Is it really OK to ignore court orders?

Is it OK to defy court orders?

  • yes

  • no


Results are only viewable after voting.
So who decides what laws and actions are illegitimate? YOU…

Typical Trumpist...screw the rule of law if you disagree with it.
The executive branch has a right to defend its venue. In this case the judicial branch is trying to cross over the line. The real lollapalooza was the actionable order to RETURN.....something completely outside of the judge's authority. That is an executive venue not a judicial one.
 
The executive branch has a right to defend its venue. In this case the judicial branch is trying to cross over the line. The real lollapalooza was the actionable order to RETURN.....something completely outside of the judge's authority. That is an executive venue not a judicial one.
So in your opinion the executive branch can decide what laws to obey and not to obey.

That is called authoritarianism.
 
So in your opinion the executive branch can decide what laws to obey and not to obey.

That is called authoritarianism.
Check with Obama on that one....he more or less invented it.
A court order is not a law ding bat....and an illegitimate Court order is not binding on the executive branch.
The Judge can call it unconstitutional but HE CANNOT ORDER ANY ACTIONS.....like " RETURN "..... that is WAAAAAY BEYOND HIS VENUE......
 
Sure sure, investigate them, and find out which cartel is paying them

Check with Obama on that one....he more or less invented it.
A court order is not a law ding bat....and an illegitimate Court order is not binding on the executive branch.
The Judge can call it unconstitutional but HE CANNOT ORDER ANY ACTIONS.....like " RETURN "..... that is WAAAAAY BEYOND HIS VENUE......
Wrong again. Obama??? Lol..is that what you have for Trump running roughshod over the rule of law. Of course a court can order actions, it is called a mandatory injunction.

So, you will decide what laws the executive branch can obey. Yeah, well come to the United Sates of Shithole. That is how shithole countries treat the law.
 
And judges overstepping their constitutional roles isn't authoritarianism?
There are appeals one can do with a court. Who decides the courts constitutional roles..YOU.

You obviously need to look up the term “authoritarianism.”
 
There are appeals one can do with a court. Who decides the courts constitutional roles..YOU.

You obviously need to look up the term “authoritarianism.”

This isn't about a decision, it's about a blanket TRO that is blatantly beyond the scope of the Judge's jurisdiction.

So the appeal will happen while the planes are in the air as well, you fucking dullard?
 
This isn't about a decision, it's about a blanket TRO that is blatantly beyond the scope of the Judge's jurisdiction.

So the appeal will happen while the planes are in the air as well, you fucking dullard?
So, in your opinion Trump can decide which laws to obey. You are a fucking idiot if you beleive that.

The procedure is to obey the order than appeal…and yes they could have called the plane back and then appealed. You are too stupid to understand how the law works. Probably because you are a Trump leg humper.
 
Last edited:
So, in your opinion Trump can decide which laws to obey. You are a fucking idiot if you beleive that.

The procedure is to obey the order than appeal. You are too fucking stupid to understand how that works. Probably because you are a Trump leg bumper.

So far he has gone along with these bullshit TRO's, but this one was too far.

The procedure is that district judges can only issue TRO's in extreme circumstances, not handing them out like candy as they currently are.
 
So far he has gone along with these bullshit TRO's, but this one was too far.

The procedure is that district judges can only issue TRO's in extreme circumstances, not handing them out like candy as they currently are.
Anyone who has ever had a TRO issued against them, says it goes too far. So I guess the president is above the law now and can decide what orders to obey or not to obey.

In this case,there was good cause for the TRO as there may have been innocents caught in the web. The court ordered a short delay. But hey, since president is now above the law he can ignore a court order according to you Trumpers.
 
Last edited:
So who decides what laws and actions are illegitimate? YOU…

Typical Trumpist...screw the rule of law if you disagree with it.
Yeah, when I see a judge overstepping his authority, it's an easy call.

The COTUS lays out the powers of judges very well.

You should read it some time.
 
Anyone who has ever had a TRO issued against them, says it goes too far. So I guess the president is above the law now and can decide what orders to obey or not to obey.

In this case,there was good cause for the TRO as there may have been innocents caught in the web. The court ordered a short delay. But hey, since president is now above the law he can ignore a court order according to you Trumpers.

So the judges are now above the law, right?

How about a judge issues a TRO banning the President from attacking the Houthis? Would that be valid?

Another 80/20 case you twats are picking up, defending gang members.

The court overstepped its bounds, and you cheer because you love seeing gang members in the US, you useless twat.
 
Back
Top Bottom