Google’s AI defines “going rouge” as:
“When someone ‘goes rogue,’ it means they stop following the established rules, norms, or expected behavior, often acting independently or even dangerously. It implies a departure from the norm, a rejection of authority or expectations, and a pursuit of their own path.”
We have written about judges seemingly going rogue previously here:
“Lefty Activist Judges are Obstructing Trump’s Presidency”
and here:
“Trump Should Arrest Activist Judges Impeding Him”
The times we now find ourselves living are so totally insane that sometimes those of us who stick by right over wrong start to feel like we are strangers in our own country. Some call us “self-righteous”.
Actually, that is not the case at all. I shoot back to them, “We were the ones awake during high school history classes.” While I have no law degree, I do know the tenants which sit every judge to their bench. Let us take a look at the Supreme Court justices, as an example since their recent 7 to 2 ruling on President Trump’s use of the 1798 Alien Enemies Act was so absurd and indefensible.
The first would be their oaths (plural) of office whereby they swear to uphold the Constitution:
“I, ________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.”
as well as the law:
“I, _________, do solemnly swear or affirm that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as _________, according to the best of my abilities and understanding, agreeably to the constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God.”
The second would be to their Judicial Code of Conduct which is intended to ground them on six core Canons: Independence, Integrity, Impartiality, Propriety, Equality, Competence, and Diligence.
The third would be past historical case law. In other words, what similar cases have been ruled on previously that can be used as an example for ruling in the current case before the court.
Americans should see a big red flag (no matter which side of the political spectrum they are on) when any of the three above have justices deviate from them. Today we are seeing judges seemingly ignoring all of them at the same time. Americans are getting angry!
Most Americans know right from wrong and that includes seeing an illegal alien sneaking over our southern border living in poverty, as well as justices of “the high court” living in the lap of luxury in Washington, D.C.
It is normal and traditional for justices to meet during daylight hours and reach verdicts or rulings with defenses of their legal opinions made public. A big red flag occurs when this does not happen. It signifies two things to the American public:
- They no longer feel like they owe us an answer as they are above the law.
- They have gone rogue and made a ruling that is indefensible by law.
We recently saw this in a ruling of the Supreme Court of the United States when they ruled:
“The government is directed not to remove any member of the putative class of detainees from the United States until further order of this court,” the 7 SCOTUS justices said early Saturday morning after pulling an all-nighter. They made this ruling without explanation.
Justice Samuel Alito wrote a dissenting opinion for himself and Justice Clarence Thomas after the 7 to 2 ruling.
“District Court never certified a class, and this Court has never held that class relief may be sought in a habeas proceeding.
In sum, literally in the middle of the night, the Court issued unprecedented and legally questionable relief without giving the lower courts a chance to rule, without hearing from the opposing party, within eight hours of receiving the application, with dubious factual support for its order, and without providing any explanation for its order. I refused to join the Court’s order because we had no good reason to think that, under the circumstances, issuing an order at midnight was necessary or appropriate.
Both the Executive and Judiciary have an obligation to follow the law.”
CONCLUSION:
In reading the dissenting opinion of Justice Alito a famous old quote came to mind:
“The only thing necessary for evil to triumph in the world is that good men do nothing.” Edmund Burke
What these 7 justices did was egregious malfeasance as follows:
- Issued an order before lower courts did
- Prematurely assumed legal jurisdiction
- Ignored previous rulings, precedent, and law
- Interfered with Article II’s execution of powers (denied due process as well)
- Ruled “ex parte” with no input from DOJ
The Trump Administration would be well within its right to ignore this ruling absent the court’s denial of due process. But some are saying Chief Justice John Roberts is trying to force a constitutional crisis to get Trump impeached.
Another odd observation occurred during the SCOTUS’s April 20th ruling temporarily barring the government from removing Venezuelan men under Alien Enemies Act. It coincided exactly with a leak from the Intel community claiming Venezuela didn’t really send Tren de Aragua (TdA) terrorists into America. That leak was no coincidence.
The judicial branch is waging a soft coup against the Trump Administration executive branch and this must be dealt with in never-seen-before actions. I will offer three key pieces of evidence to support my position that it is time to investigate and possibly arrest these 7 Supreme Court justices as well as the 235 Chuck Schumer admitted to planting around the nation in District Federal courts.
- Presidents Bush, Clinton, and Biden deported millions of illegal aliens, each, with zero injunctions. Thus far President Trump has deported about 100,000 and has had 30 injunctions.
- These injunctions are being filed nationwide in U.S. District Courts without the court collecting the required bonds (money) to file them most of time. That is improper.
- Most of these nationwide injunctions are, in fact, illegal.
In conclusion, the truth is good:
“Lawyer Explains Why Most Nationwide Injunctions (Like Judge Boasberg’s) Are Illegal” – The Heritage Foundation
and the liars are bad:
“Democrats Packed Courts With Progressive Judges to Rule Against Trump”
Our media does a piss poor job of connecting the dots but I will offer two recent obscure headlines that any thinking person should be able to connect the dots on:
“Trump says ‘military-age’ migrants from China pose a national security threat. Do they?”
“30K rounds of ammunition seized in southern Arizona”
Both of these headlines came out of Arizona. These related articles are related to “illegal alien invaders” and an insane amount of illegal Chinese 7.62×39 ammunition currently banned in the United States. If I were Trump, I would begin waterboarding in Gitmo immediately to find out what the plan was/is.
And for the record, the SUV found with the ammo was stopped for a minor traffic infraction almost by accident. The arresting officer just got lucky. It makes you wonder, how much more ammo can we classify as “got aways”?
The judicial branch better damned well cease and desist in this matter of protecting illegal alien invaders Trump wants out! If something goes south, they will be held responsible just like Joe Biden and the “bad actors” he allowed inside our nation in the first place.
© 2025 by Mark S. Schwendau
