Summary

A federal judge in Rhode Island ordered the Trump administration to unfreeze federal funding, accusing it of violating a previous court ruling.

The lawsuit, filed by 22 states and D.C., argues the freeze is unconstitutional and causing harm. Trump, JD Vance, and Elon Musk have suggested defying court orders.

The administration appealed the ruling, while legal experts warn officials like the Treasury Secretary could face contempt charges if they ignore it.

The case tests executive power limits and judicial authority.

39 points
*

I think the judge is mistaken. This is an official act. That means it’s not constrained by things like rulings. In fact, law just isn’t applicable. They really should put more effort into staying up-to-date. /s

permalink
report
reply
21 points

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I’m not saying you’re wrong in your opinion here, but I am gonna ask what happens if Trump does not comply with a federal judge’s order or the order from a state judge that would have implications and federal rulings?

I think the courts already determined that you can’t prosecute a sitting president, are there no repercussions?

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

Edit to add sarcasm tag?

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

One would hope that’s not necessary!

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Don’t ever use the /s. I don’t and look how awesome I am.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

And yet here we are

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

This is the timeline where that guy took POTUS. It’s necessary.

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

The internet has taught me that there is no such thing as sarcasm that everyone can detect.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

Well, supreme Court already said if it’s an official act, then he is immune. So if he decides a court order but it’s an official act, then he can’t be guilty.

Great job there scotus

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

I get your point, but just because you and your freedom are immune to prosecution doesn’t mean your money and property are safe from seizure. For example, if it’s believed that Mar-a-Lago was used in the process of a crime, like withholding documents or discussing illegal things, then it can be seized in civil asset forfeiture and Trump would have to prove his innocence to get it back. Same with his money. I think it’s possible in the current context to find a judge willing to try this. I have no idea how the execution of such an order would play out. But there are still interesting cards unplayed.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

I have no idea how the execution of such an order would play out.

It wouldn’t. The order would get appealed, the appeal would be slow walked so it wouldn’t be executed in a timely manner, and eventually, it would find its way to the supreme kangaroo court and be deemed unconstitutional to seize the assets of the acting president for life.

permalink
report
parent
reply
98 points
*

Ok, the last time he violated a judge’s orders, the charges were much more serious and he was facing potential jail time, both from the criminal trial he was a part of and the gag order imposed on him.

He all-but told the judge to go fuck himself on a daily basis right outside the courtroom, violated the gag order ten fucking times, and received exactly no punishment. And that was when he was a criminal defendant.

He’s now President of the United States, has all three branches of government in his back pocket, and was basically anointed as a king by the Supreme Court, who declared he’s all but immune from prosecution.

And this judge thinks he’s going to obey his orders this time? He told you guys to fuck off on the daily when he was a civilian, and y’all did exactly nothing about it. Now he’s POTUS. The fuck is he planning on doing about it now when he violates his orders again? Send out more orders? Trump could literally tell this guy to go fuck himself and his orders with a chainsaw live on television and there’s fuck-all he can do about it.

permalink
report
reply
16 points

So you want the judge to give him a pass?

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points

the hottest take i think I have ever seen. well done.

permalink
report
parent
reply
37 points

“and this judge thinks”

You can’t just bitch any time someone tries to do something. Does this judge think he’s going to single handedly rein in this fascist administration? No, probably not. Should he try anyway? Absolutely.

We don’t need more Robert Muellers.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I want the judge to put in writing actual consequences that will be followed through on when Trump refuses to comply.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Hah!

Good luck with that.

permalink
report
reply
20 points

Ya’ll have primed him to ignore your shit because nothing serious has ever happened to him from the courts. You fucking baffoons. Lay in your bed.

permalink
report
reply
25 points

Or what? This clown gonna convict the other clown of a felony?

permalink
report
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to “Mom! He’s bugging me!” and “I’m not touching you!” Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That’s all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 14K

    Monthly active users

  • 17K

    Posts

  • 317K

    Comments