Posted on 05/30/2025 8:49:11 AM PDT by TheOldSchool
I am not a lawyer however it seems Trump is doing things in reverse. Every time Trump issues an Executive Order, an activist judge rules it illegal. Why can't he do some "judge shopping" and get a ruling from a judge saying the EO is legal, then issue his/her ruling, and bingo, he is in line with the judicial system and then execute his EO.
So the Trump admin would issue an so then sue itself before a friendly judge and het a friendly ruling before the dems could go to work
So the Trump admin would issue an so then sue itself before a friendly judge and het a friendly ruling before the dems could go to work
So the Trump admin would issue an so then sue itself before a friendly judge and het a friendly ruling before the dems could go to work
So the Trump admin would issue an so then sue itself before a friendly judge and het a friendly ruling before the dems could go to work
So the Trump admin would issue an so then sue itself before a friendly judge and het a friendly ruling before the dems could go to work
So the Trump admin would issue an so then sue itself before a friendly judge and het a friendly ruling before the dems could go to work
So the Trump admin would issue an so then sue itself before a friendly judge and het a friendly ruling before the dems could go to work
So the Trump admin would issue an so then sue itself before a friendly judge and het a friendly ruling before the dems could go to work
So the Trump admin would issue an so then sue itself before a friendly judge and het a friendly ruling before the dems could go to work
So the Trump admin would issue an so then sue itself before a friendly judge and het a friendly ruling before the dems could go to work
Nothing like a good Stephen Miller jolt!
Thanks for the Legal Education! Oh well, I thought it was an idea. Once again, thanks everyone.
By doing what you suggest, Trump would be saying that his EO is illegal and he is acting illegally. Then he would be asking the judge to confirm or deny legality. That’s not how it works and it is not a good idea. Trump should, and has, start from the point the the EO is legal and he is acting in accordance with the law, his executive powers.
By doing what you suggest, Trump would be saying that his EO is illegal and he is acting illegally. Then he would be asking the judge to confirm or deny legality. That’s not how it works and it is not a good idea. Trump should, and has, start from the point the the EO is legal and he is acting in accordance with the law, his executive powers.
By doing what you suggest, Trump would be saying that his EO is illegal and he is acting illegally. Then he would be asking the judge to confirm or deny legality. That’s not how it works and it is not a good idea. Trump should, and has, start from the point the the EO is legal and he is acting in accordance with the law, his executive powers.
By doing what you suggest, Trump would be saying that his EO is illegal and he is acting illegally. Then he would be asking the judge to confirm or deny legality. That’s not how it works and it is not a good idea. Trump should, and has, start from the point the the EO is legal and he is acting in accordance with the law, his executive powers.
By doing what you suggest, Trump would be saying that his EO is illegal and he is acting illegally. Then he would be asking the judge to confirm or deny legality. That’s not how it works and it is not a good idea. Trump should, and has, start from the point the the EO is legal and he is acting in accordance with the law, his executive powers.
Hijack the thread much?
Huh? People should contact all the cops before they go out and exceed the speed limit.
I asked Zen Master this. An affirmative ruling will not negate a negative (”you can’t do that”) ruling. It will only prompt an appeal. (two equal judges).
Trump is doing the right thing by NOT ignoring the judges. He is winning over 90% of these cases when they reach the final determination. He’s going to win almost all of them.
Meanwhile, public support for ignoring judges is only about 21%
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.