Trump is NOT Complying with Orders to Re-start Foreign Aid, Judge Rules.

[Seymour Flops]

Trump administration hasn't complied with order to halt foreign aid freeze, judge says

The administration was ordered last week to continue the disbursement of foreign aid after Trump ordered a pause on nearly all U.S. foreign assistance.

www.nbcnews.com

The Trump administration has not fully complied with a court order pausing the freezing of foreign assistance grants and contracts, a federal judge ruled Thursday.

U.S. District Judge Amir Ali last week ordered the administration to allow the disbursement of U.S. foreign assistance after hearing claims from federal contractors challenging an executive order signed by President Donald Trump pausing nearly all foreign assistance.
. . .

Ali wrote. "However, to the extent Defendants have continued the blanket suspension, they are ordered to immediately cease it."

The judge stopped short of holding the administration in contempt.

No kidding.

How is a low-level federal judge supposed to hold a president or his administration in contempt?

Isn't their some kind of ethical provision against judges issuing orders which are clearly unenforceable? Even if not, it seems pretty foolish and a good way to destroy the credibility of the federal judiciary, at least at the bottom most level.

I'm sure everyone knows the play here, but it needs to be said out loud:

The judge figured that - regardless of the law or common sense, he could order this "pause in the freeze," effectively forcing Trump to send out the money, no matter how reckless we know that would be. He knows such an order will be overturned but by that time it would be moot because the money would be gone and nearly impossible to get back.

Trump did not follow that order because . . . the order will be overturned but by that time it would be moot because the money would be gone and nearly impossible to get back.

 

[theHawk]

Trump administration hasn't complied with order to halt foreign aid freeze, judge says

The administration was ordered last week to continue the disbursement of foreign aid after Trump ordered a pause on nearly all U.S. foreign assistance.

www.nbcnews.com

The Trump administration has not fully complied with a court order pausing the freezing of foreign assistance grants and contracts, a federal judge ruled Thursday.

U.S. District Judge Amir Ali last week ordered the administration to allow the disbursement of U.S. foreign assistance after hearing claims from federal contractors challenging an executive order signed by President Donald Trump pausing nearly all foreign assistance.
. . .

Ali wrote. "However, to the extent Defendants have continued the blanket suspension, they are ordered to immediately cease it."

The judge stopped short of holding the administration in contempt.

No kidding.

How is a low-level federal judge supposed to hold a president or his administration in contempt?

Isn't their some kind of ethical provision against judges issuing orders which are clearly unenforceable? Even if not, it seems pretty foolish and a good way to destroy the credibility of the federal judiciary, at least at the bottom most level.

I'm sure everyone knows the play here, but it needs to be said out loud:

The judge figured that - regardless of the law or common sense, he could order this "pause in the freeze," effectively forcing Trump to send out the money, no matter how reckless we know that would be. He knows such an order will be overturned but by that time it would be moot because the money would be gone and nearly impossible to get back.

Trump did not follow that order because . . . the order will be overturned but by that time it would be moot because the money would be gone and nearly impossible to get back.

The judge has no jurisdiction on the President’s executive authority. He can cut aid whenever he wants.

 

[Crepitus]

How is a low-level federal judge supposed to hold a president or his administration in contempt?

The same way they would anyone else ignoring their legal orders.

 

[fncceo]

Trump is NOT Complying with Orders to Re-start Foreign Aid, Judge Rules.​

Oh well ...

 

[Seymour Flops]

The same way they would anyone else ignoring their legal orders.

Then why didn't he or she?

 

[Crepitus]

Then why didn't he or she?

Gonna hafta ask him, 'cause I don't know.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Gonna hafta ask him, 'cause I don't know.

I don't know, either.

Whatever the reason, the judge isn't doing it the same way they would anyone else ignoring their legal orders, as you claimed.

 

[Crepitus]

I don't know, either.

Whatever the reason, the judge isn't doing it the same way they would anyone else ignoring their legal orders, as you claimed.

YOu asked "how is he supposed to..." and I told you.

 

[justoffal]

Trump administration hasn't complied with order to halt foreign aid freeze, judge says

The administration was ordered last week to continue the disbursement of foreign aid after Trump ordered a pause on nearly all U.S. foreign assistance.

www.nbcnews.com

The Trump administration has not fully complied with a court order pausing the freezing of foreign assistance grants and contracts, a federal judge ruled Thursday.

U.S. District Judge Amir Ali last week ordered the administration to allow the disbursement of U.S. foreign assistance after hearing claims from federal contractors challenging an executive order signed by President Donald Trump pausing nearly all foreign assistance.
. . .

Ali wrote. "However, to the extent Defendants have continued the blanket suspension, they are ordered to immediately cease it."

The judge stopped short of holding the administration in contempt.

No kidding.

How is a low-level federal judge supposed to hold a president or his administration in contempt?

Isn't their some kind of ethical provision against judges issuing orders which are clearly unenforceable? Even if not, it seems pretty foolish and a good way to destroy the credibility of the federal judiciary, at least at the bottom most level.

I'm sure everyone knows the play here, but it needs to be said out loud:

The judge figured that - regardless of the law or common sense, he could order this "pause in the freeze," effectively forcing Trump to send out the money, no matter how reckless we know that would be. He knows such an order will be overturned but by that time it would be moot because the money would be gone and nearly impossible to get back.

Trump did not follow that order because . . . the order will be overturned but by that time it would be moot because the money would be gone and nearly impossible to get back.

The judge has no power over the executive branch. He cannot dictate executive actions.
This orders that are unconstitutional can be ignored without any further process.

 

[Seymour Flops]

YOu asked "how is he supposed to..." and I told you.

Ah.

Well, perhaps he should be impeached for not doing what he is supposed?

 

[justoffal]

I don't know, either.

Whatever the reason, the judge isn't doing it the same way they would anyone else ignoring their legal orders, as you claimed.

There's nothing they can do....they could try arresting the sec state ( it's his call now) let's see how that works. That's the next step....
If he does that he better make damn good and sure his entire past is clean right down to one overdue library book....

 

[toobfreak]

How is a low-level federal judge supposed to hold a president or his administration in contempt?

Amir Ali, some bum with a bachelors degree from Canada working in DC who thinks he outranks the POTUS.
Ali can stick it where the sun doesn't shine.

Amir Ali (judge) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Seymour Flops]

Amir Ali, some bum with a bachelors degree from Canada working in DC who thinks he outranks the POTUS.
Ali can stick it where the sun doesn't shine.

Amir Ali (judge) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

He's only been on the federal bench since January of 2024.

Obviously put there to be the go-to in cases just like this.

 

[1srelluc]

Fuck him and feed him USAID beans.

 

[Crepitus]

Ah.

Well, perhaps he should be impeached for not doing what he is supposed?

Should be? Fuck yeah.

Will be?

Not with his loyal Oompa Loompas in office.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Should be? Fuck yeah.

Will be?

Not with his loyal Oompa Loompas in office.

View attachment 1082579

In enjoing your derangement, you've once again lost the thread of the conversation.

I was asking whether the judge should be impeached for not doing what he is supposed to do, according to you.

 

[Moonglow]

The judge has no jurisdiction on the President’s executive authority. He can cut aid whenever he wants.

The impoundment act does. Which is what he was taken to task for and received his first impeachment for.

 

[Moonglow]

In enjoing your derangement, you've once again lost the thread of the conversation.

I was asking whether the judge should be impeached for not doing what he is supposed to do, according to you.

First they file an ethics violation.

 

[Crepitus]

In enjoing your derangement, you've once again lost the thread of the conversation.

I was asking whether the judge should be impeached for not doing what he is supposed to do, according to you.

What would you suggest he do?

 

[Oddball]