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

176,639 Views | 2131 Replies | Last: 5 hrs ago by techno-ag
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to will25u • 5:09p, 2/28/25


Like playing rope-a-dope.
Reply Quote
will25u
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
6:05p, 2/28/25
Reply Quote
will25u
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
6:08p, 2/28/25

Reply Quote
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
6:10p, 2/28/25
As I have said, one SCOTUS decision will wipe out multiple cases
Reply Quote
Troy91
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
6:13p, 2/28/25
Trump's team has really set them up like domino's in a row.

One good opinion and the entire lawfare scheme topples quickly.

Reply Quote
will25u
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:12a, 3/1/25
Reply Quote
FTAG 2000
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to will25u • 7:15a, 3/1/25
will25u said:


Fine. Have Pam file charges against plaintiffs for child sbuse.
Reply Quote
will25u
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:19p, 3/1/25
Thread.. and DOJ Appeal.



Reply Quote
1 edit
FireAg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to will25u • 8:38p, 3/1/25
Did that judge just tell two justices to pound sand?
Reply Quote
nortex97
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to FireAg • 6:23a, 3/3/25
Not really. It's likely that goes to appeal now as the Dellinger case has a ruling is all. I think Ship is right here.


And, it's a pretty sloppy ruling, bound not to hold up, essentially.

Dellinger may fancy himself as someone who will valiantly stand athwart his boss' intentions and somehow bring down Trump, but he's likely to just litigate Trump into having more executive power than before, imho.

Personally, I think the Global Health Council v. Trump case (about a court ordering payments from USAID) is much more interesting. Ultimately, though, my guess is that one gets tossed on a jurisdiction issue (it should have gone to the court of federal claims, not this Biden hack). The problem the communists have is that in appointing via party line votes incompetent partisans as judges…the rulings wind up being so sloppy/pathetic they don't hold up long enough to have any impact.
Reply Quote
will25u
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
1:46p, 3/3/25
Reply Quote
will25u
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
6:53p, 3/3/25

Reply Quote
will25u
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
6:59p, 3/3/25
Reply Quote
will25u
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:03p, 3/3/25
Biden not Trump in the tweet.

Reply Quote
ttha_aggie_09
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to will25u • 7:09p, 3/3/25
One day every R judge will wake up and fight fire with fire. Until then, they'll continued to get outplayed by the group that plays by literally no rules.
Reply Quote
will25u
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:57a, 3/4/25
Reply Quote
ttha_aggie_09
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to will25u • 8:59a, 3/4/25

Reply Quote
SPF250
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to will25u • 9:29a, 3/4/25
Nothing says FU quite like a $1 spending limit.
Reply Quote
will25u
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:18a, 3/4/25
Reply Quote
Bulldog73
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:22p, 3/4/25
It's not surprising the TROs that have gone against the administration. The Plaintiffs have forum shopped well, and their pets on the bench apparently don't give a rat's ass what the law is. What is a bit surprising is the district judges who have said no or limited their rulings. These lawfare warriors didn't expect to lose a single bench decision, and probably think the courts of appeal will also follow their scripts. I think we'll see a couple of these courts follow the rule of law- many of these judges have higher aspirations, and getting reversed hard by the SCOTUS doesn't bide well for upward mobility.
Reply Quote
will25u
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:05p, 3/4/25
Reply Quote
HTownAg98
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:21a, 3/5/25
Reply Quote
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:25a, 3/5/25
Can't say I am surprised by Roberts' fecklessness but expected better from ACB.

Dissent is scathing, as it should be.
Reply Quote
FireAg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:50a, 3/5/25
So what's at risk? Everything or just these $2B in payments?
Reply Quote
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:52a, 3/5/25
Quote:
A divided Supreme Court on Wednesday turned down a request by the Trump administration to lift an order by a federal judge in Washington, D.C., that had directed the State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development to pay nearly $2 billion in foreign-aid reimbursements for work that has already been done.

In a brief unsigned opinion, the court noted that the Feb. 26 deadline for the government to make the payments had already passed. It instructed U.S. District Judge Amir Ali to "clarify what obligations the Government must fulfill to ensure compliance" with the temporary restraining order that Ali has entered in the case, paying attention to how feasible it is for the government to comply with those timelines.
Ali is expected to hold a hearing on the aid groups' motion for a preliminary injunction which, if granted, would suspend the freeze on foreign-assistance funding going forward on Thursday, March 6.

This means that the dispute could return to the Supreme Court as an emergency appeal again soon.
Four of the court's conservative justices would have granted the government's request to put the order on hold. Justice Samuel Alito, in a dissenting opinion joined by Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh, described himself as "stunned" by the ruling, calling it "a most unfortunate misstep that rewards an act of judicial hubris and imposes a $2 billion penalty on American
Not quite over yet but this was still a bad decision, in my view.
LINK
Reply Quote
1 edit
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:57a, 3/5/25
From same link:

Quote:
The foreign-aid recipients emphasized that, as a general rule, temporary restraining orders like the one Ali issued on Feb. 13 are not appealable. But the government has not even asked the Supreme Court to lift the TRO, they observed. Instead, it has asked the justices to lift Ali's Feb. 25 order directing the government to comply with the TRO and pay for work that had already been completed something that is even less amenable to an appeal than a TRO. Moreover, they noted, because the government has not appealed the temporary restraining order, it would still have to comply with it even if the court were to lift the Feb. 25 order.

In a one-paragraph order on Wednesday, the court emphasized that Harris's request to lift the Feb. 25 order "does not challenge the Government's obligation to follow" the Feb. 13 temporary restraining order.

Alito's dissent acknowledged Ali's "frustration with the Government," and that the aid groups had broached "serious concerns about nonpayment for completed work." But the court's denial of the Trump administration's request to lift Ali's Feb. 25 order, he contended, "is, quite simply, too extreme a response. A federal court," he suggested, "has many tools to address a party's supposed nonfeasance. Self-aggrandizement of its jurisdiction is not one of them."
These cases with mandatory injunctions dressed up as TRO's are a procedural nightmare and the Court should have addressed that as well as the separation of powers issue.
Reply Quote
SA68AG
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:01a, 3/5/25
ACB was a bad selection by Trump.
Reply Quote
HTownAg98
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to FireAg • 9:04a, 3/5/25
FireAg said:
So what's at risk? Everything or just these $2B in payments?
Just the $2B.
Reply Quote
jamieboy2014
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:39a, 3/5/25
The way I'm reading this is that they're asking for clarification and not "forcing" the payments to go through because the appeal was about the deadline and not the payments themselves.
Reply Quote
Bird Poo
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to jamieboy2014 • 9:41a, 3/5/25
jamieboy2014 said:
The way I'm reading this is that they're asking for clarification and not "forcing" the payments to go through because the appeal was about the deadline and not the payments themselves.
I sure hope so.
Reply Quote
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to SA68AG • 9:44a, 3/5/25
SA68AG said:
ACB was a bad selection by Trump.
She has been very disappointing. She bends to Roberts' will too often, in my view. And Roberts wakes up in a different world everyday and is very unpredictable. That in turn means ACB is unpredictable.
Reply Quote
Logos Stick
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to aggiehawg • 9:47a, 3/5/25
aggiehawg said:
SA68AG said:
ACB was a bad selection by Trump.
She has been very disappointing. She bends to Roberts' will too often, in my view. And Roberts wakes up in a different world everyday and is very unpredictable. That in turn means ACB is unpredictable.

Reply Quote
Logos Stick
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:47a, 3/5/25
Reply Quote
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:50a, 3/5/25
From scotusblog feed.

Quote:
Any thoughts about if Bessent v. Dellinger will be released on an opinion day, or on a day not for opinions?
Amy Howe responds:
Quote:
I think that the procedural posture is now a little weird, because Judge Amy Berman Jackson issued a permanent injunction over the weekend and the Trump administration has appealed that to the D.C. Circuit.
LINK

These judges are messing these cases up on purpose.
Reply Quote
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:55a, 3/5/25

Reply Quote
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.