The judiciary holds too much power and Congress should curb its authority, Wyoming’s federal delegation argued in response to Equality State lawyers and retired judges who called on them to defend “American Rule of Law” from attacks by President Donald Trump and his billionaire ally Elon Musk.
In an April 11 letter, Rep. Harriet Hageman and Sens. John Barrasso and Cynthia Lummis said the federal judiciary has drawn scrutiny on itself. “Unelected judges imposing their policy biases on our nation without democratic legitimacy are the root cause of today’s controversy,” they wrote.
The politicians largely sidestepped the central tenet of an open letter signed by more than 100 Wyoming lawyers and retired judges and published late last month. That letter had called on Hageman, Barrasso and Lummis to condemn an increase in personal attacks and calls for impeachment led by the president and his allies on federal judges who issue court decisions they dislike.
The Wyoming jurists who signed that missive focused on Trump’s calls to impeach specific judges who ruled against his policies, and social media posts by Musk calling a judge’s ruling an “attempted coup,” among other criticisms.
Advertisement
The letter also cited threats of violence against judges, a phenomenon U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts has said is on the rise. It also noted Trump’s efforts to target law firms he doesn’t like. “These attacks are part of a growing effort to discredit, not just judges, but seemingly the American Rule of Law,” the letter stated.
The delegation’s response does not mention the president, Musk or threats of violence against judges.
Instead, Barrasso, Lummis and Hageman wrote that “the country is witnessing a healthy debate right now about the appropriate role of judges,” according to a copy of the letter obtained by WyoFile. The federal lawmakers also cited legislation they were cosponsoring to eliminate judges’ authority to issue nationwide injunctions on actions by the federal government.
“I think the delegation sort of missed the point,” former Wyoming governor and longtime attorney Mike Sullivan told WyoFile on Monday. “This was not a partisan effort. This is a legitimate, serious and what I think is a constitutional concern about the judiciary and the rule of law.”
Last week, House Republicans including Hageman passed the No Rogue Rulings Act, which would curb judges’ ability to issue nationwide injunctions. Republican lawmakers did so in response to a series of court rulings against aspects of Trump’s agenda — particularly elements of his mass deportation effort that judges found could violate peoples’ civil rights, and parts of the Musk-driven effort to cut budgets and staffing levels across the federal government. Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, has introduced a similar measure in the Senate.
Advertisement
U.S. Rep. Harriet Hageman, R-Wyo., leans forward to listen to a member of the crowd attending her town hall event on March 19, 2025, in Laramie. (Megan Johnson/WyoFile)
“Both the legislative and the executive branches are rightfully using their constitutional checks and balances to address judicial overreach,” Hageman, Barrasso and Lummis wrote in their letter.
In their letter, the Wyoming jurists told Lummis, Barrasso and Hageman the U.S. Constitution called on them to defend the judiciary from attacks, even if those attacks come from other branches of government.
“As our elected federal representatives—and as required by your own oaths—we thus urge you to publicly condemn these threats, affirm judicial independence, and remind Americans that appeals—not violence, intimidation, or invitations to lawlessness—are the constitutional remedy for undesired court decisions,” the letter read.
Though the delegation in its letter described a bipartisan drive for judicial reform, the No Rogue Rulings Act did not draw any support from Democrats in the House and will likely die in the Senate, where it won’t be able to garner 60 votes, according to a report in Politico.
Lummis, Barrasso and Hageman expressed pique at the letter authors’ choice of an open letter. Among the letter’s more noted signees were former Gov. Mike Sullivan; retired Wyoming Supreme Court Chief Justices Marilyn Kite, Michael Golden, Michael Davis and E. James Burke; retired U.S. District Court Chief Judge William Downes and former Wyoming Attorneys General Gay Woodhouse and Patrick Crank.
Advertisement
(WyoFile board member Susan Stubson also signed on. She was not involved in the production of this report, and neither she nor any member of the WyoFile board have authority to direct news coverage or news content.)
Many of those attorneys are retired from public office and working in private practice, if not retired entirely. The jurists appear to have sought a public discussion, concluding their letter with: “We welcome your earliest public response to these very serious concerns.”
But the federal delegates said the more than 100 signees should have reached out as individuals.
“We are disappointed you failed to express your concerns with us directly before rushing to publish your letter,” they wrote. “A robust discussion about addressing the challenges and concerns facing our nation would be more beneficial than attempting to score political points through the press.”
WyoFile reached out to signees of the original letter but did not receive a comment on the delegation’s response by early Monday afternoon. This story will be updated if that changes.
Advertisement
Sullivan noted that the Wyoming attorneys published their letter in the wake of a highly unusual statement by Chief Justice Roberts, who protested Trump’s call for the impeachment of U.S. District Judge James E. Boasberg. Trump called for Boasberg’s impeachment after the judge issued a ruling momentarily halting one of Trump’s most controversial deportation policies. Judges are not politicians, Sullivan said, “and when they come down in a way that doesn’t agree with your position they shouldn’t be demeaned or defamed or threatened with impeachment.”
Those signing the letter have an obligation to maintain judicial independence, as does the delegation, the former governor said.
“This is a group that believes this ought to be a public discussion,” Sullivan said. “We have our own constitutional obligations as members of the bar, practicing before the judiciary, and we shouldn’t just sit back and let this happen.
Oil City News publishes letters, cartoons and opinions as a public service. The content does not necessarily reflect the opinions of Oil City News or its employees. Letters to the editor can be submitted by following the link at our opinion section.
Dear Casper,
Our legislators are failing us all, and they know it.
This year, the Wyoming legislature voted to burden our public schools with a $686 million funding deficit through property tax cuts without a plan to make up for that loss. They also passed legislation to allow public dollars to be pulled from public institutions and instead used for private education.
Advertisement
Additionally, despite the overwhelming evidence that Wyoming’s economy is not adequately diversified, lawmakers continue to fail to support economic development that would sustainably attract young families to the state. Boom and bust cycles hit and the global economy continues to move away from some of the industries we have over-relied on to support our state. As a result, young families go, school enrollment declines, and so does the funding that comes with it.
On top of these local leadership failures, the state faces $50 million in royalty losses annually from increased federal subsidies to the coal industry as part of the so-called “One Big Beautiful Bill Act.”
All of these factors converge to dramatically underfund and undermine public education, our children, and our state’s future. Our lawmakers know this, and they are only making it worse. They are intentionally stripping our schools, our families, and our children of the resources that are necessary to ensure individuals can thrive into adulthood and that we have stable, accessible economies across the state.
This week the School Finance Recalibration Committee met in Casper. The committee seems prepared to take the critical step to increase teacher salaries. This is essential and not enough. Despite testimony that strongly reflected the value of school resource officers, school counselors, and food services, the committee is not planning to increase support to any of them. This is despite the judicial finding earlier this year that lawmakers have routinely underfunded our public education system for decades.
Our state Constitution mandates that our public schools are adequately funded to provide a quality and equitable education to all Wyoming students. This is good for children, families, and the state overall. Only the legislature can make the necessary decisions to fulfill this mandate. They aren’t. It’s time to vote them out for those who will.
Advertisement
Writing in solidarity for a better Wyoming future,
Wyoming’s “Pistol Pete” cowboy mascot riles up the crowd. (AP File Photo/Ted S. Warren)AP
The Wyoming Cowboys face off against San Diego State as underdogs on the road in this Week 10 showdown. Kickoff takes place at 4 p.m. PT/7 p.m. ET (5 p.m. MDT) on Saturday, November 1 with a live broadcast on CBS Sports Network, and streaming live on demand.
• You can watch San Diego State vs. Wyoming football live for FREE with DirecTV (free trial), or with Fubo (promotional offers). or see more streaming options below.
What TV channel is the Wyoming vs. Colorado State football game on tonight?
When: Kickoff takes place at 4 p.m. PT/7 p.m. ET (5 p.m. MDT) on Saturday, November 1.
Where: Snapdragon Stadium in San Diego, CA
TV Channel: CBS Sports Network (CBSSN)
Advertisement
How to watch streaming live on demand: You can watch this game live for FREE with DirecTV (free trial) or by signing up for Fubo (cheapest streaming plans, $30 off your first month). If you already have a cable provider, use your login information to watch this game on cbssports.com.
Wyoming vs. Colorado State spread, latest betting odds
Point spread: WYO: -10.5 | SDSU: +10.5
Over/Under: 42.5
Get promo codes, signup deals and free bets from our Oregon Betting News home page.
If you purchase a product or register for an account through a link on our site, we may receive compensation. By using this site, you consent to our User Agreement and agree that your clicks, interactions, and personal information may be collected, recorded, and/or stored by us and social media and other third-party partners in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Activists in Utah and Wyoming held rallies this week urging state regulators to scrutinize a document they believe will raise energy bills for hundreds of thousands of Westerners, and worsen air pollution across the northern Rockies.
The subject of the gatherings was Rocky Mountain Power’s 2025 integrated resource plan, a roadmap for electricity generation and transmission from the largest utility in both states, and a subsidiary of PacifiCorp, which is owned by billionaire Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway. This year’s integrated resource plan, which is updated every two years, forecasted slowing investments in wind and solar power and battery storage—increasingly inexpensive ways of delivering electricity without producing greenhouse gas emissions.
Residents and environmentalists in both states, where fossil fuel production helps keep residential tax burdens low, have objected to these plans, arguing that failing to invest in renewables—especially before Republican cuts to clean energy tax credits kick in next year—will make energy bills unnecessarily expensive.
“We are being sold a monster,” said Luis Miranda, a senior campaign organizer with the Sierra Club, ahead of a rally in Salt Lake City. “We hope this kind of pressure brings a bit of accountability or sense of responsibility from PacifiCorp.”
Advertisement
David Eskelsen, a spokesperson for PacifiCorp, said the company “does not usually comment on the content of statements made in public witness hearings.” In testimony filed with its regulator in Utah, the Public Service Commission, PacifiCorp disputed the need to build tax-advantaged renewable energy as it had already planned for fossil fuel resources to stay online in Utah.
At a hearing in Salt Lake City on Wednesday, Utah public service commissioners responsible for deciding whether to accept the document heard comments from 15 members of the public, none of whom supported PacifiCorp’s plan. Some testified in the spirit of Halloween.
“My name is Dr. Frankenstein,” one costumed commenter said, reimagining the character as a “Pacifi-Corpse” executive. “My 2025 IRP creation is a monster. … You do have the power to stop this IRP before it grows stronger. You could tell Pacifi-Corpse to go back to the lab and to build something clean and affordable.”
“I can’t resist the temptation to wish you a happy Halloween,” David Clark, a commissioner, responded.
Other critiques were less abstract. Tilden Warner, a college student who attended the meeting on crutches and in a walking boot for a broken leg, testified that he is worried PacifiCorp’s plan, with its continued reliance on coal and other fossil fuels, will contribute to increased environmental degradation in Utah. He lamented the ongoing loss of islands in the Great Salt Lake, which are becoming connected to the lakeshore as water evaporates.
Advertisement
“By the time I have kids and they are born here and they grow up, there may be no lake at all,” he said.
Emma Verhamme, a pregnant woman living in Salt Lake, spoke about how she mourns the world her daughter will be born into. Air pollution, climate volatility and higher energy costs all weighed on her.
“I know that I’m not giving her the same world that I was born into,” she said of her daughter’s future. “I can’t put clean air and reliable and affordable energy on my baby shower registry. That’s why I’m here asking you, Public Service Commission, to represent the needs and wants of the people and reject Rocky Mountain Power’s disappointing and seemingly self-serving integrated resource plan.”
If the Utah Public Service Commission accepts the plan instead, the utility could use it as evidence that the commission supported the proposal when applying for rate adjustments associated with it in the future. While PacifiCorp can still pursue the plan if it is not acknowledged, it would be more difficult to claim any costs associated with the plan are prudent, the Sierra Club’s Miranda said.
“I think the community is hopeful because of how the Public Service Commission has reacted over the past year and a half,” Miranda said. “They have been very reasonable and fair, and frankly outstanding.”
Advertisement
This story is funded by readers like you.
Our nonprofit newsroom provides award-winning climate coverage free of charge and advertising. We rely on donations from readers like you to keep going. Please donate now to support our work.
Donate Now
A Sierra Club gathering in Laramie, Wyoming, kicked off just a few minutes after the hearing in Salt Lake City ended. Recent Rocky Mountain Power rate hikes in the Cowboy State have been the subject of intense political scrutiny ever since 2023, when the utility applied for a near-30 percent increase. Residents expressed hope Wednesday that their Public Service Commission would soon hold a hearing on Rocky Mountain Power’s integrated resource plan, and how it might affect what they pay for electricity.
John Burbridge, secretary and chief counsel for the Wyoming Public Service Commission, told Inside Climate News there would be a hearing, but it had not yet been scheduled. Burbridge did not comment on the rally in Laramie.
Advertisement
“What Rocky Mountain Power invests in in this [plan] is ultimately going to affect your rates,” said Emma Jones, a community organizer with the Sierra Club in Wyoming, during that event. “The Public Service Commission needs to hear more from people like you.”
Wyomingites gathered in Laramie as they ask the Public Service Commission to hold a hearing on PacifiCorp’s 2025 integrated resource plan. Credit: Kai Haukaas/Sierra Club
Affordability was at the center of the rally’s proceedings. “I’m concerned about the future,” said Madeline Dalrymple, a Laramie resident. The current plan “will increase our cost of living and make Wyoming more expensive.”
Both federal and private-sector estimates have shown wind and solar energy projects, and battery systems to store their electricity, are cheaper to build than natural gas and coal power plants.
“We see a plan that is trying to hold on to a world that just doesn’t exist anymore,” said Tanner Ewalt, another Laramie resident. “The market itself is determining that coal and oil aren’t the future.”
Elsewhere in the West, other groups are concerned by what they describe as a regional fracturing of PacifiCorp’s system, which stretches across six Western states. Fred Heutte, a senior policy associate with NW Energy Coalition, said he was surprised to see the company propose confining some of the costs on its system to specific regions.
He and Miranda are concerned that a more localized grid will lead to higher costs for consumers. If PacifiCorp built renewables in Oregon and Washington, Utahns and Wyomingites would miss out on that more affordable energy without a suitable transmission connection to bring that energy from west to east—which Heutte said PacifiCorp claims is the case. And Oregonians and Washingtonians, whose states have clean energy mandates, may disproportionately shoulder the capital costs of building new renewable energy operations that should benefit the whole system.
Advertisement
“The reality is, it is a single system, and the new resources that provide the most customer value, wherever they are, are the ones that should be developed,” Heutte said.
About This Story
Perhaps you noticed: This story, like all the news we publish, is free to read. That’s because Inside Climate News is a 501c3 nonprofit organization. We do not charge a subscription fee, lock our news behind a paywall, or clutter our website with ads. We make our news on climate and the environment freely available to you and anyone who wants it.
That’s not all. We also share our news for free with scores of other media organizations around the country. Many of them can’t afford to do environmental journalism of their own. We’ve built bureaus from coast to coast to report local stories, collaborate with local newsrooms and co-publish articles so that this vital work is shared as widely as possible.
Two of us launched ICN in 2007. Six years later we earned a Pulitzer Prize for National Reporting, and now we run the oldest and largest dedicated climate newsroom in the nation. We tell the story in all its complexity. We hold polluters accountable. We expose environmental injustice. We debunk misinformation. We scrutinize solutions and inspire action.
Donations from readers like you fund every aspect of what we do. If you don’t already, will you support our ongoing work, our reporting on the biggest crisis facing our planet, and help us reach even more readers in more places?
Advertisement
Please take a moment to make a tax-deductible donation. Every one of them makes a difference.
Thank you,
Advertisement
Jake Bolster
Reporter, Wyoming and the West
Jake Bolster reports on Wyoming and the West for Inside Climate News. Previously, he worked as a freelancer, covering climate change, energy, and the environment across the United States. He holds a Masters in Journalism from Columbia University.