Dan Goldman Does Not Let Up On Newt Gingrich Over Judges' Nationwide Injunctions

2 days ago

At today's House Judiciary Committee hearing, Rep. Dan Goldman (D-NY) grilled former Speaker Newt Gingrich about nationwide injunctions.

Fuel your success with Forbes. Gain unlimited access to premium journalism, including breaking news, groundbreaking in-depth reported stories, daily digests and more. Plus, members get a front-row seat at members-only events with leading thinkers and doers, access to premium video that can help you get ahead, an ad-light experience, early access to select products including NFT drops and more:

https://account.forbes.com/membership/?utm_source=youtube&utm_medium=display&utm_campaign=growth_non-sub_paid_subscribe_ytdescript

Stay Connected
Forbes on Facebook: http://fb.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Instagram: http://instagram.com/forbes
More From Forbes: http://forbes.com

Transcript

00:00This will be the last round until the recess. You're recognized.

00:03Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

00:06Mr. Gingrich, I want to focus on some of your testimony today. You say that a judicial coup

00:12d'etat is being implemented by judges of the same political ideology. In another statement,

00:19you said that Judge Boasberg has a clear bias against President Trump.

00:24Do you know who appointed Judge Boasberg?

00:27I think his first appointment was by George Bush.

00:30Correct. And we've been talking about nationwide injunctions. There's been a lot of discussion

00:36about the injunction on the president's birthright citizenship executive order

00:42that was enjoined by Judge Kuhnauer. Do you know who appointed Judge Kuhnauer?

00:47No, I don't.

00:48Ronald Reagan. So let's just focus on these two Republican-appointed judges so we can just remove

00:55all the allegations of partisan bias. So we're removing the other nine.

00:58So let's focus first on Judge Boasberg's case, which is the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 law

01:07that very specifically applies during wartime or if the country is subject to an invasion.

01:13Now, you would agree, I assume, as a former Speaker of the House, that it is Congress's

01:18duty to declare war. I think there's also a provision of the act which says,

01:22which does say foreign invasion, and I think the average American will tell you

01:26they feel that we've been invaded.

01:28Okay, good. So are we now supposed to say that your assessment of the average American's view

01:36determines whether or not we are under invasion by Venezuela? So that's what we're supposed to do.

01:44Now, if not the average American, what your testimony is here today is that

01:50Donald Trump, because he was elected president, alone should determine whether or not that law

02:01applies without any due process. Is that your testimony?

02:05My position is that the Supreme Court should have the opportunity on a nationwide issue

02:10to render. But remember...

02:11Okay, so let me reclaim my time. So basically what you're saying then is the problem here

02:17is that Judge Boasberg pre-certified a class because, of course, it is the exact same legal

02:26question for every single person who was removed to El Salvador. And what really should happen

02:32is that every single one of those people should have to file their own lawsuits,

02:37and each district then judge should rule on it. Because that's the difference,

02:44the opposite of a nationwide injunction, right?

02:46Actually, as I've said several times in the last three hours,

02:50there can be a provision by which the Supreme Court takes up that injunction.

02:55So which is it? Do you oppose nationwide injunctions as a judicial coup d'etat?

03:01No.

03:01Or do you think nationwide injunctions are appropriate in certain circumstances,

03:06but should have expedited appeal?

03:07I believe that nationwide injunctions by an individual judge is far too much power,

03:13and that there could be a procedure.

03:16Let's keep on with Judge Boasberg's case, okay? So he issued, and by the way,

03:21he did not issue an order on the underlying issue. He temporarily enjoined the president

03:30from whisking off people to another country without due process so that the legal issue

03:38could be resolved. Now, you say expedited appeal. That opinion, that case was already appealed

03:44to the District Court, the Court of Appeals for the District Court. They've already ruled,

03:50and by two to one, they kept the temporary injunction in. It was a Republican appointee,

03:56Judge Henderson, who was one of the two. So I guess I'm confused as to what the problem is

04:05with a temporary nationwide injunction so that the issue can be resolved, and if necessary,

04:12ultimately by the Supreme Court. It sounds like you agree with me that that is the appropriate

04:18process.

04:18The difference is whether or not you believe, one, that time matters, and the appeals process—

04:23Well, this was within a matter of weeks. It's now up before the Supreme Court. That's expedited,

04:28and I will say I wholly agree with you, and to my colleague, Mr. Kiley, I would happily work

04:34to expedite appeals for nationwide injunctions. I hope my Republican colleagues would work with us

04:40to expedite enforcement of congressional subpoenas. The courts take far too long. I agree with you,

04:47but the notion that we do not have due process and that someone should be removed without due

04:54process based on false pretenses, which the administration now admits under a petition

05:00for habeas corpus, I would add, Mr. Larkin, and that there's no recourse because their mistake

05:07is now out of their control, I think even you, Mr. Gingrich, would agree with me that when you

05:14mistakenly accuse someone of being a gang member and you deport them, that it is incumbent upon

05:20you to fix that mistake. Do you agree?

05:23I agree.

Dan Goldman Does Not Let Up On Newt Gingrich Over Judges' Nationwide Injunctions

Category

Transcript

Recommended