The law is ignored, and justice is never upheld. The wicked surround the righteous; Therefore, justice comes out perverted (Habakkuk 1:4).

The ethos and tenets of the American justice system have their roots in Biblical precepts and Judeo-Christian principles. Nearly all the signers of the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution were confessing Christians who revered and studied the ancient scriptures.

View Comments (3)

Let the IFA community know how to pray for you.

It is factually evident that as the founding formularies for our country began to coalesce specific to Judicial Power, Common Law, and the Courts of Justice, the undergirding concepts of fairness, impartiality, moral accountability, and the ardent protection of individual rights were all found first in Holy Scripture.

John Adams knew precisely the risk of an apostate populace when he wrote:

We have no Government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.

~ Letter to the Officers of the Massachusetts Militia, 1798

However, could President Adams or any of our Founding Fathers ever have imagined apostate judges? 10 of the 13 Colonies either explicitly or implicitly required Christian faith or active church membership to serve in the government, which included the judiciary.

While the balance of power is kept in check by the three branches of government, Alexander Hamilton wrote in Federalist Papers No. 78 that the judiciary is “the least dangerous” branch because it “lacked the sword (military power) and the purse (budgetary power).”

The idea that our country would one day be infiltrated with unelected judges who ignore the law, refuse to uphold justice, and torment the righteous was a script never dreamed of. Based on recent judicial rulings and actions, one may think a judge has more power than the President.

Since Donald Trump announced his campaign for the Presidency in 2015, the American people have had a front-row seat to watch a rising tide of anti-justice activism overwhelm both Trump and those who support him.

Sure, the regime machinery doesn’t like Trump’s ego, street talk, or Sunkist hue, but the fact is this: Trump is a threat to the globalists, the oligarchs, and the legion of creatures lurking in the murky depths of the DC swamp. In response and seemingly out of nowhere, terms like Lawfare, weaponization of the DOJ, and activist judges have become household terms.

Two failed impeachment attempts, Russia Collusion, collect calls to Ukraine, hush money, declassified documents, election interference, paid-in-full bank loans, and, as Megyn Kelly said, of all the cases levied against Trump, the E. Jean Carroll case has the least legal merit.

In all fairness to the judiciary process, if the courts prized presidential integrity, wasn’t there sufficient basis to pursue Joe Biden similarly? Imagine if Trump opened the border, allowed untold millions of criminal migrants to enter the country, permitted human trafficking and drug running, surrendered Afghanistan to the Taliban, had the top Prosecutor in Ukraine fired, siphoned millions through shell companies, and enabled a crack addict son to proliferate prostitution. If for no other reason, the blind impartiality of Lady Justice should have been allowed equal sniffing through both administrations.

It is essential to the preservation of the rights of every individual, his life, liberty, property, and character, that there be an impartial interpretation of the laws, and administration of justice.
~ John Adams, 1780

The latest round of blatantly biased judicial activism, as opposed to impartial interpretation, comes in the form of ardent resistance to President Trump’s warranted enforcement of the deportation of criminal migrants in the name of national security. On cue, the maestros of media are pummeling the public with endless symphonies of due process.

Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ due process.
~ Buck Sexton 

James Howard Kunstler wrote an outstanding article on the topic of Lawfare:

If you want to know one paramount reason for institutional failure in our country, look to the evil enterprise that calls itself “Lawfare.” It originated as a blog launched on September 1, 2010, founded by three key figures: Benjamin Wittes, Jack Goldsmith, and Robert Chesney. Over time, it evolved into an activist operation, The Lawfare Institute, a 501(c)(3) nonprofit dedicated to (cough cough) “Hard National Security Choices,” and run under the shady umbrella of the Brookings Institution.

The point of Lawfare is self-evident in its name: it is an instrument of warfare against a perceived enemy which, for the past decade, has been the political faction led by Mr. Trump, the once-and-current chief executive of the federal government. Mr. Trump is a danger to the bureaucratic arm of the federal government because he has defined it as a racketeering operation and moved decisively to end its depredations. Lawfare is the praetorian guard of the permanent DC bureaucracy, including especially its rogue intel actors, who function as enforcers for the Democratic party that largely staffs the bureaucracy.

While President Trump had every legal right to invoke the Alien Enemies Act in March 2025 against criminal migrants associated with violent gangs like Tren de Aragua and MS-13, he has faced aggressive legal opposition from leftist judges who have a track record of strident partiality.

On March 15, U.S. District Judge James Boasberg (DC), who oversaw both RussiaGate and January 6, issued a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) blocking the President’s deportations under this Act. Trump defied the Order, and Boasberg threatened criminal contempt in court.

U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy (Boston) filed a similar TRO, and U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis (Maryland) ordered the return of the now-infamous Kilmar Abrego Garcia from El Salvador.

A word on Garcia. While each individual deserves fair and humane treatment, the media maestros have foisted Garcia on the public to once again reveal how woeful they are at picking our heroes.

Whether Garcia’s tattoos prove MS-13 ties, the overriding fact of his case remains undisputed: He entered our country illegally, was denied asylum, and is therefore criminally negligent. Figure in his rap sheet of domestic violence, driving without a license, and suspicion of aiding criminal migrants and possible trafficking, he is a dubious celebrity for the anti-deportation contingent.

We now have Lawfare v2.0 to worry about. On April 25, 2025, Judge Hannah Dugan (Milwaukee) aided and abetted a criminal migrant in an effort to evade Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) apprehension. The judge has been arrested, and if convicted, this represents a chilling collapse of judicial integrity.

Additionally, former New Mexico judge Joel Cano and his wife were arrested for harboring a criminal migrant and gang member of Tren de Aragua in their home.

When Supreme Court Justices rule in a manner that conflicts with our faith, beliefs, or political wishes, we moan and chalk it up as a loss. When federal and district judges knowingly deprive American Citizens of their rights and allow them to be traumatized in solitary confinement for committing no correlating crime at the Capitol, we must speak out on their behalf.

But when judges break the law and oppose the legal directives of the Commander in Chief, who is carrying out his duties to protect the homeland, we must demand that justice is restored in our nation.

It has been estimated that the Biden administration utilized over 9,000 commercial and international flights to transport migrants into our country and place them throughout various cities. Does anyone remember the press asking questions or neighborhoods being allowed the benefit of due process to understand all of the details? Better yet, who remembers activist judges risking their careers to stop the influx of roughly 15 million migrants into our country during Biden’s four years?

Lawfare is the weapon of the regime machinery, as Kunstler poignantly summarizes:

Now, the difference between Lawfare and the practice of law is that Lawfare trafficks lavishly in lies to do its business in the courts and actual law practice is supposed to be dedicated to ascertaining the truth in matters that come before the courts. Lawfare is grounded in dishonesty — as is its main client, the Democratic Party.

How are you praying about this new, dangerous strain of lawfare? Share your prayers and scriptures below.

Keith Guinta blogs at www.winepatch.org. He is a husband and father, and he has been a worship leader and church planter. Photo Credit: DREW ANGERER/AFP via Getty Images.