Can We Trust Courts to Stop Trump's Lawlessness?

[80zephyr]

‘Just following the mass of litigation against the second Trump Administration can be a full-time job.

One leading tracker currently identifies 244 distinct cases filed against the administration. Many of these cases have been through multiple stages: temporary restraining orders, preliminary injunctions, summary judgment motions, enforcement and contempt proceedings, and appeals (and requests for stays) at each stage — in a number of instances going all the way to the Supreme Court. And Trump’s been back in office for a mere four months!

Even the past weeks have been dizzying. On May 16, the Supreme Court issued its latest ruling in A.A.R.P. v. Trump. (The letters “A.A.R.P.” here are the initials of the person who filed the lawsuit, not the well-known advocacy organization for older Americans.) The Court seemed to take a strong stand against Trump’s mass deportations. It issued an injunction preventing the deportation of immigrants under the Alien Enemies Act without due process, and it held that “notice roughly 24 hours before removal, devoid of information about how to exercise due process rights to contest that removal, surely does not pass muster.”

Yet on May 19 — the very next business day — the Court issued an order that had the effect of removing “Temporary Protected Status” from over 300,000 Venezuelan immigrants, thus clearing an obstacle to their deportation. As one leading immigration lawyer noted, “This is the largest single action stripping any group of non-citizens of immigration status in modern U.S. history. That the Supreme Court authorized it in a two-paragraph order with no reasoning is truly shocking.” Only Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson noted her dissent.’

Can We Trust Courts to Stop Trump’s Lawlessness?

The harms that Trump is causing — to our people, our polity, our politics, and so much more — go well beyond any possible violations of law.

www.lincolnsquare.media

“Can We Trust Courts to Stop Trump's Lawlessness?”

Not the Supreme Court, clearly.

The lower courts have demonstrated a willingness to do so – but trusting the courts really isn’t the issue or concern.

Of concern is Trump’s criminality and lawlessness when it comes to ignoring the courts, refusing to obey orders and injunctions, relentlessly violating the law and Constitution with impunity.

Hers the problem. There are 660+ judges that can rule on these cases. Trump has to go 660+ to zero in everyone of these cases to move his programs forward. That is WRONG.

 

[meaner gene]

They will be the judges of nothing soon. That's where this leftist lunacy is headed.
Their districts will be redefined into other districts and they will have nothing to preside over.

You'll need 60 votes in the senate to do that.
And you don't have 60 votes in the senate

 

[The Duke]

You'll need 60 votes in the senate to do that.
And you don't have 60 votes in the senate

Nah, this is a 51 vote type deal.

 

[meaner gene]

Hers the problem. There are 660+ judges that can rule on these cases. Trump has to go 660+ to zero in everyone of these cases to move his programs forward. That is WRONG.

Actually a Trump program that violates the US Constitution is WRONG.

 

[BS Filter]

The Harvard Law Review reported 127 nationwide injunctions

64 issued against the first Trump Administration.

The total number of nationwide injunctions issued against both Trump administrations is 79,

They've upheld nationwide injunctions before, and they'll do it again.

We'll see.

 

[Doc7505]

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/05/15/us/politics/trump-policies-blocked-courts.html

As of late March, judges had issued 17 nationwide injunctions against the Trump administration,

~~~~~~
Indeed, issued by Democrat shopped judges are on the SCOTUS list to repair.

Federal courts move to restrict 'judge shopping,' which got attention after abortion medication case

Federal courts are moving to make it harder to file lawsuits in front of judges seen as friendly to a point of view, a practice known as judge shopping that gained national attention in a major abortion-medication case.

apnews.com

xxxxxxxxxx​

https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/5298367-the-supreme-court-can-settle-the-question-of-nationwide-injunctions/

 

[struth]

Let me quote, " If you watch these violent fascist libs the war has already begun...." is exactly the reason a 17 year old murdered and maim and then got off complete. The quote was from

Rambunctious​

True the leftist are a violent bunch

 

[Vrenn]

True the leftist are a violent bunch

I am giving you notice. If I am at a peaceful anything and you MAGAts show up with your ARs for intimidation, I will go get my own weapons and do a bit of intimate myself. As long as you keep your weapon in the safe position you have zero to worry about. But the second you point that barrel at anyone, do the math. We will not tolerate any more Kyle Rittenhouse routines.

 

[struth]

I am giving you notice. If I am at a peaceful anything and you MAGAts show up with your ARs for intimidation, I will go get my own weapons and do a bit of intimate myself. As long as you keep your weapon in the safe position you have zero to worry about. But the second you point that barrel at anyone, do the math. We will not tolerate any more Kyle Rittenhouse routines.

Who’s pointing their AR?

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

I am giving you notice. If I am at a peaceful anything and you MAGAts show up with your ARs for intimidation, I will go get my own weapons and do a bit of intimate myself. As long as you keep your weapon in the safe position you have zero to worry about. But the second you point that barrel at anyone, do the math. We will not tolerate any more Kyle Rittenhouse routines.

.


Thanks for so eloquently proving struth's point.






.

 

[80zephyr]

Actually a Trump program that violates the US Constitution is WRONG.

The programs are fine.

 

[toobfreak]

Nah, he's some idiot suffering from TDS frantically scouting the Internet for anything anti Trump

I dunno, Sassy. Progs on this forum protecting/defending Biden and attacking Trump are consistently too dumb to be human beings I think. Not one of them can ever back up a thing they claim, and they all rely on the same defense of calling any outlet daring to print the truth or facts about Biden or Trump as "fake news."

That is their sole defense: everything they don't agree with is just not true.

 

[toobfreak]

I am giving you notice. If I am at a peaceful anything

FALLACY #1: I doubt you ever attend anything peaceful.

and you MAGAts show up with your ARs for intimidation,

Can you point out the last time Trump supporters showed up with semi-automatic rifles at a "peaceful" leftwing rally?

I will go get my own weapons and do a bit of intimate myself.

You are intimate with yourself? Do we really need to hear the hoary details? Just how do you intend to go get your own weapons if a bunch of people already have you held at gunpoint?

As long as you keep your weapon in the safe position you have zero to worry about. But the second you point that barrel at anyone, do the math.

Lessee: The moment these others take their ARs off the safe position and have their barrels pointed at you, I don't think it is they who have the problem! Do the math, genius. You might want to rethink just who really has anything to worry about.

 

[Seymour Flops]

‘Just following the mass of litigation against the second Trump Administration can be a full-time job.

One leading tracker currently identifies 244 distinct cases filed against the administration. Many of these cases have been through multiple stages: temporary restraining orders, preliminary injunctions, summary judgment motions, enforcement and contempt proceedings, and appeals (and requests for stays) at each stage — in a number of instances going all the way to the Supreme Court. And Trump’s been back in office for a mere four months!

Even the past weeks have been dizzying. On May 16, the Supreme Court issued its latest ruling in A.A.R.P. v. Trump. (The letters “A.A.R.P.” here are the initials of the person who filed the lawsuit, not the well-known advocacy organization for older Americans.) The Court seemed to take a strong stand against Trump’s mass deportations. It issued an injunction preventing the deportation of immigrants under the Alien Enemies Act without due process, and it held that “notice roughly 24 hours before removal, devoid of information about how to exercise due process rights to contest that removal, surely does not pass muster.”

Yet on May 19 — the very next business day — the Court issued an order that had the effect of removing “Temporary Protected Status” from over 300,000 Venezuelan immigrants, thus clearing an obstacle to their deportation. As one leading immigration lawyer noted, “This is the largest single action stripping any group of non-citizens of immigration status in modern U.S. history. That the Supreme Court authorized it in a two-paragraph order with no reasoning is truly shocking.” Only Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson noted her dissent.’

Can We Trust Courts to Stop Trump’s Lawlessness?

The harms that Trump is causing — to our people, our polity, our politics, and so much more — go well beyond any possible violations of law.

www.lincolnsquare.media

“Can We Trust Courts to Stop Trump's Lawlessness?”

Not the Supreme Court, clearly.

The lower courts have demonstrated a willingness to do so – but trusting the courts really isn’t the issue or concern.

Of concern is Trump’s criminality and lawlessness when it comes to ignoring the courts, refusing to obey orders and injunctions, relentlessly violating the law and Constitution with impunity.

The Constitution does not call for the courts to stop a rogue president's lawlessness. It gives that responsibility to the Senate and the House of Representatives.

The founders never would have envisioned the kind of judiacracy that Democrats are currently calling for. The whole point of the Constitution - and the American Revolution itself - was to ensure that people were ruled by representatives and executives for whom they voted on a regular basis.

It was not to ensure that we are ruled by unelected, lifetime appointees of those elected officials.

 

[j-mac]

The Constitution does not call for the courts to stop a rogue president's lawlessness. It gives that responsibility to the Senate and the House of Representatives.

The founders never would have envisioned the kind of judiacracy that Democrats are currently calling for. The whole point of the Constitution - and the American Revolution itself - was to ensure that people were ruled by representatives and executives for whom they voted on a regular basis.

It was not to ensure that we are ruled by unelected, lifetime appointees of those elected officials.

Leftists don't care about that brother. This is a Theocracy we are talking about here....Progressive liberals treat liberalism like a religion, and their ideological placements on the bench were/are their secret, last resort army to stop anything that gets in the way of their march to totalitarianism....

Our problem is that when we appoint Judges, or Justices we expect them to rule in a conservative way, but in the end we leave it up to them..Liberals are not like that, their appointments must declare to them total fealty to the cause...And we can't do anything about it because liberals have infiltrated some of our weaker sitting Judges, and they end up voting against their better judgement in order to be accepted by the false narrative of jurist prudence....Liberal judges don't give a shit about that...Roberts is a prime example.

 

[The Duke]

Actually a Trump program that violates the US Constitution is WRONG.

Trump is trying to uphold Article IV, Section 4 of The Constitution and these judges are blocking it.
By law they can be removed, charged, and fined for that.

I am giving you notice. If I am at a peaceful anything and you MAGAts show up with your ARs for intimidation, I will go get my own weapons and do a bit of intimate myself. As long as you keep your weapon in the safe position you have zero to worry about. But the second you point that barrel at anyone, do the math. We will not tolerate any more Kyle Rittenhouse routines.

Sounds kinky.

 

[Seymour Flops]

I am giving you notice. If I am at a peaceful anything and you MAGAts show up with your ARs for intimidation, I will go get my own weapons and do a bit of intimate myself. As long as you keep your weapon in the safe position you have zero to worry about. But the second you point that barrel at anyone, do the math. We will not tolerate any more Kyle Rittenhouse routines.

You're not concerned that if you pull a gun on a MAGA, you will be "disarmed" as Gaige Grosskreutz was?

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

Leftists don't care about that brother. This is a Theocracy we are talking about here....Progressive liberals treat liberalism like a religion, and their ideological placements on the bench were/are their secret, last resort army to stop anything that gets in the way of their march to totalitarianism....

Our problem is that when we appoint Judges, or Justices we expect them to rule in a conservative way, but in the end we leave it up to them..Liberals are not like that, their appointments must declare to them total fealty to the cause...And we can't do anything about it because liberals have infiltrated some of our weaker sitting Judges, and they end up voting against their better judgement in order to be accepted by the false narrative of jurist prudence....Liberal judges don't give a shit about that...Roberts is a prime example.

.

Very well said.


.