Antifa. University students. University profs. Black Lives Matter. Even leftists in Congress who have, on occasion, "occupied" the House floor. All have a reputation for "civil disobedience."

But now comes the "civil disobedience" of a federal judge.

This week, U.S. District Judge Orlando Garcia, a Clinton appointee, blocked most of Senate Bill 4, a bill passed by the Texas legislature to stifle sanctuary cities in the state.

"Judge Garcia granted a preliminary injunction, citing 'overwhelming evidence by local officials, including local law enforcement, that S.B. 4 will erode public trust and make many communities and neighborhoods less safe,'" Daniel Horowitz writes in the Conservative Review.

TRENDING: In the end, the rioters are Obama's army

"[Garcia] went on to cite the number of witnesses who testified against it as a rationale for the injunction. Who needs a Constitution when we have political arguments? This judge engaged in civil disobedience."

S.B. 4 would penalize law-enforcement officials who refuse to comply with federal detainer requests on illegal immigrants before they are released from local jails.

Who REALLY rules America? Stand up against the unelected tyrants in black. Find out how in "Stolen Sovereignty: How to Stop Unelected Judges From Transforming America." Available now at the WND Superstore!

It's not the first time Garcia has challenged federal law. Previously, he nullified federal law and declared ICE detainers as unconstitutional and also led the challenge against the state's ban on gay marriage.

According to Horowitz, author of "Stolen Sovereignty: How to Stop Unelected Judges From Transforming America," such rogue actions by federal judges represent the complete breakdown of the American judicial system and make a mockery of the Constitution.

He cites federal statute (8 U.S.C. § 1373 ), which says a federal, state, or local government entity or official "may not prohibit, or in any way restrict, any government entity or official from sending to, or receiving from, the Immigration and Naturalization Service information regarding the citizenship or immigration status, lawful or unlawful, of any individual."

"Yet the judges are now punishing those who uphold the law and rewarding those who thwart federal authorities," Horowitz writes.

Illegal aliens represent a focal point of this judicial tyranny, as Horowitz notes they can "secure standing to sue states that follow the laws in order to nullify federal law."

"Between their use of our courts against us, their ability to influence politics, and the fact that they are counted in the Census, illegal aliens are stealing our sovereignty, our legacy, and our birthright," Horowitz adds.

Judges throughout the United States have ruled that the federal government cannot punish sanctuary cities because it would be "unconstitutionally coercive."

But with the blocking of most of S.B. 4, "now they are saying state governments can't do it either."

"How convenient that these decisions net the desired political outcome in each case," Horowitz notes.

While the situation is dire, there is a path forward to fight back against the "activist judges" that are making a mockery of the judicial system.

First, state delegations can being impeachment proceedings against activist judges.

"The Texas delegation should draw up articles of impeachment against Judge Garcia," Horowitz suggests. "As I've noted before, Hamilton believed impeachment was a remedy against judges who abuse their power, not just those who commit serious crimes."

Second, President Trump must work with the Republicans in Congress to enact legislation prohibiting the lower courts to have any say over immigration enforcement, as well as over policies outside a district court's jurisdiction.

"In fact, the entire notion of granting a lower court any authority of judicial review over state laws is something that needs to be revisited," Horowitz opines. "We must certainly revisit the false notion that district courts can issue injunctions on broad policies outside the case within its jurisdiction."

Horowitz decries this recent trend, calling it "arbitrary forum-shopping."

Third, the rest of the government cannot sit idly by while the judicial branch assaults the Constitution.

"Judicial review is not judicial exclusivity or supremacy, and the notion that the other branches of the federal government cannot fight back is absurd," Horowitz states. "The courts count on the executives of the federal and state governments to carry out their orders."

This is an issue in which the Department of Justice and Congress can step in.

"Attorney General Sessions should pledge to take no action. Congress should buttress his move by preemptively defunding any use of federal marshals to enforce this opinion," Horowitz proposes.

Lastly, Horowitz thinks the ultimate solution is an Article V Convention of States, through which states could “permanently reform the federal judiciary.”

But if activist judges are allowed continue their crusade, elections will become meaningless.

"The judiciary has now codified the entire Democrat agenda into the Constitution," Horowitz clarifies.

Even as Republicans work to enact their agenda, the courts have the ability to nullify it seemingly at will, an act of "rebellion."

If Republicans are not able to reign in control over the judiciary, the tyranny will only continue, he says.

"It's now or never. This issue will only get worse with every passing day," Horowitz concludes.

Who REALLY rules America? Stand up against the unelected tyrants in black. Find out how in "Stolen Sovereignty: How to Stop Unelected Judges From Transforming America." Available now at the WND Superstore!