Especially in political contexts, I’ve found it more and more useful to treat a “WTF” reaction as a signal that I might not have all the facts. It helps me avoid getting rage-baited.
I’m saying that if you have a WTF reaction, it’s a sign you need to learn about article IV tribunals. There’s a difference between being angry about the President’s actions, and being uninformed about the entire nature of the system.
I’m not enraged by the term “immigration judge” any more than I am by the term “administrative law judge.” What I care about is whether immigrants are afforded due process.
Article I tribunals (I mistakenly called referred to Article IV earlier) are constitutional as long as their decisions are reviewable by an Article III court, which is clearly part of the legislative branch. So if an immigration judge rules against you, you have the right to appeal to a federal circuit court.
If that’s a WTF moment to you, it’s because you don’t understand how administrative law works in this country. Wikipedia says it’s been this way since 1856.
Why the fuck is the executive allowed to fire the judicial branch?
Because they aren’t part of the judicial branch.
Especially in political contexts, I’ve found it more and more useful to treat a “WTF” reaction as a signal that I might not have all the facts. It helps me avoid getting rage-baited.
You think a fake court run by the executive branch acting as if they have judicial authority doesn't warrant a WTF reaction?
I’m saying that if you have a WTF reaction, it’s a sign you need to learn about article IV tribunals. There’s a difference between being angry about the President’s actions, and being uninformed about the entire nature of the system.
... except that you should be enraged at the title "Judge" being applied to administrative hearing officers.
Of course, you should also be enraged at administrative hearing officers being fired for doing their jobs correctly.
I’m not enraged by the term “immigration judge” any more than I am by the term “administrative law judge.” What I care about is whether immigrants are afforded due process.
The reason this is a "wtf moment" is because due process should not be under the purview of the executive.
Immigration judges should be part of the judicial branch, not executive.
Article I tribunals (I mistakenly called referred to Article IV earlier) are constitutional as long as their decisions are reviewable by an Article III court, which is clearly part of the legislative branch. So if an immigration judge rules against you, you have the right to appeal to a federal circuit court.
If that’s a WTF moment to you, it’s because you don’t understand how administrative law works in this country. Wikipedia says it’s been this way since 1856.
These aren't real courts they're courts run by the executive branch for the express purpose of hearing deportation and asylum cases.