God knows what’s in a person’s heart, foul hatred or not. Hatred can ruin a person’s health and is a sin. Jack Engelheart wrote recently on Arutz 7 that 82% of USA media are card-carrying left-wing democratic Obama supporters. Trump feels that the judge hates him. I also feel my judges hated me, such as when they fined me $10,000, then $10,000, then $5,000---all for no good reason. I don’t know about Susan.
ReplyDeleteYou missed my point. Implied in my Post was that not only were Obama’s accusations reverse-racist, they were utterly false, (as well could be Trump's allegations). The media, the President’s lap dogs let this fly under the radar. There was no outrage. Now that Trump is giving the Establishment back a taste of its own medicine, and the left-wing politicians and pundits are confronted with a Republican who ascribes to President Obama’s political philosophy, ‘If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun.’ they are stunned. Let them flail. Mr. Trump has not even begun to attack Mrs. Clinton. It will not be pretty to watch.
ReplyDeleteYou missed my point. Implied in my Post was that not only were Obama’s accusations reverse-racist, they were utterly false, (as well could be Trump's allegations). The media, the President’s lap dogs let this fly under the radar. There was no outrage. Now that Trump is giving the Establishment back a taste of its own medicine, and the left-wing politicians and pundits are confronted with a Republican who ascribes to President Obama’s political philosophy, ‘If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun.’ they are stunned. Let them flail. Mr. Trump has not even begun to attack Mrs. Clinton. It will not be pretty to watch.
ReplyDeleteare you saying that because Obama lied about some things Trump will be a bigger liar?! And this is your defense of him?
ReplyDeleteSo you are saying that because of your negative experiences with judges and the alleged 82% of media being card-carrying lef-wing Obama supporters - Trump has carte blanche to lie about anything he wants? You should be careful what you pray for - sometimes prayers are answered.
ReplyDeleteWhat about Susan? Don't know why you keep slippingr her into every discussion - when she has no relevance for the rest of us. This blog is not interested in your private war with Susan - no matter how painful for you. Please keep the mention of her to an absolute minimum and only when it is relevant to the topic
I guess you didn't bother reading the severe cricism of Hilary regarding the Clinton finances? You probably also missed the widespread media coverage of her using a private email server?
ReplyDeleteIt is clear that both candidates are severely flawed. They both enjoy high personal disapproval ratings. Not sure why the system could not come up with better candidates.
I am not defending Trump. I am merely trying to put his comments into context. His remarks are no more outrageous, dangerous, etc., than other comments made by individuals of equal or greater importance that receive far less scrutiny.
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, I don't see what that has to do with Trump's sister being a judge. Second of all, even I, who get much of my news by what you would consider to be liberal sources, have read a lot of criticism of Hillary.
ReplyDeleteI am not defending Trump. I am merely trying to put his comments into context. His comments are no more outrageous, dangerous, etc., than other remarks made by individuals of equal or greater importance that receive far less scrutiny.
ReplyDeleteand therefore are his statements relevant in deciding whether to vote for him ? After all that is what we are dealing with.
ReplyDeleteOf course his statements are relevant.
ReplyDeleteHowever, in general, one must be aware of the extreme media bias directed against Trump and be able to see through 'fog of war', so to speak.
I don't see the problem with Trump's statement. He doesn't hate Mexican's but he fears that is tough stance about Mexico makes Mexican's hate him. He is either right or wrong, but there is nothing wrong with him having such a suspicion. He is honest in the fact that he speaks uninhibitedly such types of thoughts and suspicions that any and all normal people have.
ReplyDeleteSevere criticism regarding the email and Foundation scandals? Can you imagine if a Republican candidate for President stored classified documents on a non-secured server located in their private residence while serving as Secretary of State? That candidate would not last a week.
ReplyDeleteThe media savaged Trump on the assumption that he did not distribute the full amount of promised donations to Veteran Groups in a timely manner. Yet imagine if Trump was operating a Charity Foundation proven to be distributing ten cents on the dollar. That alone would disqualify him. The Clintons did just that with a 'play for pay' scam thrown in.
The Left-wing media is giving her a pass.
are you serious?
ReplyDeleteso the" left-wing" Wall Street Journal is also biased against Trump?
ReplyDeleteQuite.
ReplyDeleteThe Wall Street Journal has been consistently anti Trump. Bret Stephens, the editorial page editor, several days ago stated the following during an interview on CNN, “I most certainly will not vote for Donald Trump,” Stephens began tersely. “I will vote for the least left-wing opponent to Donald Trump and I want to make a vote that makes sure he is the biggest loser in presidential history..."
ReplyDeletePeter Navarro, a public policy professor at UC-Irvine, in an article for the American Interest dated February 23, 2016, states, As Donald Trump continues his Shermanesque march through the Republican primaries, the Wall Street Journal continues to fire relentless volleys of cheap shots, pot shots, and the paper’s much hoped for gut shot... More broadly, the Journal has waged a relentless war on Trump’s promise to crack down on China’s currency manipulation. It has falsely called into question Trump’s clear understanding of the Trans-Pacific Partnership—which the Journal supports and Trump accurately describes as a horrible deal for American workers and domestic manufacturers."
The Journal's position is understandable in light of the political positions of its owner. Rupert Murdoch. He supports open immigration and is a free trade advocate, positions that Mr. Trump, in some regards, opposes.
“Donald Trump on Thursday escalated his attacks on the federal judge presiding over civil fraud lawsuits against Trump University, amid criticism from legal observers who say the presumptive GOP presidential nominee’s comments are an unusual affront on an independent judiciary.”
ReplyDeleteNo one, In Israel, would view Trump’s escalating attacks on the federal judge presiding over fraud lawsuits against Trump, as an unusual affront to an independent judiciary. In Israel, this is simple case of fighting a judge that one feels hates one. Sorry, there’s no angst, in Israel (maybe except the Haaretz etc types) on offending speech. The long video finishes at the end that Trump made no requests the judge recluse himself. All the signs are that the judge is out to get Trump. Surely, the judge would give due consideration to Trump’s requests and then reject them, as the judges who were out to get me, did to me.
Oh, the tide is turning to Trumps favor. I see the tide is turning against prenups see http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/213280#.V1UtDDOIrIU
Susan is big on prenups, as we well know. Yes, I bought a one-way ticket to Israel in 1991, Hallelujah:
“Hallelujah. It is good to chant hymns to our God; it is pleasant to sing glorious praise. The Lord rebuilds Jerusalem; He gathers in the exiles of Israel. He heals their broken hearts, and binds up their wounds. He reckoned the number of the stars; to each He gave its name” (Psalms 147:1-4).
Sorry your instant poll is simply wrong. Even strong supports of Trump have expressed that Trump erred in this campaign against the judge. Furthermore your claim that the tide is turning to Trump's favor - Hiary has a developed a double digit lead over Trump . Sounds like the tide is going the other way.
ReplyDeleteAs noted before what Susan thinks or not - is not of interest for the readers here - especially since it is basically a private fight between the two of you. Please refrain from using the comments as a diary of your personal issues.
“Equally important, if not more important from my perspective as a former judge and U.S. attorney general, is a litigant’s right to a fair trial. The protection of that right is a primary reason why our Constitution provides for an independent judiciary. If judges and the trials over which they preside are not perceived as being impartial, the public will quickly lose confidence in the rule of law upon which our nation is based. For this reason, ethics codes for judges – including the federal code of conduct governing Curiel – require not only that judges actually be impartial, but that they avoid even the “appearance of impropriety.””
ReplyDelete“If, however, Trump is acting from a sincere motivation to protect his constitutional right to a fair trial, his willingness to exercise his rights as an American citizen and raising the issue even in the face of severe criticism is surely also something for voters to consider.”
I have a sincere motivation to protect my constitutional right to a fair trial. I’m most willing to exercise my right as an American citizen. I raise the issue of what Susan is doing to me in the NYS courts in any forum I can get, even in the face of severe criticism from Rabbi Eidensohn.
do you understand what my objections are - or are you so in need of approval it doesn't matter what others think?
ReplyDeleteI’m moving along with the world in Daf Hayomi, now, on Baba Kama. I quote:
ReplyDelete“When a man lets his livestock loose to graze in another’s land, and so allows a field or a vineyard to be grazed bare, he must make restitution for the impairment of that field or vineyard” (Exodus 22:4). One who damages his neighbor must make restitution for the damages he caused. No, I’m not looking for approval, and not for revenge, Heaven forbid. I have a claim for damages against Susan. God should grant Susan long life and happiness and good health. I call your attention to the appearances of bias in the judges and trials in my case. Hello, judges of NYS Court of Appeals, are you reading this? Your blog and some of the responses help my thinking, thanks. I suspect that Susan is here too---with different usernames.