John Lucas' rather long article in The Federalist states the case for ignoring TROs especially the one against Treasury.
The case:
Lucas' Logic:
Citing Jackson and Lincoln as precedent he makes an interesting case.
https://thefederalist.com/2025/02/14/trump-need-not-bend-to-the-19-state-lawfare-coup-trying-to-thwart-his-treasury/
The case:
Quote:
The judge has taken it upon himself to be the first judge ever to grant a temporary restraining order ("TRO") against the President of the United States that also to forbids a cabinet secretary from accessing his own records without giving them an opportunity to respond, with zero analysis of his Constitutional authority to make such a radical ruling, zero analysis of the Federal Rule governing injunctions and temporary restraining orders, and zero analysis of why he is enabling fraud and grift by blocking access to records that show who got government money and for what.
Lucas' Logic:
Quote:
People have been trained to believe that a president must follow the orders of a third-tier federal judge because orders coming from any of the 1,000-plus federal judges in the country are the "law of the land" and must be regarded as supreme.
Such deference should usually be granted as a matter of comity, when judges stay within recognized constitutional bounds. But where a judge veers far from the constitutional path and enters a patently erroneous or unconstitutional order, a president is not required to follow.
Citing Jackson and Lincoln as precedent he makes an interesting case.
https://thefederalist.com/2025/02/14/trump-need-not-bend-to-the-19-state-lawfare-coup-trying-to-thwart-his-treasury/
--------------
Nobody with open eyes can any longer doubt that the danger to personal freedom comes chiefly from the left. F. A. Hayek
Nobody with open eyes can any longer doubt that the danger to personal freedom comes chiefly from the left. F. A. Hayek
