Trump's second term is being nullified by rinky dink regional federal judges, so he deserves a do over, i.e. to have another second term.

[Lesh]

Nope

Never gonna happen

 

[0311]

Since they are usurping his Executive Powers so that there are only 2 of 3 branches effectively with authority currently, soon as the SCOTUS fixes things, then his second term should officially start.

The Judiciary is an Independent and Co-Equal Branch of our Government.

Their jobs is interpret the laws of our country and to see that the laws of our country are being upheld, which is something either you refuse to accept or understand.

They are doing their job. One which it seems you either don't understand or accept. Their job to uphold the law, NOT cow tow to a wanna be Fascist Dictator and TRAITOR!

 

[kyzr]

If you can't ignore district judges and make the USSC do their job. you are a wimp.

 

[kyzr]

The Judiciary is an Independent and Co-Equal Branch of our Government.
Their jobs is interpret the laws of our country and to see that the laws of our country are being upheld, which either you refuse to accept or understand.
They are doing their job. One which it seems you either don't understand or accept. Their job to uphold the law, NOT cow tow to a wanna be Fascist Dictator and TRAITOR!

1. The USSC is a co-equal branch, not district judges. They only rule in their "district".
2. Trump needs to ignore district judges because of his Article 2 powers and make the USSC do their job.

 

[forkup]

1. The USSC is a co-equal branch, not district judges. They only rule in their "district".
2. Trump needs to ignore district judges because of his Article 2 powers and make the USSC do their job.

That's weird. So, by that logic the DOJ is not part of the executive branch only the president.

The claim that district judges are not part of the co-equal judiciary is incorrect. The judicial branch includes all federal judges, not just the Supreme Court. District courts, courts of appeals, and the Supreme Court all exercise judicial power under Article III of the Constitution. While the Supreme Court is the highest court, district judges still hold constitutional authority and their rulings are legally binding unless overturned by a higher court.

Article II does not grant the president the power to 'ignore' rulings from district judges. The executive branch is obligated to enforce the law, and judicial decision, including those from district court, are part of that legal framework. If a president disregards lower court rulings, they undermine the separation of powers and the constitutional system of checks and balances.

 

[rightwinger]

The Judiciary is an Independent and Co-Equal Branch of our Government.

Their jobs is interpret the laws of our country and to see that the laws of our country are being upheld, which is something either you refuse to accept or understand.

They are doing their job. One which it seems you either don't understand or accept. Their job to uphold the law, NOT cow tow to a wanna be Fascist Dictator and TRAITOR!

The problem is that Republicans have a felon interpreting what is legal

 

[kyzr]

That's weird. So, by that logic the DOJ is not part of the executive branch only the president.

duh

The claim that district judges are not part of the co-equal judiciary is incorrect.

They are part of the judiciary, but they do not have the constitutional authority equal to the president.

The judicial branch includes all federal judges, not just the Supreme Court. District courts, courts of appeals, and the Supreme Court all exercise judicial power under Article III of the Constitution. While the Supreme Court is the highest court, district judges still hold constitutional authority and their rulings are legally binding unless overturned by a higher court.

Nope. That is not what the USSC said.

Federal District Court Judges Have Limited Authority | AppletonWi.org

Federal District Court Judges Have Limited Authority | AppletonWi.org | Developed and maintained by Appleton Concerned Taxpayers

appletonwi.org

Article II does not grant the president the power to 'ignore' rulings from district judges. The executive branch is obligated to enforce the law, and judicial decision, including those from district court, are part of that legal framework. If a president disregards lower court rulings, they undermine the separation of powers and the constitutional system of checks and balances.

Yep it does. Only the USSC is co-equal to the president.

 

[JimH52]

Trump already controls Republicans in Congress

Means the courts are the only branch of government to check his power grab

The courts won’t bother him if he follows the Constitution

It is hard to decide. Is he a Tyrant? Is he an Authoritarian? Or is he just Nuts?

I suggest a combination of all three. His intentions is to turn the US into a one party state. He will need to destroy the Constitution in order to accomplish that. He is well on his way.

 

[g5000]

Since they are usurping his Executive Powers so that there are only 2 of 3 branches effectively with authority currently, soon as the SCOTUS fixes things, then his second term should officially start.

 

[forkup]

They are part of the judiciary, but they do not have the constitutional authority equal to the president.

Of course they do they have Constitutional authority... period. They need it because guess what the Constitution plays a major part in their decisions. Having the authority to rule on them is kind of important.

Nope. That is not what the USSC said.

The Supreme Court rulings aren't featured in your link, It's simply an Op-Ed Here it is.

Biden Vaccine Mandate Blocked

The Fifth Circuit in Louisiana v. Biden upheld a Louisiana federal district court in blocking President Biden’s vaccine mandate on December 19, 2022…

www.lexology.com

United States v. Texas (2016) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Just a few examples. Going from a district court all the way to the Supreme Court. They didn't rule, not once that the district court doesn't have the right to judge the Constitutionality of what the president is doing.

Yep it does. Only the USSC is co-equal to the president.

Dude find me the law or the ruling that supports it and then we'll talk.

As for the "duh", I will simply assume that you know that the DOJ is part of the Executive branch.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

1. The USSC is a co-equal branch, not district judges. They only rule in their "district".
2. Trump needs to ignore district judges because of his Article 2 powers and make the USSC do their job.

Trump does not have the authority to ignore any judge.

SCOTUS has to resolve this issue. Trump can't make the court do a damn thing, kyzr, and you know it.

 

[Old Rocks]

Since they are usurping his Executive Powers so that there are only 2 of 3 branches effectively with authority currently, soon as the SCOTUS fixes things, then his second term should officially start.

LOL Another MAGAt that has never read the Constitution. You know, the document that Trump promise to dismiss.

 

[Old Rocks]

Not in this country, Trump doesn't deserve a third term.

He deserved no term.

Actually he does. About 20 years in Leavenworth.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Actually he does. About 20 years in Leavenworth.

 

[Lesh]

If you can't ignore district judges and make the USSC do their job. you are a wimp.

So the law and the Constitution mean nothing to you

 

[rightwinger]

He will need to destroy the Constitution in order to accomplish that. He is well on his way.

Republicans are willing to do that as long as they get their agenda

 

[BluesLegend]

Not in this country, Trump doesn't deserve a third term.

He deserved no term.

Every swing state and the popular vote says you are wrong. Tissue?

 

[kyzr]

Of course they do they have Constitutional authority... period. They need it because the Constitution plays a major part in their decisions. Having the authority to rule on them is kind of important.

District courts do NOT have Constitutional authority. They are NOT created as "co-equal" by the Constitution, they were created by congress.

The Supreme Court rulings aren't featured in your link, It's simply an Op-Ed Here it is.
Just a few examples. Going from a district court all the way to the Supreme Court. They didn't rule, not once that the district court doesn't have the right to judge the Constitutionality of what the president is doing.
Dude find me the law or the ruling that supports it and then we'll talk.

My argument isn't that the district courts can't rule on constitutionality, but that a single district can make a "nationwide injunction" that limits a president's Article 2 authority.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

District courts do NOT have Constitutional authority. They are NOT created as "co-equal" by the Constitution, they were created by congress.

My argument isn't that the district courts can't rule on constitutionality, but that a single district can make a "nationwide injunction" that limits a president's Article 2 authority.

kyzr is no authority. We will have to wait for SCOTUS to act on this.

 

[rightwinger]

District courts do NOT have Constitutional authority. They are NOT created as "co-equal" by the Constitution, they were created by congress.

My argument isn't that the district courts can't rule on constitutionality, but that a single district can make a "nationwide injunction" that limits a president's Article 2 authority.

We have set up a system where lower courts make the decisions and the Supreme Court steps in to arbitrate.

It relieves the higher court of an unbearable workload