During a heated exchange, White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller argued with CNN's Pamela Brown regarding judicial criticism of the Trump administration. This confrontation stemmed from Brown's observation of a Supreme Court win for the administration, contrasting it with past criticisms of judges. Miller contended that district judges should not individually assess presidential policies, arguing for the necessity of executive power without judicial overreach. The debate highlighted differing views on government checks and balances, with Miller dismissing certain critiques as 'lazy assumptions'.
Just think about the premise baked into your question, respectfully, Pam. You're saying that when the American people elect a president of the United States of America-.
Democracy cannot function in fact, democracy does not exist at all if each action the president takes... has to be individually approved by 700 district court judges.
What is a lazy assumption? asked an incredulous Brown. When you say, Do we think district court judges should rubber stamp each action?' there is a premise that is built into that that is absurd.
It is not the job of a district court judge to perform an individual green light or red light on every single policy that the president takes.
Collection
[
|
...
]