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

224,501 Views | 2496 Replies | Last: 4 hrs ago by aggiehawg
Aggie Jurist
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 • 5:54p, 7/1/25
And once again we ask - 'what is this 'independent' 4th branch of government?
Reply Quote
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 Aggie Jurist • 6:06p, 7/1/25
Aggie Jurist said:
And once again we ask - 'what is this 'independent' 4th branch of government?
The deep state apparently...
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 Aggie Jurist • 3:53a, 7/2/25
Presumably people who nominally work for the president, who cannot be fired.


Or, maybe federal judges who don't believe SCOTUS rulings are mandatory authority.

ETA: here is a site that tracks the judicial lawfare against Trump:
https://www.judicialsabotage.org/
Reply Quote
1 edit
will25u
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
1:39p, 7/2/25
More ignoring 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
1:43p, 7/2/25
Oh, here's another apparently non-APA claim from a communist judge that Trump has to accept asylum seekers and open the border, too.
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 nortex97 • 2:05p, 7/2/25
I seriously doubt the border will open again.
Pro College Station Convention Center
Reply Quote
Stat Monitor Repairman
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:22p, 7/2/25
Marxist federal judges think they are a council of philosopher kings.
Reply Quote
will25u
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:22p, 7/2/25
Reply Quote
will25u
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:43p, 7/2/25
Reply Quote
Stat Monitor Repairman
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:07p, 7/2/25
It's worth pointing out (again) that Trump is the most experienced litigant of all time.

Litigating with Trump is like throwing Br'er rabbit in the briar patch.

Trump has been involved in approximately 4,000+ lawsuits in U.S. federal and state courts over the past three decades.

This breaks down roughly to: 85 trademark cases, 1,863 casino-related cases, 208 contract disputes, 130 employee-related cases, 63 golf club cases, 190 tax and local government disputes, 14 defamation cases, and 223 other cases.

Some estimates are that Trump has initiated around 1,900 lawsuits as a business / negotiating strategy.

Point being that the law-fare conducted against Trump subject of this thread is a drop in the bucket when you look at the big picture.

The mental stress of one lawsuit is often enough to break most people. It takes its toll. Occupies people's mind 24/7 and wears them down; but not Trump.
Reply Quote
akm91
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Stat Monitor Repairman • 3:09p, 7/2/25
Quote:
Point being that the law-fare conducted against Trump subject of this thread is a drop in the bucket when you look at the big picture.
The problem isn't the necessarily the amount of litigations, it's how long it takes for each suit to wind its way to conclusion. Time is the biggest constraint and it is not on Trump's side.
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 Stat Monitor Repairman • 3:13p, 7/2/25
Yes, good points, and I'd add that he now is working with/at his disposal the largest, most powerful and successful law firm in the known universe, the US DoJ.

I won't try to cite specific conviction success rates off the top of my head, but for white collar prosecutions I think it is well north of 95%. That's what I want to see happen to a lot of the conspirators involved, because things like wire/bank/tax fraud are absolutely part of the NGO/USAID story. The federal sentencing guidelines for a lot of that stuff is off the charts terrifying if they come after you.
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 nortex97 • 5:28p, 7/2/25
nortex97 said:
Oh, here's another apparently non-APA claim from a communist judge that Trump has to accept asylum seekers and open the border, too.



Id like to see this commie's head on a pike on the border. Maybe that'll give some folks crossing something to think about.
Reply Quote
txags92
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
5:46p, 7/2/25
I would rather see the SCOTUS start calling these guys who are violating their directives and ignoring their rulings to cite the dissent instead and bringing them before the court to explain themselves. Let the judge stand before the 9 justices and explain why he or she felt it was appropriate to cite the dissent and ignore the ruling of the highest court in the land.
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 txags92 • 6:06p, 7/2/25
txags92 said:
I would rather see the SCOTUS start calling these guys who are violating their directives and ignoring their rulings to cite the dissent instead and bringing them before the court to explain themselves. Let the judge stand before the 9 justices and explain why he or she felt it was appropriate to cite the dissent and ignore the ruling of the highest court in the land.
Or just the Justice in charge of that circuit. Call them to DC and explain themselves to that supervising justice.

Of course Sotomayor, Kagan and KBJ will never do that.

But I cannot fathom the gravitas of the moment that I were I a federal district court judge I would feel sitting across a big desk from Justice Thomas, having him look over his glasses at me.

(When I was running the company, I was in a meeting with my Exec VP going over some financials, schedules and other housekeeping matters. So I had my glasses on because my head was down, reading. One of our employees walked into the office without knocking on the door first. We had an open door policy, meaning if the door was open, come in. I swear all I did was just look up sideways. That employee later told me she was sure she was fired because I gave her a side eye over my glasses. In fact, I was just startled because I was so focused on business stuff with my Operations chief officer.)
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
6:13p, 7/2/25
Let's just call it like it is. DC circuit shouldn't exist and The GOP Senatorial leadership should burn that court down.

But they won't because they're all on the same team.
Reply Quote
will25u
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:10p, 7/3/25
Reply Quote
will25u
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:56p, 7/3/25
Good chance for the SCOTUS to rule out all the insanity in girls sports.

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 will25u • 4:11p, 7/3/25

LOL.
Reply Quote
will25u
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 • 6:26p, 7/3/25
Kagan wrote the majority on the clarification.

Reply Quote
will25u
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:14p, 7/3/25
Reply Quote
nortex97
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:56a, 7/4/25

It's just funny, at this point.
Reply Quote
will25u
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:22p, 7/4/25
Are they able to file habeas after they are already out of the country?

Reply Quote
will25u
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
4:31p, 7/4/25
Thread on the habeas hearing in the above post. Seems comical at this point as to what these judges are doing. But I am not a lawyer.



Reply Quote
2 edits
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 will25u • 5:16p, 7/4/25
Motion denied.

Look forward to Ilhan Omar going meet them for margaritas.

Adios & Happy 4th of July!

I'm Gipper
Reply Quote
1 edit
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 Im Gipper • 5:20p, 7/4/25
Im Gipper said:
Motion denied.

Look forward to Ilhan Omar going meet them for margaritas.

Adios & Happy 4th of July!
Which motion?
Reply Quote
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
5:46p, 7/4/25
Rehnquist was notorious for referring back to his own dissents...but he acknowledged they were dissenting opinions and years later.

More of I-was-right-back-then-and-I-am-still-right.
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 will25u • 5:53p, 7/4/25

Losers gonna lose.
Reply Quote
japantiger
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:50p, 7/4/25
Looks like they should be on their way to a tropical paradise

Reply Quote
FourAggies
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:00p, 7/4/25
Can the Supreme Court hold district judges in contempt if it is clear that the judges are disregarding the SC rulings?
Reply Quote
will25u
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to japantiger • 10:29p, 7/4/25
japantiger said:
Looks like they should be on their way to a tropical paradise



Didn't want to get beat down by SCOTUS yet again.
Reply Quote
txags92
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
6:15p, 7/5/25
Reply Quote
will25u
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:47a, 7/6/25
Reply Quote
will25u
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:32a, 7/7/25
Reply Quote
SwigAg11
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 • 10:48a, 7/7/25
How can they possibly sue over a congressional budget? Equal protection claim if the budget bill specifically called out Planned Parenthood?
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.