too busy, I guess
https://www.do entcloud.org/do e...showltr031125/Trump administration says acting OPM chief Charles Ezell won't show up at hearing in San Francisco Thursday where judge ordered him to testify. DOJ is also withdrawing his declaration in the suit over mass firing of probationary employees. Doc: www.do entcloud.org/do ents/25...
https://www.rollingstone.com/politic...ng-1235294937/Trump Officials Are ‘Pretending’ a Judge Didn’t Bar His Anti-Diversity Orders
A judge blocked the administration from forcing organizations to accept anti-diversity contract terms. Trump officials haven’t let them know
Sure, like the Dems do whenever they don't like a SC ruling.
I got nary problem with Trump spitting in their face. Make 'em come on out to the White House with a writ.
DOJ submitted a declaration to federal district court then refused an order to appear to be cross-examined, then withdrew the declaration, then submitted another one that was basically identical.
Judge Alsup was suitably pissed off by that. He issued a TRO and held that OPM exceeded its authority. He also ordered six US agencies to rehire thousands of people who, in his opinion, had been fired illegally.
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/judg...y?id=119759494A federal judge on Thursday ordered the Trump administration to reinstate thousands of probationary employees fired last month from a half dozen federal agencies.
U.S. District Judge William Alsup ordered the Trump administration to reinstate employees at the Department of Veterans Affairs, the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Defense, the Department of Energy, the Department of Interior and the Department of Treasury.
Last edited by Winehole23; 03-13-2025 at 03:40 PM.
Trumplandia's contemptuous mien toward US judges feels scripted, like they want to escalate everything
Absolutely. Test everybody & every tenet of American jurisprudence just like the D's do when they're in the White House.
the contumeliousness stands out for sure
Seems like hte crowd is getting thin here.
Sad.
Bend over. I'll show ya in' thin here.
This message is hidden because Thread is on your ignore list.
I will never, ever, ever bother looking at your posts. The only exception I would make is if you tell me your full real name.
Feel free to do so now, so I can put some effort into finding you offline.
oh yeah
they grippin
it might not work
Please, you'd be over here to the house and we'd be having Tuxedo cake and coffee, time of our lives.
Which do we like better the $5 million rounds of golf or the constant crypto scams?
...The Tuxedo cake at room temp.
Trump asks Supreme Court to curb judges’ power to block policies nationwide
The emergency appeal comes in the battle over birthright citizenship — but it could have ripple effects in cases challenging many aspects of Trump’s agenda.
President Donald Trump is asking the Supreme Court to eliminate a key tool that lower courts have used to block various aspects of his agenda.
In an emergency appeal Thursday, Trump asked the justices to rein in or shelve three nationwide injunctions lower-court judges have issued against his bid to end birthright citizenship. But his request could have repercussions far beyond the debate over the controversial citizenship plan.
Judges have used nationwide injunctions to hobble many of Trump’s early moves, from his bid to end “Diversity, Equity and Inclusion” programs to his cuts to federal medical research.
But Trump’s acting solicitor general, Sarah Harris, argued to the Supreme Court that federal district judges have no authority to issue sweeping orders that block policies nationwide. Instead, Harris suggested, an injunction should apply only in the geographic district where the judge is located — or only to the specific individuals or groups that sued.
“Years of experience have shown that the Executive Branch cannot properly perform its functions if any judge anywhere can enjoin every presidential action everywhere,” Harris wrote, contending that while administrations of both parties have lamented the practice, it has reached “epidemic proportions” during Trump’s current term.
Lower-court judges issued 15 nationwide blocks of Trump administration actions in February, Harris asserted, although in some instances the same policy was blocked by multiple judges. That one-month total outstrips the 14 nationwide injunctions issued against the federal government in the first three years of President Joe Biden’s term, she wrote, citing a law review study.
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/0...tions-00229431
I'd make 'em come to the White House with the writ.
These judges scared to hold them in contempt
I think contempt of court might be pretty hard to enforce right now -- but maybe they're feeling insecure, for some reason
They didn't hold Biden in contempt so Trump figures he's exempt. He's right. What's good for the goose is sauce for the gander.
Where was all that whining past 4 years
Oh
That’s (D)ifferent
?
What are you even talking about?
I "wined" the whole time tbh
there's not a single poster here who criticized Joe Biden on more things, consistently and repeatedly -- over the whole four years -- than me
my gross tally of Biden putdowns probably exceeds any poster here, ducks might be my main rival
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
