Court hearing goes 'exceptionally badly' for Trump DOJ as judge loses patience: reporter
Court hearing goes 'exceptionally badly' for Trump DOJ as judge loses patience: reporter
Politico legal reporter Kyle Cheney on Tuesday brought word that the Trump Department of Justice stumbled badly in trying to justify freezing funds for the United States Agency for International Development.During a hearing in front of United States District Court for the District of Columbia Judge ...
You're viewing a single thread.
Bills must be paid by Wednesday, or else.
... or else what, exactly? There seems to be a whole lot of sternly worded judicial opinions, but can they actually do anything to enforce said decisions??
Anyone involved with the legal response or not releasing these funds can be arrested and held in contempt of court. This would obviously apply to Trump lackeys, and not himself. Do this a couple dozen times, and his entire cabinet has nobody to enforce their bullshit.
I'll believe it when one of them is in jail. More likely Trump would order US Marshalls not to arrest anyone working for the white house, and fire anyone that tried.
That sounds like a great way to go, but if the past four years have taught me anything it's that I shouldn't expect much of anything in the way of lasting consequences or impediments for Republicans from our courts.
I'll get excited when there are some arrests.
Have you noticed how stuck and stalled the Trump admin is right now? This is why. It's working. We're not even to the first court confrontation yet, which is due tomorrow. We need to see how far the judicitbranch is willing to go to issue punitive measures and enforce these things before we start crying that nothing is working.
This is the process in the US. It's worked pretty well against other bad actors, and we need to give it some time to play out as defined in due process before more drastic measures.
Have you noticed how stuck and stalled the Trump admin is right now?
No, I have not.
Edited to add - https://www.project2025.observer/
Then you haven't been paying attention. I've said this a million times before for people saying what you're saying: the executive has less far reaching power than Congress or Judicial for a reason. This is that reason.
Judges can arrest anyone attempting to enforce these fake proclamations that are illegal.
Judges can seize assets from private banks.
Judges can put anyone in jail that refuses to comply, and Trump can't pardon them.
If these rules don't hold them there is no constitutional agreement that states need to abide, and they all immediately assume control of military assets in said states. That's the end of the US, and an immediate assault and destruction of Trump and his psychos in DC.
They won't even try to push that. They know what will happen.
Judges can arrest anyone attempting to enforce these fake proclamations that are illegal.
Judges can seize assets from private banks.
Judges can put anyone in jail that refuses to comply, and Trump can’t pardon them.
Like the judges who could have locked him up before the election?
I don't think you are hearing what I'm saying. My faith in our institutions is done. Kaput. I will happily eat a serving of crow if needed, but that's gonna have to be a good sales pitch because if our institutions worked we wouldn't be where we are today. We couldn't stop Trump when he had zero executive power and was not the president.
Meanwhile, we're barely a month in: https://www.project2025.observer/
edited to clarify wording of one sentence
You don't have a basic understanding of that concept or the Judicial system. Not even worth responding when you come with a fundamental idiotic understanding of how this works.
👍
Where the fuck have you been for the last 10 years? Why do you believe that laws, norms, and rules, mean anything to this gang of fucking thieves?
Judges can issue orders for all that, but they have no enforcement mechanism of their own. Enforcement of orders is done through bodies like the US Marshals, which are ultimately under the executive branch. What happens if a judge issues a ruling, but the President instructs everyone under him not to enforce it?
You're wrong. Not only wrong, but for some reason bringing up a federal law enforcement agency that most states don't even allow to operate as intended. You can watch videos about this on YouTube if you want.
I'm sure you've seen these true crime shows on TV where people are immediately taken into custody in court and sent straight to jail if found guilty. Without me going into a civics lesson, if a judge declares you guilty of a crime, law enforcement has to incarcerate you. That is the LAW part of government.
The local police are the enforcement army of this, even for federal Judges who operate at a local level.
A judge finds you guilty of a crime, your are arrested and go to jail.
This is where contempt of court comes in. If you refuse to comply with a court order, you are immediately arrested and put in jail. You are held in contempt of court for not complying with a court order. This is not under the purview of state or federal law for pardons because there is no crime committed, you are being held in contempt of court, a branch of government.
A federal judge who is telling Trump's lackeys to stop what they are doing can absolutely fire off a number of contempt charges that Trump can't intervene with.
Elon doesn't comply? Freeze his banking assets.
DOJ head doesn't comply , assume judgement and have her arrested if she steps foot in the judge's territory.
On and on until they comply.
What you're clearly not understanding is that a single judge can destroy this cabinet by simple levers provided by the constitution, and take any of the low level people into jail or also freeze their assets if they don't comply.
DOGE employee: jail and frozen assets
Local Podunk Texas cop who refuses to enforce: jail and frozen assets.
It's all the way down until people comply with the LAW, and the judges enforce these laws.
A judge finds you guilty of a crime, your are arrested and go to jail.
DOGE employee: jail and frozen assets
Local Podunk Texas cop who refuses to enforce: jail and frozen assets.
Former President Convicted of 34 Felonies: No Restrictions
Justice Juan Merchan followed through on a promise made one week ago to give Trump a sentence of unconditional discharge, which includes neither jail time nor any other restriction that might impede Trump after his inauguration on Jan. 20.
THIS is what we're all screaming at you while you ask if we ever took a civics class.
TRUMP IS ABOVE THE LAW and he was above the law before he even took office this time around.
We're all handwaving away your assurances because they are all about things that CAN happen in a world where people are following the rules and things work like they should. A world that no longer exists.
You're missing the point. Trump doesn't do his own dirty work. His little underlings will be the ones going to jail.
When they do, I'll come back to acknowledge I was wrong. In the meantime, I'm not holding my breath. 4 years of that was enough.
You’re missing the point.
No, you are missing mine.
My point is that nothing that happened with Trump over the course of four years that gives me ANY confidence regarding how the system will work now. (see 34 felonies case)
Your "well okay, Trump is above the law, but the folks below him might not be" is not the confidence builder you seem to think it is. When folks start going to jail (and staying there) I'll share your enthusiasm.
Edit: And it doesn't count if they are going to jail after we've reached the "rebuilding our nation from rubble" stage.
Can you expand on "and Trump can't pardon them"?
Two reasons:
- President can only pardon federal convictions
- Contempt is not a conviction. It's a power of the courts to compel compliance.
We need to see how far the judicitbranch is willing to go to issue punitive measures and enforce these things before we start crying that nothing is working.
Sorry to be skeptical bud but we got 4 years to prosecute Trump on his many many crimes when he was not protected by his King of America title and literally NOTHING happened to him...
You can sit and wait until the very last shred of the judicial systems shows you it has failed... by then 2 things would be true: 1) apparently you'll be convinced and 2) you won't have a country anymore
That's not the fault of the Judicial branch, they don't prosecute crimes.
Oh come on.. they delayed every step of the way until Trump won again and now claim they cannot impose any sentence
also, it absolutely is the judicial branch's responsibility to prosecute crimes... that is why gov attorneys are referred to as "prosecutors"
can be arrested
By who?
US Marshals...
...who are part of the executive branch under the President's authority... 👀
The local police who are deferential to the judicial. That's how and why they can arrest people. The executive does not decide this.
Am I living in a universe where people just aren't tought these things in school?
Welcome to the constitutional sherrifs movement where they are the law. The only law. Where they chose what is legal and right. They are above any federal law, system, etc.
Also, see: JD Vance saying trump can ignore the courts. And the numerous 'signs your gov is authoritarian/fascist' lists which include stacking/ignoring courts because, who is going to arrest the president? Especially when the supremacists/nationalists have been infiltrating police forces for well over a decade.
The way things ought are no longer applicable.
I don't know what universe you're living in, but it isn't the normal one because you're wrong.
The local police are part of the executive branch of the local government. Not judicial.
That fundamental lack of understanding goes a long way to explain why you keep delusionally insisting that judges can enforce the law.
"In a room sit three great men, a king, a priest, and a rich man with his gold. Between them stands a sellsword, a little man of common birth and no great mind. Each of the great ones bids him slay the other two. 'Do it,' says the king, 'for I am your lawful ruler.' 'Do it,' says the priest, 'for I command you in the names of the gods.' 'Do it,' says the rich man, 'and all this gold shall be yours.' So tell me—who lives and who dies?"
It sadly all comes down to who the police (and somewhere down the line the military) believe is right.
So the money in almost every case then.
What’s the answer to your riddle? I’m curious
It's not mine, it's a quote from the book "A Clash of Kings" and subsequently the Game of Thrones TV show.
Anyway the answer is just what I wrote. Power resides where men believe it resides. In the riddle, it's entirely up to the sellsword which kind of power they value most.
The executive does not decide this
They do.
Federal Court actions are enforced by the United States Marshals Service, which is part of the executive branch, which is under the President's Authority.
That's why we got the famous quote from President Andrew Jackson: "John Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it".
How the right will interpret this;
JUDGES HAVE TOO MUCH POWER! REWRITE THE CONSTITUTION!
I'm ok with that, they are full of shit anyways, so no matter what they say it will still be shit
Arrested by whom? Isn't it the executive branch that controls the enforcement of laws and judicial decisions?
Serious question. What power does the judiciary have to enforce their rulings.
Judges can deputize if necessary
Thank you for the response.
No. Absolutely not.
You also don't have a fundamental understanding of how the constitution works.
Do you know what the three branches of government are and what they are responsible for? This is grade school stuff.
I am honestly asking how the ruling is supposed to be enforced and you insult me instead of answering the question? That was unnecessarily rude.
I am always happy to be educated if you would care to actually answer the question. How does the judiciary enforce their decisions, especially against another branch of the government that chooses to ignore the ruling?
I responded, and asked a question of you. I didn't degrade or insult you. You obviously just don't have an understanding of how the three branches of government are intended to work. We don't have an executive branch that decides everything as you asked, so you have a fundamental misunderstanding of how the constitution works.
There is clearly a breakdown of communication here. I never claimed that the executive branch decided things. I said that the executive branch enforces laws (those laws being made by the legislative branch) and enforces the decisions passed by the judicial branch in their capacity to interpret the laws. Perhaps I could have been more clear in my wording.
The perceived insulting behavior was your decision to draw attention to out my lack of knowledge on the topic. Especially when comparing time and effort of that part of your response to the three words you used to respond to my questions.
I appreciate that you do not believe that your response was insulting, and maybe most people would agree that it was not, but at the minimum it was disparaging and could discourage others from asking questions.
You edited your comment to reflect what you're saying, and thanks for that.
Your misunderstanding is that there are THREE branches of government, and the separation of powers is starkly and explicitly stated. The executive has nothing to do with law enforcement as you continue to state it does. It does not.
My grade schoole knowledge of how that works is not "calling you out" for being uninformed and responding to comments. What in the hell universe are we living in?
You made an uninformed comment.
You got corrected.
You come back for seconds and got corrected.
Now you're complaining I made you feel bad about it?
Wrong place and time for that.
The executive has nothing to do with law enforcement as you continue to state it does. It does not.
Please, pray tell, which branch of the government do you think police officers belong to?
You obviously found the answer by a simple search and don't want to say it. Your laziness is abhorrent.
You made an uninformed comment.
You got corrected.
You come back for seconds and got corrected.
Now you're complaining I made you feel bad about it?
Wrong place and time for that.
Is there any particular reason you’re being so inflammatory? OP comes off as asking genuine questions in the interest of developing a better understanding and sharing it with readers. To back what they’re saying, ‘at the minimum it’s disparaging and could discourage others from asking questions.’
I edited none of my comments in this conversation. Maybe you misread the original?
I appreciate you pointing out what you think that I am getting wrong, but you have yet to provide any information or resources that would refute my current understanding. As a result, I regret to say that I have not considered any of your replies to be a correction.
You say that my "misunderstanding is that there are THREE branches of government, and the separation of powers is starkly and explicitly stated". Are there not 3 branches? If not how many are there? Are their roles and powers not defined?
Again, I am not trying to argumentative. These are honest questions. If I have incorrect information then I would like to correct it.
I would also like to apologize if you feel like I am complaining. The part of my responses address your behavior has been an attempt to correct what I see as hostile behavior that is an impediment to an open discourse. I am attempting to address this behavior by patiently explaining why I think it is wrong, how it can improved on, and by providing an example of civil discourse to the best of my ability. I understand this may have been misinterpreted and could be taken in a manner that you find upsetting. Please know that this is not nor has it ever been my intent to upset anybody and I hope that we can move forward in a more amicable and productive manner.
My guy, you are right that this is taught in grade school civics class. But that isn't the zing you think it is.
The legislative makes the law The judicial interprets the law The executive enforces the law
Judges can't enforce anything. They need people from the executive side to do the enforcing.
You keep repeating the same misinformation throughout this post and are getting the down votes for it.
Exactly why I qualified my statement with "enforce the law".
Never said they make the law.
Its pathetic that people are even commenting on very basic things regarding the constitution here.
Although the text of the take care clause "seemingly invests the office with broad enforcement authority," it also limits the executive's power. As the Constitution Annotated notes, the clause "underscores that the executive is under a duty to execute the laws of Congress faithfully and not disregard them."
The executive is not there to enforce anything except what Congress has already passed. You can't make shit up and decide that up is down and yellow is green at your leisure.
One more time
The judicial interprets, not "enforces".
The executive doing their job wrong doesn't change this.
lol
Or else he will be asked again with a slightly more impatient tone.
Start holding people in contempt of court I suppose. Not Trump but some of his lackeys. The real fireworks will be when Trump tells the U.S. Marshals to not enforce the order.
Why would he need to do this? He’d just pardon them at that point and there’s literally no repercussions for him or anyone associated besides the almost impossibility of him being impeached. You can thank the Supreme Court for that.
Can you be pardoned for contempt of court?
For criminal contempt, but not civil.
Assuming the rule of law is respected.
Yeeep.
For anyone wondering how this all works, this article lays it out: https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2025/02/trump-news-are-we-in-dictatorship-yet.html
Time to bring back the medieval Writ of Outlawry. Literally make them outside the protection of the law. The lawless do not deserve the protection of the law.
Right, why the fuck do laws matter anymore? I won't be bound by them if a rapist felon traitor nazi won't be.
It’s time for Judge Dredd then.
Dunno, haven’t seen the movie.
The Judges of Dredd's universe were judge, jury, and executioner. We may need them to have that power to combat the current regime, but once they have that there's no going back.
at some point its not about going back, its finding a way through.
You'd be smart not to piss off the government's HOA. Those fines increase each day until morale is improved.