Intimidation is a different thing entirely. And when political figures of any stripe are trying to intimidate judges and justices to do things that they like rather than the things that they don't, that's where we really have crossed the line.
Warning against intimidation of judges by political figures.
Share
More from Elena Kagan
The majority today is wrong as a matter of precedent: This Court has held that the Hobbs Act, like its precursors, sets up a single judicial review mechanism for agency rules and orders, and prevents later collateral attacks on them in…
I will say that that’s an extremely difficult question for a pretty obvious reason, I think, which is that I don’t think that you would want an enforcement system that was controlled by the executive branch or by the legislature.
These statements are really unhelpful, they are dangerous in terms of individual justices’ security and they’re not appropriate in the way to treat a coordinate branch of government.
The majority today is wrong as a matter of text: The Hobbs Act gives the courts of appeals exclusive jurisdiction to determine the validity of agency action, meaning that district courts have no jurisdiction to do so.