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

191,015 Views | 2244 Replies | Last: 2 hrs ago by Dirty_Mike&the_boys
45-70Ag
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:38p, 4/16/25
Just going to throw this here because it'll end up in court.




The meltdown this causes will be unlike anything we've seen.
Reply Quote
infinity ag
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to 45-70Ag • 7:59p, 4/16/25
45-70Ag said:
Just going to throw this here because it'll end up in court.




The meltdown this causes will be unlike anything we've seen.

I still don't understand why the F are we funding other countries. Esp like UK.
Reply Quote
aezmvp
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:02p, 4/16/25
Well I bet Harvard will be suing soon. Put Yale on the list next to really stick it to Judge B.
Reply Quote
Ag87H2O
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to 45-70Ag • 8:07p, 4/16/25
45-70Ag said:
Just going to throw this here because it'll end up in court.




The meltdown this causes will be unlike anything we've seen.
This is exactly what our federal government needed. I am thankful Trump is going after the system with both barrels. It's the only way that place will ever change.

Go big or go home.
Reply Quote
techno-ag
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Ag87H2O • 8:51p, 4/16/25
Ag87H2O said:
45-70Ag said:
Just going to throw this here because it'll end up in court.




The meltdown this causes will be unlike anything we've seen.
This is exactly what our federal government needed. I am thankful Trump is going after the system with both barrels. It's the only way that place will ever change.

Go big or go home.
You come after the GOAT you best not miss.

They missed.
Trump will fix it.
Reply Quote
Houston Lee
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:55p, 4/16/25
WTF







Reply Quote
1 edit
txags92
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Houston Lee • 9:18p, 4/16/25
Houston Lee said:
WTF







Thanks to Roberts and ACB for leaving these big areas wide open for continued litigation instead of just shutting this BS down.
Reply Quote
Im Gipper
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to txags92 • 9:37p, 4/16/25
Again, why do you give Alito, Thomas and Gorsuch a pass? They did the EXACT same thing Roberts did here!

All 9 members of the court FAILED mightily on this case. Reverse, and render judgment should have been the ruling. Not a single justice has the temerity to do what was right

I'm Gipper
Reply Quote
1 edit
flown-the-coop
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:54p, 4/16/25
Becoming clearer by the minute that SCOTUS is IMPOTUS when it comes to making a decision.

It may be worth a separate thread, but I think SCOTUS needs to fundamentally change. It's not working.

Interestingly enough, this is not a new concept. Below from a left leaning rag and a Harvard / Yale legal guy. But I found the convo interesting here:

https://www.vox.com/2018/10/12/17950896/supreme-court-amy-coney-barrett-mark-tushnet

Quote:

Sean Illing
Do you think the Court competently fulfills this role today?

Mark Tushnet
Whether the Court is competently pursuing it depends on a couple of things. One is your assessment of the legal quality of the work they do. And another is, of course, your assessment of the merits of the limits that they are placing on political choice.

As to the latter, it's just going to depend on your politics. For a while, liberals liked what the Court was doing, and then they didn't. For a while, conservatives didn't like what the Court was doing, and now they do.

Sean Illing
And what of the "legal quality" of the work they're doing?

Mark Tushnet
I think the honest answer there is that, in the modern era, the quality has ranged from minimally competent legal analysis to extremely bad decisions that are announced without a clear or compelling explanation.
Reply Quote
will25u
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:31p, 4/16/25
"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
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:08p, 4/16/25
Good Lord! I actually hoped that Emmet Sullivan's massive stupidity in the Flynn case was just one judge being way past his prime and "Bidening" his decisions.

That has now become an epidemic among these judges. Completely insane and in no way resembles the law as to how I was taught in the late 70s, early 80s.

Honestly. these federal judges need much more requirements for Continuing Legal Education every year, including the Federal Rules for both criminal and civil procedure, at a minimum. And they need to pass a written test at the end of those. The stuff they are doing now is so whacked and outside of the law, they would have flunked out of law school.

Not enough face palms in the world for this crap.
Reply Quote
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 aggiehawg • 11:32p, 4/16/25
It's a leftist strategy. They're political partisans trying to tie the hands of the Executive Branch. They're denying the will of the people because leftists are miscreants totally devoid of ethics.

Notice you have not seen or heard a single leftist decry these tactics as wrong or unethical. It's pure unconstitutional obstruction.
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
In reply to Ellis Wyatt • 11:37p, 4/16/25
Ellis Wyatt said:
It's a leftist strategy. They're political partisans trying to tie the hands of the Executive Branch. They're denying the will of the people because leftists are miscreants totally devoid of ethics.

Notice you have not seen or heard a single leftist decry these tactics as wrong or unethical. It's pure unconstitutional obstruction.
I have heard a few lawtubers bemoan the expansion of Executive powers because when it is POTUS AOC utilizing them people will be screaming about it.

Fair point, in my view. Assuming we as the voting populace ever allows that to happen, The POTUS has those powers, since Congress has largely abandoned and delegated them to that office.
Reply Quote
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 aggiehawg • 11:42p, 4/16/25
But I'm saying utilizing judges to limit the Executive's power is a political strategy. Not rightfully limiting his power, but seizing his power when they don't even have jurisdiction, etc. They're just doing it. They don't care about the consequences.
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 Ellis Wyatt • 4:54a, 4/17/25
The bottom line is Boasberg is going to…lose, badly. He is trying to glass over/hand wave his idiotic dismissal of venue/jurisdiction a month ago, and then to pretend he himself didn't suggest dropping the habeas claim.

The ACLU can request that he order Trump to be sent to Mars this afternoon but it doesn't matter, as it isn't going to happen. The class they seek to represent shouldn't have been 'temporarily' certified at all, and insane claims of a class of prisoners in El Salvador are not…going to hold up. It was a waste of time just to type this petition out, imho:

Margot a couple days ago had a decent article out at the Federalist some may want to read, though I think it's a bit hyperbolic. Yes, it's a bit of a crisis when these judges are trying to direct foreign policy, but no, they are not succeeding.
Reply Quote
flown-the-coop
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:14a, 4/17/25
Contempt for an unlawful order or an order subsequently vacated feels an awfully similar to being charged with obstruction of justice on falsified charges.

Isn't there some sort of legal concept of fruit from the poisonous tree? I know it applies to evidence, but it should apply here as well.

It is basic human comprehension and basic morality that if the underlying or original activity was wrong, then you cannot still victimize the wronged through procedure fercknannery.

SCOTUS would be wise to cleanup both of these areas. But they are not wise. They are corrupt. entitled legal primadonnas and the whole court should be expunged and rethought.
Reply Quote
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 nortex97 • 8:27a, 4/17/25
Quote:
Yes, it's a bit of a crisis when these judges are trying to direct foreign policy, but no, they are not succeeding.
Bur they are obstructing and delaying. Meanwhile they're declaring that Trump is acting illegally. They're smearing him for doing what he was elected to do and has a right to do.
Reply Quote
flown-the-coop
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Ellis Wyatt • 8:44a, 4/17/25
Ellis Wyatt said:
Quote:
Yes, it's a bit of a crisis when these judges are trying to direct foreign policy, but no, they are not succeeding.
Bur they are obstructing and delaying. Meanwhile they're declaring that Trump is acting illegally. They're smearing him for doing what he was elected to do and has a right to do.
Can the judge be charged with obstruction of justice? Seems to me the concept is exactly what he is doing.

Trump is trying to meter out justice and enforce the laws, judge is obstructing that.
Reply Quote
will25u
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:45a, 4/17/25
So question...

Judge B when he first got this case, he had an ex parte hearing with just the plaintiffs. And immediately issued a TRO.

Is that how it is normally done? Just take some plaintiffs word and issue TRO immediately, no nothing from the defendant? I mean he would have done it anyway but just taking whoever asks for TRO word for things without hearing from other parth?
"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 edit
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 flown-the-coop • 8:45a, 4/17/25
flown-the-coop said:
Ellis Wyatt said:

Bur they are obstructing and delaying. Meanwhile they're declaring that Trump is acting illegally. They're smearing him for doing what he was elected to do and has a right to do.
Can the judge be charged with obstruction of justice?
No. And of course, leftists don't care. The ends justify the means. Still waiting for a single leftist to complain about what he is doing. It is wrong.
Reply Quote
flown-the-coop
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Ellis Wyatt • 8:51a, 4/17/25
Ellis Wyatt said:
flown-the-coop said:
Ellis Wyatt said:

Bur they are obstructing and delaying. Meanwhile they're declaring that Trump is acting illegally. They're smearing him for doing what he was elected to do and has a right to do.
Can the judge be charged with obstruction of justice?
No. And of course, leftists don't care. The ends justify the means. Still waiting for a single leftist to complain about what he is doing. It is wrong.
Actually, I believe you can. They may have some immunity but usually the immunity is removed when they act outside their authorities and against the law.

Its time Pam Bondi have some of these judges put behind bars until things can be sorted out on appeal.

I mean, even Boasberg says that if a mistake is made you have to abide by it until a higher court rules.

Throw the ******* in jail for the Easter weekend. Send the message.
Reply Quote
FireAg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:04a, 4/17/25
I've said it before...at some point, folks are going to start taking action in the streets against judges who just make up the law as they go...
Reply Quote
1 edit
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 FireAg • 9:06a, 4/17/25
FireAg said:
I've said it before...at some point, folks are going to start taking action in the streets against judges who just make up the law as they go...
That is what the left wants. They're been baiting the right. See what they did with J6, and that pales in comparison to what the left has been up to.
Reply Quote
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 Ellis Wyatt • 9:07a, 4/17/25
Ellis Wyatt said:
FireAg said:
I've said it before...at some point, folks are going to start taking action in the streets against judges who just make up the law as they go...
That is what the left wants. They're been baiting the right. See what they did with J6, and that pales in comparison to what the left has been up to.

Oh I have no doubt…but then what happens if the some of the authorities side with the folks in the streets?

Quite frankly…we need a national divorce…question becomes if it can be done peacefully or not…
Reply Quote
1 edit
TacosaurusRex
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 • 9:10a, 4/17/25
FireAg said:
Ellis Wyatt said:
FireAg said:
I've said it before...at some point, folks are going to start taking action in the streets against judges who just make up the law as they go...
That is what the left wants. They're been baiting the right. See what they did with J6, and that pales in comparison to what the left has been up to.

Oh I have no doubt…but then what happens if the some of the authorities side with the folks in the streets?
That is extremely unlikely. In this situation you are asking someone to go from the protected class (Dem/Govt) to the non-protected class and lose everything they ever worked for.

Also, please see Covid and how fast authorities shirt colors faded to brown.
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
In reply to will25u • 9:10a, 4/17/25
will25u said:
So question...

Judge B when he first got this case, he had an ex parte hearing with just the plaintiffs. And immediately issued a TRO.

Is that how it is normally done? Just take some plaintiffs word and issue TRO immediately, no nothing from the defendant? I mean he would have done it anyway but just taking whoever asks for TRO word for things without hearing from other parth?
Not unusual at all because the TRO is temporary and expires by its own terms. In the meantime, the other party has the opportunity to be heard and argue their case.
Reply Quote
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 TacosaurusRex • 9:12a, 4/17/25
TacosaurusRex said:
FireAg said:
Ellis Wyatt said:
FireAg said:
I've said it before...at some point, folks are going to start taking action in the streets against judges who just make up the law as they go...
That is what the left wants. They're been baiting the right. See what they did with J6, and that pales in comparison to what the left has been up to.

Oh I have no doubt…but then what happens if the some of the authorities side with the folks in the streets?
That is extremely unlikely. In this situation you are asking someone to go from the protected class (Dem/Govt) to the non-protected class and lose everything they ever worked for.

Also, please see Covid and how fast authorities shirt colors faded to brown.
I think calling anything "extremely unlikely" these days is naive...

There's a reason the Left is always going after 2A...
Reply Quote
ThunderCougarFalconBird
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 • 9:20a, 4/17/25
aggiehawg said:
will25u said:
So question...

Judge B when he first got this case, he had an ex parte hearing with just the plaintiffs. And immediately issued a TRO.

Is that how it is normally done? Just take some plaintiffs word and issue TRO immediately, no nothing from the defendant? I mean he would have done it anyway but just taking whoever asks for TRO word for things without hearing from other parth?
Not unusual at all because the TRO is temporary and expires by its own terms. In the meantime, the other party has the opportunity to be heard and argue their case.
on the AEA case, has anyone asked how, exactly, the aclu got information regarding deportations and flights from what was almost assuredly supposed to be a clandestine operation? Is there a leaker? And why is a judge smearing this stuff all over a public docket?
Reply Quote
Ag with kids
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to nortex97 • 9:21a, 4/17/25
nortex97 said:
The bottom line is Boasberg is going to…lose, badly. He is trying to glass over/hand wave his idiotic dismissal of venue/jurisdiction a month ago, and then to pretend he himself didn't suggest dropping the habeas claim.

The ACLU can request that he order Trump to be sent to Mars this afternoon but it doesn't matter, as it isn't going to happen. The class they seek to represent shouldn't have been 'temporarily' certified at all, and insane claims of a class of prisoners in El Salvador are not…going to hold up. It was a waste of time just to type this petition out, imho:

Margot a couple days ago had a decent article out at the Federalist some may want to read, though I think it's a bit hyperbolic. Yes, it's a bit of a crisis when these judges are trying to direct foreign policy, but no, they are not succeeding.
This is what these judges apparently think about jurisdiction...

Reply Quote
TacosaurusRex
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 • 9:29a, 4/17/25
FireAg said:
TacosaurusRex said:
FireAg said:
Ellis Wyatt said:
FireAg said:
I've said it before...at some point, folks are going to start taking action in the streets against judges who just make up the law as they go...
That is what the left wants. They're been baiting the right. See what they did with J6, and that pales in comparison to what the left has been up to.

Oh I have no doubt…but then what happens if the some of the authorities side with the folks in the streets?
That is extremely unlikely. In this situation you are asking someone to go from the protected class (Dem/Govt) to the non-protected class and lose everything they ever worked for.

Also, please see Covid and how fast authorities shirt colors faded to brown.
I think calling anything "extremely unlikely" these days is naive...

There's a reason the Left is always going after 2A...
I don't think it is naive at all. Please point out all the heroes that stepped forward and stopped their coworkers from abusing power during Covid?

Then let's bring in human behavior. If you are truly worried about protecting your family, your morals are going to shift drastically. Again, you are asking people to go from a protected class WITH their families and financial futures to the un-protected class. This wouldn't be some war fought on some distant land. You are talking about neighbors knowing what side of the fence you fall on, where your kids go to school, where you go to work, where the spare key is hidden on the back porch.

All of the above leads me to believe they government will have no shortage of bodies to throw at us if it ever came down to it, and I pray often that it never does.
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 ThunderCougarFalconBird • 9:34a, 4/17/25
Quote:
on the AEA case, has anyone asked how, exactly, the aclu got information regarding deportations and flights from what was almost assuredly supposed to be a clandestine operation? Is there a leaker? And why is a judge smearing this stuff all over a public docket?
Homan and Noem were going on large sweeps with cameras there. Wasn't exactly clandestine. Those being detained had to go somewhere. So not exactly a leak, per se. Just that somebody knew somebody and tracked it down is my guess.
Reply Quote
flown-the-coop
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 • 9:54a, 4/17/25
aggiehawg said:
Quote:
on the AEA case, has anyone asked how, exactly, the aclu got information regarding deportations and flights from what was almost assuredly supposed to be a clandestine operation? Is there a leaker? And why is a judge smearing this stuff all over a public docket?
Homan and Noem were going on large sweeps with cameras there. Wasn't exactly clandestine. Those being detained had to go somewhere. So not exactly a leak, per se. Just that somebody knew somebody and tracked it down is my guess.
Who arranged the transportation? I cannot recall if they were chartered or were military transports.

If the latter, we know for sure there are leakers at the DoD as a couple got walked out in the last couple of days.

Homan rescheduled at least one raid due to a leak, think maybe more.

So I think its a combination of the left behinds being put into contact with the right folks and leakers.

Keep in mind the Dems have a whole system in place to make each and every case of an illegal being deported some sort of travesty of mankind.

If they had their **** together back in 2001, they would have argued due process for 09/11 hijackers saying they were just refugees seeking a career in aviation and that the attacks were just them expressing the 1st amendment rights.
Reply Quote
oysterbayAG
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:11a, 4/17/25
Trump should just set up an Auto-Pen that automatically pardons everyone in the Executive Branch on a monthly basis including himself and tell these left wing nut jobs to get lost !
Reply Quote
txags92
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:04a, 4/17/25
Boasberg responding to SCOTUS:

Reply Quote
nortex97
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:47a, 4/17/25
I dunno why Margot is so, again, dramatic about this, as this is simply a judge setting deadlines for filings (she re-tweeted this).

He's pissed and throwing his weight around, yes, but judges do that every day at the office, especially federal ones.

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.