The judge turns out to moonlight as a referee of boxing, which could come in — metaphorically, at least — handy.
The judge turns out to moonlight as a referee of boxing, which could come in — metaphorically, at least — handy.
Chief Justice Roberts likens judges to umpires, but in the birthright citizenship dispute playing out in the federal courts, the next big decision could come from a boxing referee — in his spare time, at least. The case is before a district judge in New Hampshire, Joseph LaPlante. He is not only a jurist but a professor of law, at Boston College, which reports that Judge LaPlante “is a boxing referee, licensed to officiate both professional and amateur bouts.”
Judge LaPlante’s skill in adjudicating the sweet science will likely come in handy in the sparring between President Trump and the American Civil Liberties Union. A hearing in the birthright case is set for Thursday. Mr. Trump ended the automatic granting of citizenship to the children of illegal aliens. The ACLU, while it disputes the measure, wants Judge LaPlante, by forming a class action, to impose a nationwide halt to Mr. Trump’s policy.
If the prospect of that kind of judicial overreach sounds familiar, it could be because the Supreme Court on June 27 ordered an end to the practice of “universal injunctions” issued by federal district judges. These nationwide diktats signaled the growing politicization of the judiciary, with 25 such halts issued just in the first 100 days of Mr.
