Posted on 02/11/2025 2:43:15 PM PST by packagingguy
IIRC anyone can file a complaint agaisnt the gov in Alaska. Apparently Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck didn’t like her either. So messed up.
H.R.8771 - Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2025
118th Congress (2023-2024)
Sponsor: Rep. Diaz-Balart, Mario [R-FL-26] (Introduced 06/14/2024)
....
Department Of State
migration and refugee assistance
For necessary expenses not otherwise provided for, to enable the Secretary of State to carry out the provisions of section 2(a) and (b) of the Migration and Refugee Assistance Act of 1962 (22 U.S.C. 2601), and other activities to meet refugee and migration needs; salaries and expenses of personnel and dependents as authorized by the Foreign Service Act of 1980 (22 U.S.C. 3901 et seq.); allowances as authorized by sections 5921 through 5925 of title 5, United States Code; purchase and hire of passenger motor vehicles; and services as authorized by section 3109 of title 5, United States Code, $2,453,236,000 (reduced by $500,000,000), to remain available until expended: Provided, That of the funds appropriated under this heading, not less than $6,500,000 shall be made available for refugees resettling in Israel
....
https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/8771/text
Love it. Bankrupt the DNC and all the unions that support blocking Trump.
There needs to be an injunction against the government funding of religious charities: Catholic, Lutheran, Muslim, Hindu, etc.
And no, I shouldn’t have to post an injunction bond for that.
That is the wrong kind of hardball; the price of an independent judiciary is that even tendentious judges are independent.Next thing you know, some Democrat executive is doing the same to SCOTUS justices of whom we approve.
Andrew Jackson showed the hardball approach - he basically said, as Stalin put it, “How many divisions does the Pope have?”
Not that this isn’t dangerous, but in the most extreme case the executive always has that in his (for now) hip pocket. Joe Biden ignored SCOTUS WRT student loans, and Andrew Jackson implemented the Trail of Tears removal of the “Indians” to Oklahoma. Those are not reputable examples. But if time were truly of the essence in emergencies, ignoring the ruling of some inferior judge could become necessary.
But if the damage of a tendentious ruling is tolerable, stick with the devil you know, and appeal. Ultimately we have a pretty trustworthy SCOTUS, after all. That is wonderful; I am old enough to remember the Warren Court.🤮
Sick big balls on them and their financial and internet history
I would add that ex partite injunctions against the executive branch should be disallowed - that would slow their roll
I’m an attorney. It is a refreshing thought, but the text of the rule grants discretion to the Judge issuing the injunction:
“No restraining order or preliminary injunction shall issue except upon the giving of security by the applicant, in such sum as the court deems proper, for the payment of such costs and damages as may be incurred or suffered by any party who is found to have been wrongfully enjoined or restrained..”
...”as the court deems proper”.
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.