Posted on 03/07/2025 6:25:52 AM PST by Red Badger
It’s OK. I can certainly understand your point and I only meant my comment with a little humour and irony (as I like to do often here, lol).
You are being too soft on Amy Q and Roberts, IMO. The Commie harpies never see a fine point to support the Constitution.
I totally agree!
Judicial coup.
From the lowest to the highest levels of the judicial branch.
All way from a nothing burger local judge named Merchan to five sitting on the highest bench in the land.
It is a judicial coup, don’t you see it?
Maybe just defund the supreme court?
Yes, it’s a coup, not a disagreement over precedents. Political power seized by the unelected.
Of course then Al Green will have his grounds for impeachment - which will take about seven minutes. Trump should be patient and then if this obstruction continues, deal with it in an effective way. In the interim, he can collect legal opinions from respected legal scholars to question this aberrant ruling for a district judge to set national judicial opinion without a stay for review.
After all, insecure Speaker Mike Johnson is talking about a CR, which could just reinstate all of the waste that DOGE has truncated... the nature of warfare.
I only described the two positions that would have reasonably led to the decisions made. I didn't support or condemn either. (Although, I would be wary of arguing in defense of withholding funds for contracted work already completed, at least not without validating if the original contracts were fraudulent.)
The Commie harpies never see a fine point to support the Constitution.
Counter-example: the SCOTUS unanimously smacked down the Colorado Supreme Court when they tried to disqualify Trump from the ballot in 2024.
Given that the deadline in the challenged order has now passed, and in light of the ongoing preliminary injunction proceedings, the District Court should clarify what obligations the Government must fulfill to ensure compliance with the temporary restraining order, with due regard for the feasibility of any compliance timelines. The order heretofore entered by THE CHIEF JUSTICE is vacated.
At issue is what the District Court labeled as a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO). A TRO restrains someone from doing something. It is not an order to affirmatively take one or more actions.
A Preliminary Injunction (PI) could order someone to do something.
It is not at all clear what actions the Government must fulfill to ensure compliance with the temporary restraining order.
The date for compliance with the TRO has passed. The Government is not now under any obligation to anything at any date and time certain.
What is crucially at interest here is that a TRO is not generally appealable, while a PI is appealable. It appears that what the District Court labeled a TRO to make it unappealable, contains elements of a PI which would make it appealable. Should the District Court clarify that the Government must disburse $2B, Scotus may in turn decide that it is really a PI, appealable, and proceed to entertain a Government appeal.
Should the Scotus not clarify what it is, TRO or PI, and entertain it as a a TRO, it would open itself to hearing an appeal on every TRO issued in the future. A TRO is a temporary measure to retain the status quo while a court decides whether issuance of an Injunction is appropriate. Generally, it covers a week or ten days, and the matter does not become appealable until the couurt decides whether an Injunction is apppropriate or not.
For those who prefer law without the histrionics.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AruQwqyUl3E
TOTALLY OVERBLOWN! SCOTUS DOGE USAID DECISION IS FINE, ACTUALLY...20m:27s
Mar 5, 2025
SCOTUS’s DOGE order on the USAID funding should not present a problem moving forward. Mark Smith Four Boxes Diner discusses...Second Amendment scholar Mark W. Smith hosts the Four Boxes Diner 2A channel, which was named the Top Voice of the 2nd Amendment at the 2025 Gundies Awards. Mark Smith is a constitutional attorney, a member of the United States Supreme Court Bar, a professor, a frequent Fox News guest, and a New York Times bestselling author.
I posted this within a thread here: https://freerepublic.com/focus/news/4302379/posts?page=47#47
Also started as its own thread thread here:
I was expecting that one counterpoint. Tossing Trump would have led to assassinations, guaranteed.
Thank you for the clarification. Have a great day.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.