Judge today sternly blocks funding freeze, contradicts press secretary Leavitt

[g5000]

You should prove yourself before flapping your trap. The constitution does not give federal judges at the state level this power

It appears you don't know what "federal" means.

 

[g5000]

Damn straight!

I have a solution to this dilemma...

The judge can agree to be held financially responsible for every penny of corruption that is later found with these payments.

If the judge agrees to that...in writing...the payments will be made!

That is not how democracy works, mein quisling.

 

[g5000]

playing with Congressional funds is what got Donny-boi his first impeachment.

Exactly. Except he now has a Republican Congress and is free to start shooting people on Fifth Avenue.

 

[elektra]

It appears you don't know what "federal" means.

It appears you don't know your ass from a hole in the ground. Now reply with one of your low IQ insults using a sexual reference.

The people who don't know what dementia is when they see it and it is pointed out now think they are clever using semantics.

Dementia morons

 

[g5000]

It appears you don't know your ass from a hole in the ground. Now reply with one of your low IQ insults using a sexual reference.

The people who don't know what dementia is when they see it and it is pointed out now think they are clever using semantics.

Dementia morons

This is how you choose to cover up your embarrassment at not knowing what federal means and what authority a federal judge has.

You can't admit you made an ignorant mistake.

That's sad. Really sad.

 

[elektra]

This is how you choose to cover up your embarrassment at not knowing what federal means and what authority a federal judge has.

You can't admit you made an ignorant mistake.

That's sad. Really sad.

You are claiming this judge was not in Rhode Island, you are the idiot

 

[g5000]

You are claiming this judge was not in Rhode Island, you are the idiot

He is physically in Rhode Island. So?

He's a FEDERAL judge. Try to get it through your thick head what that means.

Stop doubling, tripling, and quadrupling down on your willful ignorance in public.

 

[elektra]

He is physically in Rhode Island. So?

He's a FEDERAL judge. Try to get it through your thick head what that means.

I never said he was a state judge, moron

 

[g5000]

You are claiming this judge was not in Rhode Island, you are the idiot

Think, Tinkerbell.

Your US Senator is physically from your state. He lives there.

But he's a federal official who writes federal laws which affect the entire country, not just your state.

Are you finally getting it, yet?

 

[elektra]

Think, Tinkerbell.

Your US Senator is physically from your state. He lives there.

But he's a federal official who writes federal laws which affect the entire country, not just your state.

Are you finally getting it, yet?

I only referred to the man as a federal judge dumbass

 

[g5000]

I never said he was a state judge, moron

You plainly said he was "a federal judge at the state level authority".

Wrong. Wrong, wrong, wrong.

He has FEDERAL level authority.

Goddam, you are unbelievably obtuse!

 

[elektra]

You plainly said he was "a federal judge at the state level authority

You are clearly a low life fucking liar

 

[Mac-7]

Separation of powers.

The money has already been allocated by Congress.

You know how when Trump runs up a deficit, you blame Congress because they have the power of the purse, and yet blame Obama for every penny of the debt run up on his watch?

Yeah.

Don't you remember Trump was impeached for holding hostage already allocated money to Ukraine?

Trump obviously has not learned his lesson.

You could be right

I dont claim to have all the answers

But neither do you

At this point we just dont know

 

[Mac-7]

What are they allegedly forcing spending on?

any federal funds going to states that defy federal laws

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

any federal funds going to states that defy federal laws

You mean states that don't immediately comply with Trump's bullshit edict to scrub the existence of DEI from their state?

If so, then consider whether or not an executive order is a "federal law" (it's not). Furthermore, they can't really order states to comply with an executive order because the states are sovereign and have their own laws and constitutions.

Now he can attempt to COERCE them into compliance, by threatening to withhold or cutoff money that they receive from the federal government but as we just saw, Trump can't just come in and demand that everyone comply with his every demand or EO.

Not without a fight.

 

[SweetSue92]

‘A federal judge in Rhode Island has formally blocked the Trump administration's spending freeze, saying in an order this afternoon that the funding freeze is likely a violation of the Constitution.
[…]
"The Court finds that the record now before it substantiates the likelihood of a successful claim that the Executive's actions violate the Constitution and statutes of the United States," he added in the 13-page decision in the lawsuit filed by 22 state attorneys general.
[…]
Even after the OMB rescinded the memo on Wednesday, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt posted on X, claiming, "This is NOT a rescission of the federal funding freeze. It is simply a rescission of the OMB memo.
[…]
"Based on the Press Secretary’s unequivocal statement and the continued actions of Executive agencies, the Court finds that the policies in the OMB Directive that the States challenge here are still in full force and effect and thus the issues presented in the States’ TRO motion are not moot," he said.

The judge warned that there was "more than monetary harm" at stake with the case.

As Justice Anthony Kennedy reminds us, 'Liberty is always at stake when one or more of the branches seek to transgress the separation of powers,'" he wrote.’

Trump administration funding freeze blocked by federal judge

A federal judge in Rhode Island has formally blocked the Trump administration's spending freeze, saying in it is likely a violation of the Constitution.

abcnews.go.com

Very good.

At least we have a semi-functional judiciary that will check Trump’s corruption and lawlessness.

Your game.

Your rules.

You hate it NOW???

Aw

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Your game.

Your rules.

You hate it NOW???

Aw

Who said anything about hating it. It's a good ruling in that it stops the immediate damage and if Trump et al want to fight it, then they have that option to appeal all the way up to SCOTUS, if they'll even hear it which I'd be surprised if they wouldn't since this seems pretty important in terms of Presidential power and the separation of powers between the branches of the government, etc.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

You are clearly a low life fucking liar

You could have just said that you misspoke and stand corrected.

 

[elektra]

View attachment 1073226

You could have just said that you misspoke and stand corrected.

Semantics, shove it where the sun don't shine

 

[elektra]

You mean states that don't immediately comply with Trump's bullshit edict to scrub the existence of DEI from their state?

If so, then consider whether or not an executive order is a "federal law" (it's not). Furthermore, they can't really order states to comply with an executive order because the states are sovereign and have their own laws and constitutions.

Now he can attempt to COERCE them into compliance, by threatening to withhold or cutoff money that they receive from the federal government but as we just saw, Trump can't just come in and demand that everyone comply with his every demand or EO.

Not without a fight.

Except when a democrat issues an executive order than it is okay.

Rhode Island don't want to lose its federal money for green energy otherwise they are stuck with piles of crap.

All of New England is screwed cause the gravy train is over