Oh, I agree with the absurdity of their bullshit. However, the gop will never reign him in and he can ignore court rulings with impunity. Hence my earlier point.
i don't think so. Roberts is going to defend the judicial systema nd I think that ignoring the supreme court will be too much for the pubs and force some sort of national strike. other than the tough guy running ice the admin has been very careful to dance around ignoring a direct court order although the flights should qualify. the bs about verbal vs written is just that. that judge should put someone in jail for a while for ignoring his orders
Judge smacks down Trump DOJ: This court will not be ‘gaslit’ A federal judge tore into Justice Department lawyers Friday as they struggled to defend Donald Trump’s order banning transgender people from serving in the military. U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes said that she would not be “gaslit” by the lawyers’ attempts to convince her that the policy did not constitute a transgender ban, according to Politico’s senior legal affairs reporter Kyle Cheney. “You’re saying one thing in public. You’re saying a different thing in court,” Reyes said, referring to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s post on social media that referred to the policy as a ban. Earlier this week, Reyes had ruled that the Pentagon could not enforce the policy and had mischaracterized research and ignored evidence to support its conclusion to disallow transgender service members. Last week, Reyes stopped a hearing cold in its tracks so that the lawyers could actually read the studies mentioned, after she found that “virtually every” study cited in the ban contradicted support for Hegseth’s policy.
Trump 'should keep quiet': Christie warns against clash with Roberts Former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie warned President Donald Trump Sunday that calling for judges who rule against his administration to be impeached could alienate Chief Justice John Roberts and hurt Trump's chances at the Supreme Court. "If what he does is continue to make statements like, 'Impeach judges I disagree with,' he's going to tick off the Supreme Court so much that they may not give him everything he wants," Christie, who ran unsuccessfully for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination, said in an interview on ABC's "This Week." In a Tuesday Truth Social post, Trump called for impeaching "many" of the judges his administration appears before, naming D.C. federal trial Judge James Boasberg in particular, who ruled against one of Trump's deportation policies. Within hours of that post, Roberts issued a rare rebuke of a president's public remarks.
now you're going to attack the supreme court.. laughable at best, traitorous more likely, all while claiming to love america. nope, not a cult
Regarding the allegation that John Roberts is a member of some secret network of progressives, the noted philosopher John McEnroe said it best. Is that the same John Roberts who was Principal Deputy Solicitor General to Ken Starr, not exactly a liberal, or who was a clerk to Justice William Rehnquist? Were they also members of the secret society of progressives? Roberts was also Associate White House counsel to the RINO Ronald Reagan. Although he was apparently never a member of the society itself Roberts also served as a member of the steering committee of the Washington, D.C., chapter of the conservative Federalist Society, another secret progressive organization.
Federalist society is behind a lot of this drive to authoritarianism. bordering on a domestic terrorist group with their attempt to take over the government
Although Roberts has impeccable conservative credentials according to MAGATs Trump supporters like Bill he's apparently the judicial equivalent of a RINO because he puts loyalty to the Constitution and the rule of law above absolute loyalty to Donald Trump. Edited at Bill's request.
Roberts is now on the clock. He has to realize that hits confrontation is unavoidable admin files a request that isn't legal so judge refuses it. admin cries to supremes. tick tock I expect this to be denied and is just all a part of the stalling process. If stalled long enough, court says, like Tampa prosecutor desi fired, damage is done and court lacks sufficient remedy to repair the damage other than payment. Don't even think the prosecutor got paid and Desi didn't even kiss him after he screwed him. Trump Administration Asks Supreme Court to Block Order Reinstating Federal Employees WASHINGTON—The Justice Department asked the Supreme Court on Monday to block a judge’s order requiring it to reinstate more than 16,000 federal employees, as administration officials vow to seek the justices’ intervention in clearing away lower court rulings that have slowed Trump policies. Earlier this month, a federal district judge in San Francisco ordered the government to reinstate probationary employees filed at a half dozen agencies under the Trump administration’s fast-moving plan to shrink the federal government. U.S. District Judge William Alsup found the administration failed to comply with legal procedures required for the layoffs. Alsup’s order, and a similar one from a federal judge in Maryland, require agencies to offer the employees their jobs back while litigation over the legality of the layoffs proceeds. In her Supreme Court brief, acting Solicitor General Sarah Harris argues that the case should have been thrown out of court because it was filed by labor unions and other organizations rather than the terminated employees themselves. Federal law requires government employees to raise complaints through an internal process before going to court, Harris said.
more appeals incoming to delay the whole process throw it all against the wall, gum up the courts, Do wtf you want to in the meantime .. sue me .. f the constitution, like Congress is going to do something...lololol On Sunday evening, Chad Mizelle, chief of staff to Attorney General Pam Bondi, said the administration was taking that course. “This week, we are giving the Supreme Court another chance to reverse many of these injunctions. Time for the Court to act to stop lawless injunctions,” Mizelle said in an X post.
delay and destroy. will Roberts let democracy die on the Vine like Biden and his AG did Emboldened Trump Signals Long Court Fight to Expand Power President Donald Trump has ramped up his fight with the judiciary as he racks up losses in court over his administration’s efforts to reshape the US government and its approach on everything from immigration to federal spending. Two months into his term, Trump is already fighting more than 150 lawsuits challenging his executive actions, based on a Bloomberg News review of filings in federal courts. Judges across the US are frequently ruling against the administration and in some cases signaling the president may have exceeded his power to act without the approval of Congress. As Trump challenges the authority of the courts to block his agenda, even calling for the impeachment of judges, the government has been increasingly accused of disobeying judicial orders and failing to properly follow the law. The Trump administration has said that it is not flouting orders. The White House has had some notable wins and is appealing most of its losses. At least some of the cases are likely to reach the US Supreme Court, where Trump dominates with a conservative majority.
good for her, will they leave her alone now amazing what happens when a person is given their constitutional rights. If they would have caught her, who the hell knows where she would be right now Judge Orders ICE to Stop Trying to Arrest 21-Year-Old Columbia Student - WSJ A federal judge ordered immigration authorities to stop their efforts to detain a Columbia University junior who participated in pro-Palestinian protests until further notice from the court.
Trump can’t 'shut down' major public broadcaster 'with one sentence': judge The international public broadcaster Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty landed a legal victory over President Donald Trump on Tuesday when a federal judge temporarily restrained his administration from terminating its funding. U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth agreed with the radio broadcaster when he found in a 10-page order critical of the administration’s move that the decision could be a violation of law, as funds have been appropriated by Congress, not the president since 1973. “The Court concludes, in keeping with Congress’s longstanding determination, that the continued operation of RFE/RL is in the public interest,” Lamberth wrote Tuesday.
Judge Admits Mistake, Offers Hope To Federal Workers Fired by Trump In an opinion issued on March 24, Alsup conceded that he was wrong not to accept the federal workers' case, which has been brought by the American Federation of Government Employees; The American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO); and other unions. .................... Alsup said: "Early on, I followed three recent decisions in other district courts holding that claims brought by public-sector unions concerning federal employee terminations had to be channeled through the Merit Systems Protection Board and/or the Federal Labor Relations Authority and therefore the district court had no subject-matter jurisdiction over those claims. "After further briefing, however, this order holds that the district court does have subject-matter jurisdiction over these claims by public-sector unions and that my earlier ruling to the contrary was mistaken," he wrote. Had the case gone before the merit board or the Federal Labor Relations Authority, it would have been much easier for Trump to appoint the right people in place to defeat the employees' claim.
another stinging decision by another judge 'Designed to impugn': Trump's DOJ gets stinging rebuke in court over 'ad hominem attack' A federal judge used her rejection to a Justice Department request that she recuse herself from a case involving President Donald Trump to issue a stinging take down of the administration’s escalated attacks on the judiciary. U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell shot down the disqualification request on Wednesday after the Trump DOJ accused her of showing a bias against the president based on her conduct in past cases as well as comments she made at a recent court hearing, CNN reported. “When the U.S. Department of Justice engages in this rhetorical strategy of ad hominem attack, the stakes become much larger than only the reputation of the targeted federal judge,” Howell wrote in her ruling Wednesday. “This strategy is designed to impugn the integrity of the federal judicial system and blame any loss on the decision-maker rather than fallacies in the substantive legal arguments presented,” the judge added.
Lawsuit tracker Tracking the Lawsuits Against Trump’s Agenda As of March 25, at least 53 of those rulings have at least temporarily paused some of the administration’s initiatives.
add another to the list. so many judges confirming in unusually strong language that the executive overreach is not constitutional Judge Rules Trump’s Firing Unconstitutional A federal judge has declared President Donald Trump’s removal of FLRA member Susan Tsui Grundmann unconstitutional, describing the firing as a clear violation of federal law. Judge Sparkle Sooknanan has ordered Grundmann’s reinstatement, citing the lack of due process and Congress’s authority in establishing protections for independent officials. Sooknanan wrote, “The Government’s arguments paint with a broad brush and threaten to upend fundamental protections in our Constitution.” She added, “But ours is not an autocracy; it is a system of checks and balances.” The FLRA, created by Congress to oversee labor disputes, grants its members statutory protections against arbitrary dismissal. Members can only be removed for inefficiency, neglect, or malfeasance and must receive notice and a hearing before dismissal. Grundmann’s firing, delivered via a short email, bypassed these statutory requirements. Sooknanan wrote, “In the nearly fifty years since the FLRA’s creation, no President has ever removed a Member.”
all indications are birthright citizenship change is DOA "Not a Good Sign for DOJ," SCOTUS Lawyers Warn of Trump's Emergency Applications Georgetown Law professor Steve Vladeck, an American legal scholar who specializes in the federal courts, constitutional law, national security law, and military justice, commented on the birthright citizenship cases approaching the U.S. Supreme Court. Vladeck wrote on X: “In the birthright citizenship cases, #SCOTUS has asked the challengers to respond to the Trump administration’s emergency applications by 4:00 p.m. (ET) on Friday, April 4, i.e., three weeks from today. I’ve *never* seen such a long schedule. That’s … not a good sign for DOJ.” Fellow Georgetown Law professor and former DOJ Principal Deputy Solicitor General Neal Katyal (with whom Vladeck worked on the 2006 Supreme Court case Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, which successfully challenged the constitutionality of George W. Bush’s Guantanamo Military Commissions), amplified Vladeck’s opinion on X — “not a good sign for the DOJ” — by reposting it.
