[RD] Trump in Charge: The MAGA Presidency
- Thread starter Birdjaguar
- Start date
That may be because we keep changing our money.
Angst
Rambling and inconsistent
extreme right source with mixed factuality.Ousted From Power By Voters, Dems Turn To Activist Judges To Defy Trump
What’s happening right now is that Democrats, having been thrown out of power by American voters in a landslide victory for Trump, have decided they’re going to deploy a widely-used tactic from Trump’s first term to thwart the president’s agenda: use the federal judiciary. Under the false pretext that the lower federal courts are part of a “coequal branch of government” with the executive, they’re aiming to shut down Trump’s reform efforts with a fusillade of preliminary injunctions.
In recent days dozens of lawsuits have been filed against the Trump administration by Democrat attorneys general and various left-wing groups. These groups have carefully selected their venues, ensuring the lawsuits come before rabidly anti-Trump activist judges. So far, the tactic seems to be working. As of this past weekend, eight different rulings from the federal bench have temporarily halted the president’s executive orders.
Federal judges in Democrat-majority districts have issued preliminary injunctions blocking Trump’s executive actions to end birthright citizenship, reform and downsize the United States Agency for International Development, and offer buyouts to federal bureaucrats. A federal judge this past weekend blocked Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency and all other political appointees in the Trump administration — including the Treasury secretary and his deputies — from accessing payment data at the Treasury Department.
One judge even issued a restraining order halting a Trump order that would have ensured federal inmates are housed according to biological sex, not transgender identity, and also would have prevented tax dollars from being used to pay for “gender transitions” for federal inmates. (Another judge, appointed by Obama, took the extraordinary step of ordering the administration to pay back every cent of federal funding that’s been paused or canceled — and threatened anyone who violates his order with criminal contempt.)
What all this lawfare amounts to is a kind of judicial coup against the sitting president. By doling out injunctions like they’re USAID grants for LGBTQ awareness programs in Mali, Democrats have been able to hamstring key aspects of Trump’s agenda — at least for the moment. It’s a simple enough tactic. All Democrats have to do is shop for a venue to find the most activist, rabidly anti-Trump federal judges in the country, file their lawsuits, and wait for the injunctions to come raining down.
By doing this, Democrats and their allies in the judiciary turn the Constitution on its head, and effectively govern negatively through injunction, making major reform of the federal bureaucracy impossible. In nearly every case so far, the federal judiciary is siding with the permanent bureaucracy in Washington, preventing the Trump administration from doing anything to reform it despite Trump having campaigned on precisely that promise.
The problem is, as my colleague Sean Davis noted recently on X, federal judges have no actual authority to do this. They can’t decide on their own who the president can talk to or what data he can access. They can’t bind the president at all. According to the U.S. Constitution they’re “inferior” courts and therefore don’t have any authority over the executive branch. Yes, the three branches of the federal government are coequal, but the only part of the federal judiciary that’s equal to the presidency is the Supreme Court, not all the federal district courts scattered across the country.
“John Roberts and SCOTUS have two options here: they can bring these inferior malcontents to heel, or they can get used to the President simply ignoring these inferior courts or Congress eliminating them entirely,” wrote Davis. “Congress created these inferior courts so the Supreme Court wouldn’t have to deal with every federal case by itself. But if these rogue inferior judges are going to routinely issue lawless decisions that the Supreme Court has to deal with anyway, Congress would be well within its rights to just eliminate them.”
The issue might come to a head before Congress gets around to eliminating the federal courts, though. If the Supreme Court steps in on just one of these cases where a federal judge has blocked a lawful executive order from Trump, it might not go well for Democrats. In the 2018 Supreme Court case Trump v. Hawaii, which reversed a lower court’s decision to uphold a nationwide injunction on Trump’s travel ban, Justice Clarence Thomas called into question the idea that a federal judge in Hawaii (or anywhere else) can simply issue an injunction against a presidential executive order and apply it to the entire country.
“District courts, including the one here, have begun imposing universal injunctions without considering their authority to grant such sweeping relief,” wrote Thomas. “These injunctions are beginning to take a toll on the federal court system — preventing legal questions from percolating through the federal courts, encouraging forum shopping, and making every case a national emergency for the courts and for the Executive Branch.”
He went on to say he is “skeptical that district courts have the authority to enter universal injunctions,” that such injunctions didn’t emerge until a century and a half after the Founding, and that they “appear to be inconsistent with longstanding limits on equitable relief and the power of Article III courts. If their popularity continues, this Court must address their legality.”
Only a few weeks into Trump’s second term, the popularity of injunctions is back with a vengeance, which means the Supreme Court might well step in to decide whether any federal district judge, anywhere in the country, can bind the actions of the White House by issuing nationwide injunctions.
It’s long past time to settle this. The American people overwhelmingly elected Trump precisely because they wanted to see his agenda for America enacted. Lower court federal judges, whom no one voted for, have no right to assert their will over and against the will of the American people. The sooner the Supreme Court takes this up and settles the obvious question, the sooner Democrat lawfare against Trump’s agenda will come to an end. Instead of relying on activist judges, Democrats might then have to figure out how to compete at the ballot box — something they are obviously loath to do.
Dems Turn To Activist Judges To Defy Trump
Lower federal court judges have no constitutional authority to govern by injunction and undermine the executive branch.thefederalist.com
anyways, yes, federal judges can block stuff like this. it's their job. what do you think a judge does
We still have stuff that takes change, like vending machines, and laundromats and we still receive change in cash transactions at stores and restaurants. Actually spending change/coins is a bit of a pain, so alot of times it just ends up lost in couch cushions, drawers, car consoles, and various jars, bottles, and other random containers in people's houses. There are billions of dollars of loose change just languishing in random places, never to be used...
Yes, federal judges should be able to gum up the works.
If Trump wants to beat them, he should take his arguments all the way up to the Supreme Court.
He should also put in the work.
Did the Supreme Court striking down student loan forgiveness stop Biden?
He got really creative and forgave every student loan he could anyway.
Twist Congress's arm at the bully pulpit to pass his spending priorities.
Instruct his departments to request $0 for next year's budget.
Try to achieve actual success that makes peoples' lives better to maintain a high approval rating and keep support in Congress.
Ignoring a judicial ruling is really appealing if DOJ won't do anything, but this isn't the 1830s anymore.
It would have dire consequences with a federal government 1000 times more powerful than that one.
There will be a Democrat President again as well.
If Trump wants to beat them, he should take his arguments all the way up to the Supreme Court.
He should also put in the work.
Did the Supreme Court striking down student loan forgiveness stop Biden?
He got really creative and forgave every student loan he could anyway.
Twist Congress's arm at the bully pulpit to pass his spending priorities.
Instruct his departments to request $0 for next year's budget.
Try to achieve actual success that makes peoples' lives better to maintain a high approval rating and keep support in Congress.
Ignoring a judicial ruling is really appealing if DOJ won't do anything, but this isn't the 1830s anymore.
It would have dire consequences with a federal government 1000 times more powerful than that one.
There will be a Democrat President again as well.
Lexicus
Deity
If the federal government is ignoring federal court orders and Republicans mostly support this, what makes you think there is going to be a Democratic President again?
Considering the way their government is going, the psychopaths currently running things could literally wipe out the bank accounts of everyone in the country in a minute or two. Or just in the demographics they don't like.
Therefore it's not a bad idea for people to keep cash on hand (in whatever way they deem safest). Just in case they need something essential, like food or medicine.
As for nickels... they're not terribly useful anymore here. A dime can be used as a screwdriver if you need one and haven't got one.
The disabled transit bus I take for shopping and medical appointments still accepts cash. It's $3/one-way trip, so if I forget to buy tickets, I can still give them either a loonie and a toonie, or 3 loonies. So I still keep a few of those around.
If Doge gives all the detailed information of the Executive Branch to Congress (the ultimate goal of their almost illegal/reckless speed?), Congress could craft a much larger blow than normal with reconciliation with both the House and Senate under their control.
No Senate Filibuster allowed.
Here is the reconciliation from 4 years ago.
The Democrats’ reconciliation bill: What you need to know
Congress is considering how much of President Joe Biden’s public investment agenda to implement — but in an unusually co
www.politifact.com
Round up to the nearest 10 cents and make dimes the smallest. This is not a hard problem.Jimmy Kimmel commented today on an article that eliminating the penny is going to necessitate minting more nickels and since nickels are even less cost effective than pennies, the savings in discontinuing the penny will be wiped out and overtaken by the losses from minting more nickels... so discontinuing the penny is actually a net loser
Our country is so screwed
Are we “losing money” on other coins?
According to the U.S. Mint, producing nickels has also remained above face-value for nearly 20 years. In fiscal year 2024, it cost nearly 14 cents to make the five-cent piece.
Across the other coins — the dime, quarter, and half-dollar — the situation is much better.
Per the latest U.S. Mint report, it costs less than six cents to make a dime ($0.0576). To make a quarter, it cost about 15 cents ($0.1468), and nearly 34 cents for a half-dollar ($0.3397).
You're forgetting about the "good luck" you get "all the day" when you "find a penny, pick it up"
SemiLazyGamer
Prince
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2021
- Messages
- 402
RFK confirmed by Senate.
apnews.com
Reminder that we've got ongoing Tuberculosis and measles outbreaks and now we have a guy that is likely to allow more of it.
Vaccine skeptic Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is sworn in as Trump's health chief after a close Senate vote
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has been sworn in as President Donald Trump’s health secretary. The Senate on Thursday confirmed him, voting 52 to 48.
apnews.com
Reminder that we've got ongoing Tuberculosis and measles outbreaks and now we have a guy that is likely to allow more of it.
We have had this 5 gallon glass jar for decades. It is really too heavy to move around and we stopped adding changes 20 years ago.
Last edited:
RFK confirmed by Senate.
Vaccine skeptic Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is sworn in as Trump's health chief after a close Senate vote
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has been sworn in as President Donald Trump’s health secretary. The Senate on Thursday confirmed him, voting 52 to 48.
Reminder that we've got ongoing Tuberculosis and measles outbreaks and now we have a guy that is likely to allow more of it.
Mitch McConnell was the only no-vote again amongst Republicans.
Jeeezz
Lexicus
Deity
If Doge gives all the detailed information of the Executive Branch to Congress (the ultimate goal of their almost illegal/reckless speed?), Congress could craft a much larger blow than normal with reconciliation with both the House and Senate under their control.
No Senate Filibuster allowed.
Here is the reconciliation from 4 years ago.
The Democrats’ reconciliation bill: What you need to know
Congress is considering how much of President Joe Biden’s public investment agenda to implement — but in an unusually co
How does this answer my question?
SemiLazyGamer
Prince
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2021
- Messages
- 402
My dad has always had one of those large plastic water jugs he uses in this sort of situation. Not sure if he's had the same one all my life or not. I personally use a small plastic food storage container. Effectively makes me go and get it turned back into cash more often. Not as much cash, but my bank has one and has reduced fees for members.
Why does an unelected, unaccountable, private citizen, billionaire have access to all my financial and health information?