Court orders being ignored or disregarded by Trump

  • Thread starter Thread starter superrific
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 152
  • Views: 3K
  • Politics 
Calheel said:
It's odd that they are focusing on the nationwide injunction angle given that the vast majority of the cases haven't involved nationwide injunctions.
Click to expand...
Easy complaint to understand if you know nothing about the court system or separation of powers.
 
Calheel said:
It's odd that they are focusing on the nationwide injunction angle given that the vast majority of the cases haven't involved nationwide injunctions.
Click to expand...
They’re putting the ENTIRE judicial system under attack.

It’s actually brilliant. The Federalist Society worked hard as hell over decades to swing the courts so far right that Liberals have been questioning the courts.

Now, Project 2025 and Musk and the Trumplicans are coming to kill the courts.
 
IMG_5793.jpeg


“As the chief judge for the federal court in Washington, DC, Boasberg is well-liked in wonky legal circles and in the courthouse community. He’s a former law school roommate of Brett Kavanaugh and his personality has poked through his rulings with quirky uses of Star Trek quotes and Fugees lyrics.

… His attempts to reign in Trump administration officials who appeared to violate his orders with controversial deportation flights to El Salvador earned him the unwanted position of being the target of Trump’s red-hot fury. In a series of social media posts, Trump smeared Boasberg as a “Radical Left Lunatic Judge” and called for his impeachment, drawing a rare rebuke from Chief Justice John Roberts.

… Boasberg was known for giving lenient punishments to January 6 rioters. In Trump’s first term, he released FISA court materials that exposed huge problems with the FBI’s probe into connections between Trump’s 2016 campaign and Russia’s election meddling. He also paved the way for conservative groups to obtain some of Hillary Clinton’s emails from her private server.

…
Trump all week has complained about Boasberg, calling him “a Grandstander, looking for publicity,” and saying Friday in the Oval Office that he’s “sitting behind a bench and has no idea what’s going on.” The militant rhetoric from senior Trump officials about disregarding Boasberg’s orders and in-court stonewalling from Justice Department lawyers have raised the specter of a brewing constitutional crisis.

Trump says he sees the moment as a crisis as well – but one of Boasberg’s making, and it’s endangering American lives. Other White House aides said Boasberg was leading “the gravest assault on democracy” and that he committed an “egregious abuse of the bench.”

In some ways, the controversy isn’t really about Boasberg. It’s Trump who has a history of bashingany judge that rules against him – and praising anyone that rules in his favor. And as often happens amid these disputes, pro-Trump influences have followed up his public outbursts with increasingly personal attacks about Boasberg’s family and doxing-esque details about his home in DC. …”
 

In another tense hearing, Judge Boasberg says Trump’s use of the Alien Enemies Act has ‘frightening’ implications​


“
US District Judge James Boasberg vowed on Friday to find out whether officials in the Trump administration violated his orders temporarily blocking the use of an 1798 law for deportations by refusing to turn two flights around last weekend.

“I will get to the bottom of whether they violated my order – who ordered this and what the consequences will be,” Boasberg said near the end of an hourlong hearing over whether he should lift the pair of orders he issued last Saturday. …”
 
Zoo_View said:
What kind of law school is Yale?

Josh Hawley is a graduate.
Click to expand...
It's not just that. No lawyer in America has been asking for and getting (from corrupt Texas judges, primarily -- I guess there was a La one in there too) more nationwide injunctions than Erin Hawley. Erin Hawley's entire legal practice seems to consist of finding judges who will enter nationwide injunctions on the thinnest of possible justifications.
 
nycfan said:
and saying Friday in the Oval Office that he’s “sitting behind a bench and has no idea what’s going on.”
Click to expand...
Indeed. It's the executive's responsibility to inform the court of what's going on.

I wish more journalists would stop dissembling about the specific terms of practices of the AEA. The AEA cannot nullify the 4th Amendment, which is clear on this point:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause,

Nor can the president's wartime powers or Article II authority negate the 4th Amendment, as the 4th Amendment was ratified after the constitution. It's an amendment -- and incidentally it was mostly done by the same people who drafted and ratified the constitution. If the founders wanted to make an exception for the president's Article II authority, they would have. They didn't, because their intent was the opposite: the expansive power given in Article II was always intended to be reined in by the Bill Of Rights (which is why it is called "Of Rights").

It's high school civics lesson stuff, and it's getting lost in the noise. There is no universe in which any power exercised pursuant to Articles I or II or both can override the plain command of the 4th Amendment. And Article III is also bound, given the requirement of probable cause.

Nor can the AEA or any other act of Congress nullify the protections of the First Amendment. Again, one would think that wouldn't need to be said, but alas. So enough articles about what the AEA does or how it has been used. Viewpoint discrimination is the fundamental bedrock of the First Amendment (i.e. that it's impermissible). To the extent that speech can be punished anyway, it's because that speech is deemed unprotected by the First Amendment, and there are tests, some of which are very strict (e.g. Brandenburg) as to what is required for speech to be unprotected. Mohamed Khalil doesn't remotely approach that line.

So fuck the AEA. Journalists, write about the First Amendment. That's the only lens through which the Khalil case can be viewed.
 


“… This was for an event called “The Shakespeare Theatre Company livestreamed A Hero Defamed? Much Ado About Margaret, a mock trial production in an appellate-court format that explored the connection between classical theatre and modern-day law.”

It was moderated by Abbe Lowell, the defense attorney who has represented Jared Kushner, Ivanka Trump, and Hunter Biden.“
 
nycfan said:


Click to expand...

Actually Trump has also said and tweeted that what these judges are doing is in his opinion wrong and that he may not obey their rulings, and on the issue of deporting immigrants they've already ignored federal court rulings. And growing numbers of his fellow Congressional Republicans are saying that they want to defund or even impeach and remove these judges, so he's clearly avoiding the question. And based on what I've seen so far I'd say that the Senator and a great many of his colleagues could use a good old-fashioned high school civics lesson about checks and balances and separation of powers, because Congress right now is clearly ceding much of its budgetary authority and power of the purse to the executive branch, and allowing an unelected, unappointed nut - Elon Musk - to take a hatchet to everything in sight, which is not supposed to happen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top