***** Official Trump 47 Admin Court Battles *****

177,643 Views | 2137 Replies | Last: 4 hrs ago by will25u
TacosaurusRex
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BMX Bandit said:

so in cases where the APA does not apply, the APA injunction power cannot be used. I don't think that is in question.

I don't see a path for the court to hold that in APA actions, the district courts cannot issue injunctions stopping agency action
So did this case actually do anything, or did it just kick the can down the road?
"If you are reading this, I have passed on from this world — not as big a deal for you as it was for me."
T. Boone Pickens
Claude!
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Stat Monitor Repairman said:


Is this for real?
Eh, I don't make too much of this. It's fun for memes, but I think it's just a rhetorical tic.
TacosaurusRex
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Claude! said:

Stat Monitor Repairman said:


Is this for real?
Eh, I don't make too much of this. It's fun for memes, but I think it's just a rhetorical tic.
Well, the beat down she got this morning from her peers seem to show that the rest of the justice's do not think too much of the DEI hire either.
"If you are reading this, I have passed on from this world — not as big a deal for you as it was for me."
T. Boone Pickens
Claude!
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TacosaurusRex said:

Claude! said:

Stat Monitor Repairman said:


Is this for real?
Eh, I don't make too much of this. It's fun for memes, but I think it's just a rhetorical tic.
Well, the beat down she got this morning from her peers seem to show that the rest of the justice's do not think too much of the DEI hire either.
Fair point, and I'm not claiming that she's a paragon of jurisprudence.
techno-ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Claude! said:

TacosaurusRex said:

Claude! said:

Stat Monitor Repairman said:


Is this for real?
Eh, I don't make too much of this. It's fun for memes, but I think it's just a rhetorical tic.
Well, the beat down she got this morning from her peers seem to show that the rest of the justice's do not think too much of the DEI hire either.
Fair point, and I'm not claiming that she's a paragon of jurisprudence.

Have you read her opinions? She truly does not understand, still.
Pro College Station Convention Center
flown-the-coop
How long do you want to ignore this user?
KJB is to Legal Expertise as Maxine Watters is to Finance Expertise.

As a reminder, DEI does not stand for discernment, expertise nor intelligence unless it is to describe the lack thereof.
samurai_science
How long do you want to ignore this user?
How did she pass the bar?
flown-the-coop
How long do you want to ignore this user?
samurai_science said:

How did she pass the bar?
We know for one thing that Kamala did not take it for her. Recall she failed it at least once.

KJB will be a dirty **** stain on the history of SCOTUS. But she makes it very easy for Trump to pick whomever he wants at the next vacancy.
whatthehey78
How long do you want to ignore this user?
samurai_science said:

How did she pass the bar?
Are you certain it was her that sat for it?
Alexander, Caesar, Charlemagne, and myself founded empires; but upon what foundation did we rest the creations of our genius? Upon force! But Jesus Christ founded His upon love; and at this hour millions of men would die for Him. - Napoleon Bonaparte

“To do evil a human being must first of all believe that what he's doing is good” - Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
ThunderCougarFalconBird
How long do you want to ignore this user?
samurai_science said:

How did she pass the bar?
interesting question. I'm of the position that anyone on this site with an ag tag could pass the bar. Given enough time and adequate study resources (perhaps 6-8 weeks and a barbri course?) it wouldn't be that tough. The bar doesn't require legal analytical thinking skills; it's a long-format binge & regurgitate test.

Everyone I know that didn't pass on the first time flunked because they were lazy and didn't put in the work, not because they were dumb. The population of people able to qualify to sit for the bar (JD from accredited law school which almost always requires an undergraduate degree) but are just too dumb to pass it is likely tiny.

KBJ may well be in that population based on whatever that dissent was.
nortex97
How long do you want to ignore this user?
She was almost certainly an affirmative action admission to Harvard, fwiw (from Wikipedia), an example of Ivy League DEI policies backfiring long-term:
Quote:

After high school, Jackson matriculated at Harvard University to study government, having applied despite her guidance counselor's advice to set her sights lower. She took classes in drama and performed improv comedy, forming a diverse friend group. As a member of the Black Students Association, she led protests against a student who displayed a Confederate flag from his dormitory window and protested the lack of full-time professors in the Afro-American Studies Department. While a freshman, Jackson enrolled in Michael Sandel's course Justice, which she has called a major influence during her undergraduate years. She graduated from Harvard in 1992 with a Bachelor of Arts, magna cum laude. Her senior thesis was titled "The Hand of Oppression: Plea Bargaining Processes and the Coercion of Criminal Defendants".

From 1992 to 1993, Jackson worked as a staff reporter and researcher for Time magazine. She then attended Harvard Law School, where she was a supervising editor of the Harvard Law Review, graduating in 1996 with a Juris Doctor, cum laude
Anyone who could make it through Harvard Law, though, should have the ability to pass the bar. Notably, she was also not a particularly good trial court judge;
Quote:

In 2019, Jackson ruled that provisions in three Trump executive orders conflicted with federal employee rights to collective bargaining. Her decision was reversed unanimously by the D.C. Circuit. The D.C. Circuit also reversed another 2019 decision, involving a challenge to a Department of Homeland Security decision to expand the agency's definition of which non-citizens can be deported.
I think she did somehow pass the bar on her first attempt, but that as well could be false.
Ellis Wyatt
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Quote:

Eh, I don't make too much of this. It's fun for memes, but I think it's just a rhetorical tic.
She's wholly unqualified to be a judge. ANY judge.

She's a ****ing idiot.
Claude!
How long do you want to ignore this user?
As someone who failed the Texas Bar (by less than a point), I can confirm that it was largely due to laziness and lack of preparation.

Don't get me wrong, I'm also pretty dumb, but it mostly came down to preparation.
techno-ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
nortex97 said:

She was almost certainly an affirmative action admission to Harvard, fwiw (from Wikipedia), an example of Ivy League DEI policies backfiring long-term:
Quote:

After high school, Jackson matriculated at Harvard University to study government, having applied despite her guidance counselor's advice to set her sights lower. She took classes in drama and performed improv comedy, forming a diverse friend group. As a member of the Black Students Association, she led protests against a student who displayed a Confederate flag from his dormitory window and protested the lack of full-time professors in the Afro-American Studies Department. While a freshman, Jackson enrolled in Michael Sandel's course Justice, which she has called a major influence during her undergraduate years. She graduated from Harvard in 1992 with a Bachelor of Arts, magna cum laude. Her senior thesis was titled "The Hand of Oppression: Plea Bargaining Processes and the Coercion of Criminal Defendants".

From 1992 to 1993, Jackson worked as a staff reporter and researcher for Time magazine. She then attended Harvard Law School, where she was a supervising editor of the Harvard Law Review, graduating in 1996 with a Juris Doctor, cum laude
Anyone who could make it through Harvard Law, though, should have the ability to pass the bar. Notably, she was also not a particularly good trial court judge;
Quote:

In 2019, Jackson ruled that provisions in three Trump executive orders conflicted with federal employee rights to collective bargaining. Her decision was reversed unanimously by the D.C. Circuit. The D.C. Circuit also reversed another 2019 decision, involving a challenge to a Department of Homeland Security decision to expand the agency's definition of which non-citizens can be deported.
I think she did somehow pass the bar on her first attempt, but that as well could be false.

Schools are set up for women to succeed. Memorization and then regurgitation on multiple choice tests and short answer is something many women have practiced successfully since grade school.

It's the real world application of unemotional jurisprudence that is tripping up Ketanji.
Pro College Station Convention Center
will25u
How long do you want to ignore this user?

will25u
How long do you want to ignore this user?
will25u
How long do you want to ignore this user?

txags92
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Great question in the replies to one of the X posts…"How can the unborn be a class?" Who is the damaged party when it is the unborn whose "rights" stand to be abridged by by an action? And if it is ruled that it is unconstitutional to deny such a class the right of citizenship upon birth, how on earth can it be legal to deny them life before they are born? I am not some pro-life zealot…I am honestly shocked that the dems haven't considered the potential consequences of success in making that argument.
techno-ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
txags92 said:

Great question in the replies to one of the X posts…"How can the unborn be a class?" Who is the damaged party when it is the unborn whose "rights" stand to be abridged by by an action? And if it is ruled that it is unconstitutional to deny such a class the right of citizenship upon birth, how on earth can it be legal to deny them life before they are born? I am not some pro-life zealot…I am honestly shocked that the dems haven't considered the potential consequences of success in making that argument.

They don't consider the consequences of their actions. They just want the current "win" because Orange Man bad.

Note similar mistakes like doing away with 60 votes in the Senate needed to confirm federal judges under Obama.
Pro College Station Convention Center
aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
txags92 said:

Great question in the replies to one of the X posts…"How can the unborn be a class?" Who is the damaged party when it is the unborn whose "rights" stand to be abridged by by an action? And if it is ruled that it is unconstitutional to deny such a class the right of citizenship upon birth, how on earth can it be legal to deny them life before they are born? I am not some pro-life zealot…I am honestly shocked that the dems haven't considered the potential consequences of success in making that argument.
You are not the only mystified as to how the unborn can be certified as class for a class action lawsuit. How such a class would have standing, etc.

Not something covered in the rules of procedure.
nortex97
How long do you want to ignore this user?
There is some speculation out there among the legally illiterate commentariat class in DC that various 'causes' will proceed based on things like APA footnotes in the recent CASA 'birthright citizenship' decision (journalism major, lol). This is simply false.

Of course, Casa had the paperwork drafted already, fwiw, to begin such a process.
SwigAg11
How long do you want to ignore this user?
If the courts rule that the unborn can meet the requirements for class certification over citizenship, then why wouldn't they be able to certify with respect to life against abortion?
BMX Bandit
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Did you post the wrong tweet? The hurdles of getting a class certified are definitely going to slow down these injunctions, but has nothing to do with the footnote mentioned APA.
nortex97
How long do you want to ignore this user?
No, they are separate claims but related to Casa decision. This will slow it down to use rule 23 and no the APA non-decision footnote doesn't really lead to this being easy still either. I should have clarified that I guess I just found the piece to be horrible/sloppy 'journalism' written essentially as a mouthpiece of the leftist lawfare groups.

I am curious when Illston's injunction will be removed. My guess is after July 4.
FTAG 2000
How long do you want to ignore this user?
nortex97 said:

There is some speculation out there among the legally illiterate commentariat class in DC that various 'causes' will proceed based on things like APA footnotes in the recent CASA 'birthright citizenship' decision (journalism major, lol). This is simply false.

Of course, Casa had the paperwork drafted already, fwiw, to begin such a process.




Weird. Almost like they had been leaked the decision well in advance so they could prepare this filing.

Guessing it was wise Latina or Biden's Jacksonian illiterate.
BMX Bandit
How long do you want to ignore this user?
It was discussed at the oral arguments and probably every legal commenter that listened/read it opined that class actions wouid be a path forward. No leak was necessary to see the writing on the wall. It was clear as day.
Troy91
How long do you want to ignore this user?
yeah, if any attorney didn't see multiple attempts to certify a class across a bunch of different lawsuits, they were on vacation.
Dirty_Mike&the_boys
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I guess we will see if Rule 23(b)(2) becomes an issue because the left will most certainly be seeking injunctive relief, because without it their case isn't even a door stop much less disruptive which is all they want. They don't give a damn about the actual people they are an expendable commodity to them.
“ How you fellas doin? We about to have us a little screw party in this red Prius over here if you wanna join us.”
nortex97
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Oh there will be more class action suits filed, but it now is fairly simple for SCOTUS to just remand various injunctions with or without a small comment about the new Casa precedent. Spending a lot of money to just lose and not even getting a 6+ month universal injunction out of the effort is going to be frustrating to the Eisen's of the world.

And this is the case I am curious about. The APA was not considered in the Casa case. But, I don't think the APA precludes the executive branch from reorganizing as she has concluded under the universal injunction.

will25u
How long do you want to ignore this user?
techno-ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
will25u said:



That's smart.
Pro College Station Convention Center
Stat Monitor Repairman
How long do you want to ignore this user?



Trump gon' Judge Roy Bean on they ass.

Gatah-traz v. Mommy Jurisprudence --- Battle Royale.

What a time to be alive!
rausr
How long do you want to ignore this user?

nortex97
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I hate to steal an SEC team slogan but…'gator bait!'
will25u
How long do you want to ignore this user?
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.