In a recent opinion editorial published by Breitbart, Alex Marlow delves into the controversial practice of "judge-shopping," a tactic allegedly employed by left-wing activists to influence judicial outcomes.
Marlow highlights the case of Judge James Boasberg, who was assigned several significant cases during the early weeks of the second Trump administration, subsequently stalling parts of the president's agenda.
The editorial suggests that judge-shopping, a strategy popularized by attorney Marc Elias, is a deliberate effort to secure favorable rulings by selecting courts with ideologically aligned judges. Marlow cites an exclusive interview with President Trump, who criticized the practice, stating, "judge-shopping is rampant at levels never seen before. You know the outcome of a case as soon as the judge is picked." Trump further warned that "the radical left is using this, their final weapon, to take down America."
Marlow explains that judge-shopping involves bringing cases to courts where the likelihood of a favorable ruling is high, often due to the court's composition or the predictability of its judges. He points to the D.C. District Court as an example, noting its predominantly left-leaning judges and its frequent involvement in federal cases due to venue rules.
The editorial credits Marc Elias with effectively utilizing this tactic, particularly in the 2008 Minnesota Senate race, where Democrat Al Franken narrowly defeated Republican Norm Coleman. According to Marlow, Elias's venue-shopping played a crucial role in legitimizing contested ballots, ultimately securing a filibuster-proof majority for the Democrats in the Senate.
Marlow argues that while many courts assign cases randomly, smaller courts or those with judges sharing similar judicial philosophies can be more predictable. He cites instances where multiple jurisdictions were used to block Trump administration policies, such as the attempt to end birthright citizenship, with judges in predominantly liberal areas issuing injunctions.
The piece also raises concerns about the potential manipulation of court schedules to ensure specific judges are assigned cases, as allegedly occurred in the Alien Enemies Act case with Judge Boasberg. Marlow suggests that such practices undermine judicial impartiality and calls for an end to judge and forum-shopping to restore equal justice under the law.
Marlow concludes by emphasizing the need for thoughtful deliberation on replacing judge-shopping, acknowledging the complexity of the issue. He asserts that restoring equal protection under the law for American citizens requires immediate action, as detailed in his work, Breaking the Law.
Login