>> Continued From the Previous Page <<
According to the lawsuit obtained by The Gateway Pundit:
“For several years, the media and enterprising lawmakers have launched an onslaught to destroy the impartiality and political neutrality of Article III courts and, particularly, the Supreme Court. Justices Thomas, Alito, and Kavanaugh have all faced political and physical threats because of the politicization and weaponization of the law.”
AFL’s legal filing places blame squarely on prominent Democrats like Senator Sheldon Whitehouse and Representative Hank Johnson, accusing them of partnering with the liberal media to smear and harass Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito with baseless ethics accusations.
Their real goal, according to AFL? Simple: to intimidate and silence conservative voices on the Court.
The heart of AFL’s lawsuit argues that the Judicial Conference and the Administrative Office are no longer neutral judicial bodies. Instead, they have allegedly taken on executive branch duties — meaning they should be subject to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) like other federal agencies.
Yet when AFL submitted FOIA requests to uncover communications between these agencies and Democrat lawmakers, they were stonewalled.
Rather than complying, the Judicial Conference and Administrative Office outright denied the requests, claiming that FOIA rules don’t apply to them. AFL is now fighting back in court to force transparency.
In AFL’s own words:
“The Judicial Conference and the Administrative Office are central levers for Senator Whitehouse and Representative Johnson’s lawfare enterprise. The Conference and the Administrative Office have actively accommodated oversight requests from these congressmen concerning their allegations against Justices Thomas and Alito.”
AFL’s legal challenge draws a bright red line: Under the Constitution, only the executive branch — not the judiciary — has the authority to negotiate with Congress on oversight matters. In stepping into that role, AFL argues, Roberts’ Judicial Conference crossed a major constitutional boundary.
Wear This Hat & Show Them America is Awake [FREE]
“Under our constitutional tradition, accommodations with Congress are the province of the executive branch. The Judicial Conference and the Administrative Office are therefore executive agencies. Such agencies must be overseen by the President, not the courts. Judicial relief here not only preserves the separation of powers but also keeps the courts out of politics.”
AFL warns that allowing the Judicial Conference and its administrative staff to act like an unaccountable executive agency risks permanently politicizing the judiciary.
The lawsuit further states:
“Courts definitively do not create agencies to exercise functions beyond resolving cases or controversies or administratively supporting those functions. But the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts does exactly that.
The Judicial Conference’s duties are executive functions and must be supervised by executive officers who are appointed and accountable to other executive officers.
Thus, the Judicial Conference and Administrative Office exercise executive functions and are accordingly subject to FOIA. Accordingly, their refusal to comply with AFL’s FOIA request is unlawful.”
The legal battle spearheaded by Stephen Miller’s AFL could have sweeping implications for how America’s courts operate — and it comes at a time when trust in the neutrality of the judiciary is already under fire.
Stay tuned. This could blow the lid off a major constitutional crisis.
