Can a Federal Judge order Schumer to end his shutdown?

[BackAgain]

Says the guy who literally just did that.

Settle down.

The president has legal authority to move funds, like he did for WIC.

I'm not asking you to take my word for it. And I don't care if you believe these simple facts or not.

I didn’t. I asked you a question.

And, as expected, you chose to evade it.

I’m not unsettled. Maybe you’re just projecting. You can either support your claim or you can’t. You don’t even try.

It doesn’t matter whether you care about what I do or don’t believe. What does matter is you lack of ability to support your claim.

 

[BackAgain]

He’s assuming that the Judge first ordered Schumer to end his Shutdown, it’s the only thing that makes sense

Nothing he says makes sense.

And he does say a lot of things but rarely even bothers to try to support them.

 

[BackAgain]

No. One is ordering a Senator to vote in a certain way. The other is basically a "writ of mandamus" which is an order to a government official to preform their required duties.

But that difference will escape some.

WW

You assume that an application was made for a writ of mandamus.

You also assume that the President is under some lawful duty to spend monies during a shutdown.

 

[BackAgain]

This is not Schumers shutdown.

It most certainly is.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

This is not Schumers shutdown.

 

[BackAgain]

I previously noted that what libturds such as Fort claim is a “contingency” fund isn’t really that at all.

Guys like Fort simply never bother to read the underlying laws at issue in these discussions:

Post in thread 'Two Federal District Court Judges order a hold on SNAP cutoff'

Oct 31, 2025

There is no “contingency” fund per se.

But let’s pretend that the provisions of the funding for SNAP — involving approximately 5.25 billion (currently) for shortfalls — were what these judges were claiming to order the President to release were to get released. How long would that last?

About 20 days.

And the set-aside funds are for shortfalls. It provides for the secretary to then direct the states to lower the allotments to recipients. It doesn’t say diddly shit about using the funds to cover congressional inaction such as a government shutdown.

I would suppose that the judges...

• BackAgain

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

He’s assuming that the Judge first ordered Schumer to end his Shutdown, it’s the only thing that makes sense

No, and you sound insane.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I didn’t. I asked you a question.

And I answered it. Then you asked for a link.

And I told you I don't care if you believe me or not, and what kind of moron would just take my word for it anyway, look it up yourself.

Then you whined that I made a claim without supporting it, right after you did exactly that.

And here we are.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I previously noted that what libturds such as Fort claim is a “contingency” fund isn’t really that at all.

Except it is, as both the courts and administration are calling it, because that's how it functions. And Trump has the legal authority to move funds into it, as he similarly just did with WIC. As the courts also pointed out when ruling against him.

So you can stomp your feet and insist that the above isn't factual, but you would just be embarrassing yourself.

So please, by all means... knock yourself out... trust me, nobody is going to be, like, "OH what a surprise, BackAgain is having a Grade A drywall punching tantrum over simple facts he doesn't like!"

 

[CrusaderFrank]

No, and you sound insane.

You're telling us the Judge ordered Trump to ask as a King and ignore the Constitution. Is that what you meant to say?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You're telling us the Judge ordered Trump to ask as a King and ignore the Constitution.

Also false.

Frank,can you even make a post without lying?

 

[BackAgain]

And I answered it. Then you asked for a link.

Which you decline to provide. Your answer isn’t an answer. It is a mere empty claim by you. As usual.

And I told you I don't care if you believe me or not, and what kind of moron would just take my word for it anyway, look it up yourself.

As I told you: what you do or don’t care about is irrelevant. You’re still just evading. And it’s plain for all to see.

Then you whined that I made a claim without supporting it, right after you did exactly that.

I don’t make a claim. I challenged yours. You having made the initial claim remain the one obliged to support it. You refuse.

And here we are.

Yes, with you still evading everything.

 

[JWBooth]

Well the order isn't worth the paper on which it is printed, the Supremes saw to that.
Even then, the administration agreed to some partial payment from Agriculture Dept. emergency funds.
The leeches will still feed off of the host, just not at a level they feel entitled to.

 

[BackAgain]

Except it is, as both the courts and administration are calling it, because that's how it functions. And Trump has the legal authority to move funds into it, as he similarly just did with WIC. As the courts also pointed out when ruling against him.

So you can stomp your feet and insist that the above isn't factual, but you would just be embarrassing yourself.

So please, by all means... knock yourself out... trust me, nobody is going to be, like, "OH what a surprise, BackAgain is having a Grade A drywall punching tantrum over simple facts he doesn't like!"

Except, no. It isn’t.

I’d recommend that you read and try real hard to actually comprehend the law.

Try this. Look up: 7 U.S.C. § 2027

The fact is that it makes no reference at all to any contingency fund or emergency fund.

So instead of deflect and evading and making shit up as you generally do — and as you’re doing in this thread — try sacking up. Cite any law which supports your claim.

But you won’t because you can’t.

I’m not sure you’re bright enough to even realize how wrong you are.