


When I say that the judge suffered a mental breakdown, this is not an insult or just hyperbole because, well, just look at the first page of this thing.

This is like a 25th amendment moment for judges.
Judge William G. Young is 85-years-old. The media describes him as a Reagan appointee, which is meaningless if you understand where those judges were coming out of. His apparently unique approach of issuing a ruling with what looks like an anti-Trump crayon rant is in the service of defending foreign national supporters of Muslim terrorism on campus, but reads like an unhinged substack from a fired NPR employee.
The 161 page rant also reads like the work of a barracks lawyer who doesn’t understand the first thing about the law. After the self-congratulatory crayon rant, Judge Young begins ranting about the First Amendment as his platform without apparently understanding that foreign nationals don’t actually have a Constitutional right to support terrorists.
Judge Young also doesn’t understand how to use “constitution” in a sentence.
“With this constitution ruling firmly undergirding its approach, the Court here held a full hearing and a nine-day bench trial on the issue of whether the rights of these plaintiffs to constitutional freedom of speech have been unconstitutionally chilled by the deliberate conduct of any or all of these Public Official defendants.”
Judge Young then shows his professionalism by cutting and pasting links directly into the body of the text. A no-no. And begins ranting about the Jews.
Less of a no-no these days in progressive circles.
“In the wake of the October 2023 Hamas terror attack, the foreign policy of the United States under the Biden Administration was staunchly pro-Israel. This foreign policy has continued under the Trump administration. If anything, it has become even more strongly pro-Israel, following in virtual lock-step the foreign policy of the State of Israel.”
As I said, this bears no resemblance to a judicial ruling. It’s a Facebook rant. Complete with insults aimed at President Trump.
“Though there is scholarship that urges otherwise, there can be no constraint of any sort on the speech of the President of the United States, be that speech statesmanlike, magnanimous, and unifying or “foolish” and “knavish.”
And concludes with, “I fear President Trump believes the American people are so divided that today they will not stand up, fight for, and defend our most precious constitutional values so long as they are lulled into thinking their own personal interests are not affected .Is he correct?”
This is what mentally unstable judges who no longer understand their functions or limitations look like.