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

451,692 Views | 3510 Replies | Last: 1 day ago by will25u
Aggie Jurist
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Rapier108 • 6:47p, 3/24/26
AG
Supremacy clause anyone?
Reply Quote
7
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Rapier108 • 7:27p, 3/24/26
Lololololol.

That's it. That's the post.

Rapier108 said:
Reply Quote
4
Rapier108
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 • 7:31p, 3/24/26
???
Reply Quote
Ag with kids
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to flown-the-coop • 9:03p, 3/24/26
AG
flown-the-coop said:
will25u said:

Sounds like the VA guy who was upset on the 5 point friday emails is finally getting justice.

JFC...

I forgot about THAT evil injustice they were subjected to...
Reply Quote
3
flown-the-coop
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:06p, 3/24/26
AG
1. Did minimal tasks required by VA Job standard 2.8308.126 v2013.07.13

2. Inspected female latrines for contrabros sitting to pee as per new Trump anti trans hate program.

3. Began to prepare weekly updated.

4. Spent remainder of day hating on Trump all over TexAgs.

5. Refused to hit send because it is my right to defer executive orders until the Supreme Court has ruled.
Reply Quote
1
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Rapier108 • 9:27p, 3/24/26
That they are upset about not cooperating.
Reply Quote
3
LMCane
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:04a, 3/25/26
how many cases of the first Trump Administration involved swamp creature Rod Rosenstein?!

right now I am in a webinar meeting where he is speaking on investing in Venezuela as part of the Baker McKenzie South America forum.
Reply Quote
3
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:09a, 3/25/26
Reply Quote
8
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:41a, 3/26/26
Reply Quote
6
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:32p, 3/26/26
Interesting thread.

Reply Quote
5
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:06p, 3/26/26
"We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution."

- Abraham Lincoln
Reply Quote
1
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:09p, 3/26/26
"We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution."

- Abraham Lincoln
Reply Quote
2
Ellis Wyatt
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 • 8:16p, 3/26/26
Another judge acting outside her authority.
Reply Quote
7
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:31p, 3/26/26
"We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution."

- Abraham Lincoln
Reply Quote
AustinAg2K
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 • 9:35p, 3/26/26
will25u said:

It's hard to label them a supply chain risk when the day before you were using their products and negotiating with them to expand their usage.
Reply Quote
1
Ag with kids
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to will25u • 12:05a, 3/27/26
AG
will25u said:

It's almost like these district judges have never heard of immigration courts...


Actually, it's more like they know about them, but they cover their ears and chant LALALALALALALALALALALA as the government attorneys try to explain the law to them...
Reply Quote
11
Ag with kids
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to will25u • 12:08a, 3/27/26
AG
will25u said:

It's always great how they put the Trump district court losses on page 1....

Then, they forget to report on the district courts getting ***** slapped by superior courts...


But...they're not biased...
Reply Quote
7
nortex97
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to will25u • 5:03a, 3/27/26
AG
That thread is actually pretty infuriating.

Bad government. The DoJ does wield enormous power and the ability to just target who they want sent to jail for white collar crimes and get a conviction is dangerous itself, but when abused as here is't just a horrible thing, politics aside.
Reply Quote
2
nortex97
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
5:27a, 3/28/26
AG
Brace yourself; an Obama judge just made a good ruling about voter ID law in North Carolina. Seriously.
Quote:
U.S. District Judge Loretta Biggs, an Obama appointee, upheld North Carolina's photo voter ID law in a sweeping 134-page ruling. She found that liberal voting rights groups, including the state NAACP, failed to prove the 2018 law violated the 14th Amendment, the 15th Amendment, or the Voting Rights Act. The ruling keeps the law firmly in place heading into the 2026 midterms and hands Republicans a significant win on election integrity.

In 2018, 55% of North Carolina voters approved a constitutional amendment requiring photo ID at the polls. The legislature then passed it, and it became law. The bill is thorough and accounts for every silly excuse Democrats make against Voter ID: Free photo IDs are available at county election offices and the DMV. Accepted forms include a driver's license, military ID, or U.S. passport. Voters without ID can fill out an exception form for a provisional ballot or bring their ID in before certification. The accommodations are extensive.

Now, we all know there's nothing discriminatory about Voter ID, but that's the narrative that the left has long been pushing, and, for the most part, liberal judges have been striking down commonsense Voter ID laws for years. So, when I learned that an Obama judge actually made this ruling, I was pleasantly surprised. It's not every day that an Obama-appointed judge rules for common-sense election integrity.

I just looked out my window to see if any pigs were flying by, nothing yet.
Reply Quote
14
nortex97
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
6:40a, 3/28/26
AG
And, back to our regularly scheduled 9th circus programming, appellate court says no problem with district court's ruling (Kim Wardlaw, a 71 year old sophist hack of a Clinton judge) that per the tariff case Potus (DHS Sec.) can't take the 'extraordinary' action of revoking TPS for Venezuelans.
Quote:
The author of the Ninth Circuit panel decision sustaining a San Francisco Judge's decision to keep TPS for Venezuela in place cited the Supreme Court's decision in the Tariffs case Learning Resources v. Trump as supporting the panel's decision. But to do so, Judge Kim McClane Warlaw did great "violence" to the the language and reasoning of the Supreme Court in that case maybe to the degree that it will draw the attention of the Justices.

Here is the relevant passage from Chief Justice Roberts' opinion:
Quote:
Absent from this lengthy list of powers is any mention of tariffs or duties. That omission is notable in light of the significant but specific powers Congress did go to the trouble of naming. It stands to reason that had Congress intended to convey the distinct and extraordinary power to impose tariffs, it would have done so expressly as it consistently has in other tariff statutes.

Here is what Judge Warlaw wrote in taking this language and "modifying" it to suit her purposes this week:
Quote:
As the Supreme Court recently explained, "[t]he omission" of a particular power in a statute "is notable in light of the significant but specific powers Congress [does] go to the trouble of naming." Learning Resources v. Trump…. "It stands to reason that had Congress intended to convey the distinct and extraordinary power to" vacate a prior lawful designation or extension, "it would have done so expressly."

According to Judge Warlaw the authority vested in Congress in the Constitution to impose tariffs is functionally no different than the "extraordinary power" of the DHS Secretary to "vacate" actions of her predecessor in office. She broke up the Supreme Court's quote, removed "to impose tarrifs" and put in its place "vacate a prior lawful designation or extension" as if they were interchangeable as a constitutional and legal matter.

That is an example of an abuse of judicial discretion in the fashioning of a legal argument.
...
Yes, in multiple provisions of its amendments to the Immigration and Nationality Act Congress has "taken great pains" to keep Article III courts out of the enforcement of immigration policy!!!

It seems that only Article III judges like Judge Wardlaw have difficulty reading the proverbial signs saying "KEEP OUT" posted throughout the amendments with respect to judicial interference.

Within the last few days, the D.C. Circuit upheld a District Judge Anna Reyes' order blocking the ending of TPS for Haiti. The Second Circuit took similar action with respect to Syria.

In its Applications for Stays in both those cases filed with the Supreme Court, the government has asked the Court to take both up under its "Cert. Before Judgement Rule." This is a Supreme Court rule that allows the Court to take up a case on its merits without waiting for a Circuit Court of Appeals to finish considering the case basically the 9 Justices decide the case without waiting for three judges in the Circuit Court to weigh-in with their decision.

But Judge Chen's Final Orders regarding Venezuela mean that case is concluded. The Ninth Circuit has considered the government's appeal on the merits, and upheld Judge Chen's decisions. It has now voted to not grant en banc review, and the case is now final for all purposes.
Judge Warlaw's injudicious invocation of the holding in the Tariffs' case, combined with the nonchalance with which the panel opinion sloughs aside the Court's two Stays because no explanation was provided could contribute to a view on the Court that it should take all three cases up immediately and resolve this issue prior to the end of the Court's current term in June.

Hopefully! This judicial lawfare must be put to bed.
Reply Quote
7
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
1:32p, 3/30/26

"We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution."

- Abraham Lincoln
Reply Quote
7
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:14a, 3/31/26
Reply Quote
7
flown-the-coop
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:41a, 3/31/26
AG
Scattershooting from memory, but it can be either Alito… or Robert's, no?
Reply Quote
TRM
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to flown-the-coop • 12:02p, 3/31/26
AG
It can be anyone in the majority, but generally they split the workload.
Reply Quote
1 edit
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:16p, 3/31/26
Reply Quote
2
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:51p, 3/31/26
Reply Quote
2
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 • 2:54p, 3/31/26
AG
will25u said:


Ok king.
Reply Quote
8
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 • 2:54p, 3/31/26
AG
On what basis?
Reply Quote
3
Mathguy64
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:55p, 3/31/26
AG
Da fuq? He planning on saying "put it all back?"

And exactly who has standing to sue the President or Exec Branch to stop construction?
Reply Quote
3
Rapier108
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:00p, 3/31/26
Old fossil Bush 43 appointee.
Reply Quote
3
Hubert J. Farnsworth
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:02p, 3/31/26
It's just more petty BS from the swamp to gum up the works. What a bunch of clowns.
Reply Quote
6
Rapier108
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Mathguy64 • 3:02p, 3/31/26
Mathguy64 said:
Da fuq? He planning on saying "put it all back?"

And exactly who has standing to sue the President or Exec Branch to stop construction?

The " National Trust for Historic Preservation" sued and claims only Congress can approve the design and construction.

It is a non-profit entity run by Carol Quillen who from what I can tell, is a leftist.
Reply Quote
3
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:03p, 3/31/26


Quote:
U.S. District Judge Richard Leon in Washington granted a preservationist group's request for a preliminary injunction that temporarily halts President Donald Trump's White House ballroom project.
Leon, who was nominated to the bench by Republican President George W. Bush, concluded that the National Trust for Historic Preservation is likely to succeed on the merits of its claims because "no statute comes close to giving the President the authority he claims to have."
"The President of the United States is the steward of the White House for future generations of First Families. He is not, however, the owner!" the judge wrote.

Leon suspended enforcement of his order for 14 days, acknowledging that the case "raises novel and weighty issues, that halting an ongoing construction project "may raise logistical issues." He also recognized that the administration is likely to appeal his decision.

Reply Quote
1
Mathguy64
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:04p, 3/31/26
AG
So they want it put back. Go for it.
Reply Quote
2
Mathguy64
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Rapier108 • 3:05p, 3/31/26
AG
Rapier108 said:
Mathguy64 said:
Da fuq? He planning on saying "put it all back?"

And exactly who has standing to sue the President or Exec Branch to stop construction?

The " National Trust for Historic Preservation" sued and claims only Congress can approve the design and construction.

It is a non-profit entity run by Carol Quillen who from what I can tell, is a leftist.


And this lady has standing to sue? She ain't congress. It's not her beef. If Congress is mad and things he violated the law then Congress needs to sue.
Reply Quote
8
First Page Last Page
Page 96 of 101 ▼
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.