Major win for the Trump Administration on federal judges

[meaner gene]

/-----/ And the USSC steps in every time and bytchslaps the loons in the district courts. That's checks and balances for ya.

except the court doesn't look at whether or not the case is likely to prevail in the other federal districts?

If it's likely to prevail, they are only delaying it's protections.

If it's not likely to prevail they are rightfully stopping it from doing additional damage.

But they never addressed the merits of the case.

 

[meaner gene]

Watch many rulings in federal districts across the country. All it requires is filing a complaint in the district.

Some legal justice groups have already begun doing that.

 

[WEATHER53]

Some legal justice groups have already begun doing that.

More circumvention of law and rulings from the party of illegality and lawlessness

 

[meaner gene]

More circumvention of law and rulings from the party of illegality and lawlessness

They prevailed in several districts.

 

[alang1216]

No law permits the rogues actions

Do you have any idea what those 'rogues actions' were or are you just regurgitating what you were told?

 

[alang1216]

No law permits the rogues actions

FYI, SCOTUS didn't say there were any rogue actions, only that the impact of the decision should be limited.

 

[Cellblock2429]

except the court doesn't look at whether or not the case is likely to prevail in the other federal districts?

If it's likely to prevail, they are only delaying it's protections.

If it's not likely to prevail they are rightfully stopping it from doing additional damage.

But they never addressed the merits of the case.

/----/ "except the court doesn't look at" ... "But they never addressed"
Which court? Who is "they?" Next time try being even more vague.

 

[Cellblock2429]

That is the way the system is supposed to work, unfortunately the USSC is too busy removing long-standing checks and balances to see the long-term damage they are doing out of loyalty to an ideology.

/----/ "removing long-standing checks and balances"
Removing what long-standing checks and balances?

 

[Marener]

The USSC ruled that federal dismisses blocks on Trump EOs now only apply to that judges district. No more national rulings.

You know this from last year, right?

 

[meaner gene]

/----/ "except the court doesn't look at" ... "But they never addressed"
Which court? Who is "they?" Next time try being even more vague.

The supreme court limiting nationwide injunctions.

 

[Cellblock2429]

The supreme court limiting nationwide injunctions.

/---/ Understood. Thanks. I disagree but now understand your point.

 

[WEATHER53]

Do you have any idea what those 'rogues actions' were or are you just regurgitating what you were told?

Well of course failure at life we have all been following the daily usurpance from “judges” who don’t like Trump and tell him he can’t utilize his Presidential powers. USSC comprised of 9 and not just one feelings faggo say he Can

 

[WEATHER53]

FYI, SCOTUS didn't say there were any rogue actions, only that the impact of the decision should be limited.

Word salad to avoid saying the rogue in robes was overturned

 

[Papageorgio]

A win for Trump, a loss for American democracy and its system of checks and balanaces.

Respectfully, this was never part of the checks and balance system, federal courts never had the authority to issue nationwide injunctions in the first place. There is no lawful basis for them in any federal statutory law or Supreme Court precedent. Instead, this practice developed slowly in a gray area of American law throughout the nation’s history.

The Supreme Court’s decision rests solely on statutory authority, not constitutional grounds. That means Congress ( just like many case) holds the key to change it. Lawmakers could choose to restore this judicial power with new legislation, further restrict it, or leave the current limitations in place. That is actually a healthy outcome in a functioning democracy — the branch that makes the laws decides whether this remedy exists.

What it ends is a specific, legally questionable shortcut that allowed any single district judge to freeze federal policy for 330 million people — a power that, as the Court found, Congress never actually granted in the first place.

 

[alang1216]

/----/ "removing long-standing checks and balances"
Removing what long-standing checks and balances?

Checks on unconstitutional actions by the executive branch to bring balance to the separation of powers.

 

[WEATHER53]

Checks on unconstitutional actions by the executive branch to bring balance to the separation of powers.

No they are not the hall monitor
They are independent federal systems and not local yokel county judges that “balance” the nation

 

[BluesLegend]

You might like this right now.

Yeah, we shoved it up the Dems ass with a hot poker while laughing. The packed Trump SCOTUS has been giving the Democrats a knee to the groin ever since we stole two justice nominations from the Democrats.

 

[alang1216]

Well of course failure at life we have all been following the daily usurpance from “judges” who don’t like Trump and tell him he can’t utilize his Presidential powers. USSC comprised of 9 and not just one feelings faggo say he Can

Judges should rule only on the law (except SCOTUS it seems) so why do Trump supporters feel he should be able to do anything he pleases and laws be damned. Is Trump above the law?

 

[alang1216]

No they are not the hall monitor
They are independent federal systems and not local yokel county judges that “balance” the nation

Hall monitors are EXACTLY what they are. They check your pass and determine if it is legitimate.

 

[alang1216]

Word salad to avoid saying the rogue in robes was overturned

Except that is exactly wrong.