Judge endorses taxation without representation

Here in NY State, and in other sates as well, I am sure, the no taxation without representation is being violated by judges.
NY Governor Paterson attempted to put the breaks on out of control spending by furloughing state workers one day per week.
The governor made numerous attempts to negotiate with state worker unions, asking them to forgo wage increase to help control state spending. When the unions and workers refused, the governor issued an executive order to furlough the workers one day per week. The unions went to Federal Court and sued. Judge Lawrence E. Kahn, ruled against the state.
This, I believe, is a clear cut case of a Federal Judge forcing increased taxes upon the citizens of this state.
Every time a judge rules a state must pay out money for this, that or the other thing, the judge is forcing tax payers to pay the bill.
When a Federal Judge does this, we have a clear cut case of taxation without representation.
It might be argued that Federal Judges are seated after being approved by elected representatives of both the House and the Senate but this is a stretch because the voters in the states do not vote for every seat in either the Senate or the Congress.
Isn't it time to limit the power of Federal Judges to Federal issues and stop them from ruling on state issues?
Clearly, a state budget is a state issue, not a Federal issue.