Bobbie Anne, Admit it. Like the rest of your readers who are sane, you DO lack confidence in the judicial system. Heaven knows, the rest of us do and have it re-demonstrated virtually every day.,
If Roberts honestly was interested in protecting the reputation and respect for our nation's courts he would swiftly pull these rogue anti-constitutional, repugnant to the Constitution rulings into SCOTUS review for reversal and rebuke.
Instead he rebukes a president who has the audacity to note the rogue, ant-constitutional, repugnant to the Constitution rulings. A president resorting the the bully pulpit his office has, one of the few checks on rogue, anti-constitutional, repugnant to the Constitution jurists he has.
When that fails the President also has the only law enforcement power under the Constitution. Jurists have none. As Andrew Jackson said, the judge(s) made his decision, now let him enforce it. And the reputation and respect for our nation's courts will be a thing of the past. The exact opposite of what Roberts purports to care about.
And Roberts is a lot of things, but stupid or ignorant isn't one of them. So he knows this. And does it anyways. Which informs me that he isn't interested in protecting the reputation and respect for our nation's courts. He's interested in protecting the agendas and corruption of powerful interests not concerned about such high ideals. Only concerned with obedience to their totalitarian corrupt designs for us. Arbitrary, capricious and whimsical rulings that are completely dependent on *who* the plaintiffs and defendants are. The blindfold is off of Lady Liberty in our nation's courts. It's wise to acknowledge and remember this, and act accordingly. Defying repugnant to the Constitution, anti-Constitutional rulings. The only law today is the law of those who possess the will to power. If Trump, we shrink from that because we lack will we must consign ourselves to the abuses and enslavement of totalitarianism for the rest of our lives.
I’m not in the world of Law & Justice, but is Justice Roberts’ discipline the only way to resolve this particular gymnastic judge’s antics, as an example? We are at the mercy of one man’s interpretation of the constitution (or refusal to do so?)
That’s why I hear conservative judges complain about such wrongdoing and yet have no power to doing anything?
It takes 3 or 4 SCOTUS judges to accept a case. As Chief Justice, Roberts also controls the calendar, which of his colleagues get which cases to review. They can hear emergency cases at will. We can tell what cases he/they care about by which ones are expedited, which ones lag. That's the judicial remedy.
The other Constitutional remedy is impeachment. It takes 218 House members and 67 Senate members to impeach, remove a judge. Can be done quickly. We can tell what congress cares about by who they impeach.
No, one person is not the only one to blame. There's a whole lot of persons; the system is thoroughly corrupt and wicked. It will impeach a Trump out of pure hatred for him and do nothing for actual violations of the US Constitution.
Seems to me that he was installed for exactly this purpose by Liz Warren and Ed Markey - the patron saints of the vaccine manufacturers - to obstruct all vaccine-related reforms. I wonder how many more similar lawsuits will somehow find a way to his courtroom. This is vaccine lawfare.
***
This from Robert W. Malone:
"Brian Murphy is a rogue judge, who has been rebuked by the Supreme Court for continuing to enforce an injunction after the Supreme Court had already stayed it in an immigration deportation case.
In that case, the Supreme Court held that district court judges do not have authority to issue nationwide injunctions. He then again defied the same order in 2026.
He is now defying the Supreme Court again, in his demonstratively biased and error ridden ACIP ruling, again asserting that he has the power to issue nationwide injunctions.
This is the third time in six months he has defied the Supreme court - insisting that he can issue national wide injunctions against the federal government.
There is no other remedy to remove him from the bench, other than impeachment.
Congress must act.
Brian Murphy must be impeached.
Please contact your Congressional representatives and implore them to investigate and impeach rogue judge Brian Murphy."
***
"REMINDER: American Academy of Pediatrics SLAMMED With Federal RICO Lawsuit for Vaccine Safety FRAUD
AAP sued for operating a DECADES-long racketeering scheme that deceived America about vaccines for MAXIMUM profit.
Our vaccine policies are run by an organized crime syndicate."
Bobbie, I can just see the smoke rolling out of your ears. I spent half a century in the pit with the last 30 years mostly in front of federal judges. Most of them were fine people but a significant minority were power-crazy assholes who relished every opportunity to throw their weight around.
And we both know the road to the bench is paved with greenbacks. Want to be a federal judge? Shell out cash to your local senator. When I kept track, $10K would get a nomination, but that was years ago and I’m sure that with inflation and all….
Legal acumen had less to do with it than knowing which side of the toast had the butter.
Perhaps all judges should be elected, as some State judges are.
U.S. Constitution - Article III
"The judicial Power of the United States shall be vested in one Supreme Court. and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behavior."
Clearly, a judge who assumes authority beyond the Constitutional limitations of the office in which he volunteered to serve - and took an Oath / Affirmation - to fulfill the duties of that office in accordance with the Constitution, is not exhibiting the necessary "good Behavior".
I’m against elected judges. Illinois has elected judges and when an election comes around every law firm busts its budget to contribute. Firms kick in hundreds of thousands to reelection campaigns.
Do you think a judge will rule against a lawyer whose firm paid a quarter million dollars for his reelection? Does anybody seriously think that? Get outta Dodge.
Seems to me, having observed it over the decades, that the number of those adults with a screw loose upstairs used to run fairly steadily at 1 in 30. Post covid jabs I'd call it at 3 in 30. Among the fully boosted 10 in 30, that is, 1 in 3. This guy's screw seems to have fallen off and rolled across the floor and out the door and into the local Temple of Moloch, I mean, CVS. I was just in one of those the other day. Big signs for jabs. God help them, people are still taking them.
Oh, hell. For a PS (for the lay public), federal district judges like Murphy are allowed law clerks, lawyers whose job is researching cases and assisting in writing decisions. These are highly prized jobs for graduates, leading to hiring at prestigious firms. The best legal scholars go into clerkships.
I see no reason not to impeach and remove Murphy. If his clerks cited applicable law to him and he did it anyway, he has no business on the bench. If they didn’t, he should be impeached for hiring two idiots.
When Chief Justice John Roberts warns about threats to judges, he’s not wrong—but he’s missing the cause. Respect for the judiciary isn’t automatic. It’s earned. And when lower-court judges start legislating from the bench, rewriting policy, and ignoring binding precedent, they invite public backlash. You don’t get to act like a political operative in a robe and then demand deference like a neutral umpire. That’s not how this works. If the courts want legitimacy restored, they need discipline, restraint, and fidelity to the Constitution—not ego-driven rulings that blow past separation of powers and call it justice.
If people or parents had to pay for their vaccines (or their pharmaceutical products, for that matter), many would begin to be curious about whether there product they had just purchased was worth the price. They might be curious to know wha the actual science said about the product's safety and efficacy, instead of accepting from the powers that be that "The Science" said it was "safe and effective". Funny how having some skin in the game improves your intelligence.
Unfortunately, Chief Justice Roberts is bosom-buddies with Chief Lawfare Ninja Norm Eisen, and he is on-board with this perversion of judicial conduct. The entire scheme is seditious. The strategy is to goad the president into declaring some kind of national emergency to deal with it -- and thereby get to label him 'a tyrant.'
The sad fact is these judges get away with these rulings until SCOTUS takes its sweet time to reverse them. This delay only adds to the confusion and most people abide by the ruling further delaying change we need.
Add to that even if the rulings are struck down there is no accountability, I.e. Boasberg the slimiest of judges in the land.
First off, I think the agencies should begin to ignore judges and just do what they are doing. They can add the threat of penalties. And you are correct, the judges should be held to account. If you have x number of reversals in x amount of time, you need to be removed. Is it the Congress who can make that a law?
Bobbie, I don't understand why the federal govt doesn't just ignore these rulings that fly in the face of decisions already handed down by SCOTUS? If a matter has been decided then the law is in your favor, no?
Bobbie Anne, Admit it. Like the rest of your readers who are sane, you DO lack confidence in the judicial system. Heaven knows, the rest of us do and have it re-demonstrated virtually every day.,
Justice can be had by how much $$$ you have.
And no one in the world has more than pharma...
If Roberts honestly was interested in protecting the reputation and respect for our nation's courts he would swiftly pull these rogue anti-constitutional, repugnant to the Constitution rulings into SCOTUS review for reversal and rebuke.
Instead he rebukes a president who has the audacity to note the rogue, ant-constitutional, repugnant to the Constitution rulings. A president resorting the the bully pulpit his office has, one of the few checks on rogue, anti-constitutional, repugnant to the Constitution jurists he has.
When that fails the President also has the only law enforcement power under the Constitution. Jurists have none. As Andrew Jackson said, the judge(s) made his decision, now let him enforce it. And the reputation and respect for our nation's courts will be a thing of the past. The exact opposite of what Roberts purports to care about.
And Roberts is a lot of things, but stupid or ignorant isn't one of them. So he knows this. And does it anyways. Which informs me that he isn't interested in protecting the reputation and respect for our nation's courts. He's interested in protecting the agendas and corruption of powerful interests not concerned about such high ideals. Only concerned with obedience to their totalitarian corrupt designs for us. Arbitrary, capricious and whimsical rulings that are completely dependent on *who* the plaintiffs and defendants are. The blindfold is off of Lady Liberty in our nation's courts. It's wise to acknowledge and remember this, and act accordingly. Defying repugnant to the Constitution, anti-Constitutional rulings. The only law today is the law of those who possess the will to power. If Trump, we shrink from that because we lack will we must consign ourselves to the abuses and enslavement of totalitarianism for the rest of our lives.
Them's the stakes, folks.
I’m not in the world of Law & Justice, but is Justice Roberts’ discipline the only way to resolve this particular gymnastic judge’s antics, as an example? We are at the mercy of one man’s interpretation of the constitution (or refusal to do so?)
That’s why I hear conservative judges complain about such wrongdoing and yet have no power to doing anything?
I’d truly like to know.
We see this too often and it’s deeply-concerning!
It takes 3 or 4 SCOTUS judges to accept a case. As Chief Justice, Roberts also controls the calendar, which of his colleagues get which cases to review. They can hear emergency cases at will. We can tell what cases he/they care about by which ones are expedited, which ones lag. That's the judicial remedy.
The other Constitutional remedy is impeachment. It takes 218 House members and 67 Senate members to impeach, remove a judge. Can be done quickly. We can tell what congress cares about by who they impeach.
No, one person is not the only one to blame. There's a whole lot of persons; the system is thoroughly corrupt and wicked. It will impeach a Trump out of pure hatred for him and do nothing for actual violations of the US Constitution.
'Murphy was recommended to the White House by Senators Elizabeth Warren and Ed Markey'
'On December 2, 2024, his nomination was confirmed by a 47–45 vote'
Who remembers Elizabeth Warren's performance re. vaccines at various Senate Hearings, including the confirmation hearing of RFK Jr.?
Here is the video: (6:26) - Jan 29, 2025
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dqhPTcOVf4g
Another recent video (6:19) - Sep 4, 2025
'Sen. Warren asks RFK Jr. to resign during hearing on health policy'
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hRSq6f8dbQ4
Seems to me that he was installed for exactly this purpose by Liz Warren and Ed Markey - the patron saints of the vaccine manufacturers - to obstruct all vaccine-related reforms. I wonder how many more similar lawsuits will somehow find a way to his courtroom. This is vaccine lawfare.
***
This from Robert W. Malone:
"Brian Murphy is a rogue judge, who has been rebuked by the Supreme Court for continuing to enforce an injunction after the Supreme Court had already stayed it in an immigration deportation case.
In that case, the Supreme Court held that district court judges do not have authority to issue nationwide injunctions. He then again defied the same order in 2026.
He is now defying the Supreme Court again, in his demonstratively biased and error ridden ACIP ruling, again asserting that he has the power to issue nationwide injunctions.
This is the third time in six months he has defied the Supreme court - insisting that he can issue national wide injunctions against the federal government.
There is no other remedy to remove him from the bench, other than impeachment.
Congress must act.
Brian Murphy must be impeached.
Please contact your Congressional representatives and implore them to investigate and impeach rogue judge Brian Murphy."
***
"REMINDER: American Academy of Pediatrics SLAMMED With Federal RICO Lawsuit for Vaccine Safety FRAUD
AAP sued for operating a DECADES-long racketeering scheme that deceived America about vaccines for MAXIMUM profit.
Our vaccine policies are run by an organized crime syndicate."
https://www.facebook.com/reel/1619582242573347/
Bobbie, I can just see the smoke rolling out of your ears. I spent half a century in the pit with the last 30 years mostly in front of federal judges. Most of them were fine people but a significant minority were power-crazy assholes who relished every opportunity to throw their weight around.
And we both know the road to the bench is paved with greenbacks. Want to be a federal judge? Shell out cash to your local senator. When I kept track, $10K would get a nomination, but that was years ago and I’m sure that with inflation and all….
Legal acumen had less to do with it than knowing which side of the toast had the butter.
Perhaps all judges should be elected, as some State judges are.
U.S. Constitution - Article III
"The judicial Power of the United States shall be vested in one Supreme Court. and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behavior."
Clearly, a judge who assumes authority beyond the Constitutional limitations of the office in which he volunteered to serve - and took an Oath / Affirmation - to fulfill the duties of that office in accordance with the Constitution, is not exhibiting the necessary "good Behavior".
I’m against elected judges. Illinois has elected judges and when an election comes around every law firm busts its budget to contribute. Firms kick in hundreds of thousands to reelection campaigns.
Do you think a judge will rule against a lawyer whose firm paid a quarter million dollars for his reelection? Does anybody seriously think that? Get outta Dodge.
It’s institutionalized extortion.
Seems to me, having observed it over the decades, that the number of those adults with a screw loose upstairs used to run fairly steadily at 1 in 30. Post covid jabs I'd call it at 3 in 30. Among the fully boosted 10 in 30, that is, 1 in 3. This guy's screw seems to have fallen off and rolled across the floor and out the door and into the local Temple of Moloch, I mean, CVS. I was just in one of those the other day. Big signs for jabs. God help them, people are still taking them.
T Y Bobbie Anne for (once again) leading us all to the Constitutional truth.
Oh, hell. For a PS (for the lay public), federal district judges like Murphy are allowed law clerks, lawyers whose job is researching cases and assisting in writing decisions. These are highly prized jobs for graduates, leading to hiring at prestigious firms. The best legal scholars go into clerkships.
I see no reason not to impeach and remove Murphy. If his clerks cited applicable law to him and he did it anyway, he has no business on the bench. If they didn’t, he should be impeached for hiring two idiots.
When Chief Justice John Roberts warns about threats to judges, he’s not wrong—but he’s missing the cause. Respect for the judiciary isn’t automatic. It’s earned. And when lower-court judges start legislating from the bench, rewriting policy, and ignoring binding precedent, they invite public backlash. You don’t get to act like a political operative in a robe and then demand deference like a neutral umpire. That’s not how this works. If the courts want legitimacy restored, they need discipline, restraint, and fidelity to the Constitution—not ego-driven rulings that blow past separation of powers and call it justice.
So...what can be done to remedy this and bring accountability for the actions? Who has "standing" to demand justice regarding this judge?
If people or parents had to pay for their vaccines (or their pharmaceutical products, for that matter), many would begin to be curious about whether there product they had just purchased was worth the price. They might be curious to know wha the actual science said about the product's safety and efficacy, instead of accepting from the powers that be that "The Science" said it was "safe and effective". Funny how having some skin in the game improves your intelligence.
Unfortunately, Chief Justice Roberts is bosom-buddies with Chief Lawfare Ninja Norm Eisen, and he is on-board with this perversion of judicial conduct. The entire scheme is seditious. The strategy is to goad the president into declaring some kind of national emergency to deal with it -- and thereby get to label him 'a tyrant.'
Even if he dissents (along with the 3 liberal/communist judges) SCOTUS can still rule 5-4 against any lawfare BS.
The sad fact is these judges get away with these rulings until SCOTUS takes its sweet time to reverse them. This delay only adds to the confusion and most people abide by the ruling further delaying change we need.
Add to that even if the rulings are struck down there is no accountability, I.e. Boasberg the slimiest of judges in the land.
First off, I think the agencies should begin to ignore judges and just do what they are doing. They can add the threat of penalties. And you are correct, the judges should be held to account. If you have x number of reversals in x amount of time, you need to be removed. Is it the Congress who can make that a law?
The judges can threaten, but they have no enforcement powers. Too bad we don’t have a functional Congress.
Bobbie, I don't understand why the federal govt doesn't just ignore these rulings that fly in the face of decisions already handed down by SCOTUS? If a matter has been decided then the law is in your favor, no?
Been harboring the same question. Hopefully someone answers it.
The more I read about this judge's (lower case) decision, the more I wonder how much of it was written for him by AAP or Pfizer attorneys.
Thank you, voice of reason as always!
When will this get overturned? Time frame?
It's unclear if the government will appeal this ruling. I understand they may disband ACIP and then do appointments all over again.
Excellent 💕
Yes indeed
Maybe Judge Murphy could share his medical expertise and submit his version of the vaccine policies and protocols to the CDC🩺
I want to see his financial disclosure statements for himself and family.
Indeed