Yet Another Judge blocks portions of Trump's anti-DEI Order

[j-mac]

On this issue..I trend legal.

As to the rest:
I support the 2nd..I'm against birthright citizenship. I support a national voter ID and I support presenting it every time you vote.
All of these I've posted about here.

I would point out..just BTW..that one can be both a Lefty and NOT a Democrat..or a partisan anything.
Just as one can despise MAGA and still be on the Right...and not be a Republican.

But whatever..you see..for your ilk...you need to have labels--and take assumptions for fact--simply because the partisan narratives you espouse require you to do so.

I have never met nor conversed with a Partisan on either side who was adept of seeing nuance--black and white is all they know~

That may hold some truth to it, but ask yourself how'd we get here?

For instance, I have been a Conservative since my 20s, or since the Reagan administrations....I do hold some socially compassionate views, but now in my 60's I realize that the Government can NOT be responsible for the failure of it's citizenry to 'launch'....

On this subject, what we are actually seeing IMHO, is those on the left, realizing that they have literally zero political power in the Congress, and are replete with infighting, and no vision, or ideas, are trying to use our judiciary to seize power over the Executive....It ultimately will not work, and all it will do is further divide the nation....Is that what we need?

 

[EvilEyeFleegle]

That may hold some truth to it, but ask yourself how'd we get here?

For instance, I have been a Conservative since my 20s, or since the Reagan administrations....I do hold some socially compassionate views, but now in my 60's I realize that the Government can NOT be responsible for the failure of it's citizenry to 'launch'....

On this subject, what we are actually seeing IMHO, is those on the left, realizing that they have literally zero political power in the Congress, and are replete with infighting, and no vision, or ideas, are trying to use our judiciary to seize power over the Executive....It ultimately will not work, and all it will do is further divide the nation....Is that what we need?

Welll...lessee:

The idea that the Democratic party has 'literally zero political power'- in the Congress is false. The whole reason for the veritable flood of EO's is that most of this shyte would never get past the Senate. Period.

The idea that the Democratic party is in control of the Judiciary is false. The idea that the courts are guided by 50 years of precedent..most of it appearing to favor the liberal side is true...and the rulings show it.

I say 'appearing' because when Trump signs an EO that blatantly goes against all precedent---he will get slapped down..every time...on principle. At least at first.

Many, if not most, of the Federal Judges...regardless of cultural leanings--are not going to look kindly upon what is, in effect, rule by fiat.

Which is to say, the judges are often not ruling on the core issue..they're ruling on the process...or lack of process.

They're ruling on standard law..in many cases--a collective bargaining agreement..cannot be unilaterally set aside at whim, for example. A contract is a contract...basis of the rule of law.

I think you see collaboration where none exists..and i think that is a viewpoint that is encouraged by the party leaders.

The things that divide us are far more basic and primal..tribal loyalty, regional factions, the racial divide and always that divide twixt the haves and have-nots--with one side inventing reasons why they are favored....and the other inventing reasons why they are not.

...And that, we are not going fix.

 

[j-mac]

Welll...lessee:

The idea that the Democratic party has 'literally zero political power'- in the Congress is false. The whole reason for the veritable flood of EO's is that most of this shyte would never get past the Senate. Period.

The idea that the Democratic party is in control of the Judiciary is false. The idea that the courts are guided by 50 years of precedent..most of it appearing to favor the liberal side is true...and the rulings show it.

I say 'appearing' because when Trump signs an EO that blatantly goes against all precedent---he will get slapped down..every time...on principle. At least at first.

Many, if not most, of the Federal Judges...regardless of cultural leanings--are not going to look kindly upon what is, in effect, rule by fiat.

Which is to say, the judges are often not ruling on the core issue..they're ruling on the process...or lack of process.

They're ruling on standard law..in many cases--a collective bargaining agreement..cannot be unilaterally set aside at whim, for example. A contract is a contract...basis of the rule of law.

I think you see collaboration where none exists..and i think that is a viewpoint that is encouraged by the party leaders.

The things that divide us are far more basic and primal..tribal loyalty, regional factions, the racial divide and always that divide twixt the haves and have-nots--with one side inventing reasons why they are favored....and the other inventing reasons why they are not.

...And that, we are not going fix.

You raise some good points, and I thank you for that..However, where I disagree with you is that our Congress (big C) is working against Trump...The Senate is a problem, for the same reason that Republican's have always ran into snags. We have some Senators that enjoy their seats in blue states aren't really Conservatives.

Unlike Democrats, Republicans don't vote lock step like sheep. And with RINO's trying to gum up the works is probably tied directly to their wealth.

They need to go.