Summary
Federal Judge Amir Ali sharply criticized the Trump administration during a Tuesday hearing for failing to comply with his 12-day-old restraining order to unfreeze USAID contract funding.
“I don’t know why I can’t get a straight answer from you,” the judge demanded, asking if funds had been unfrozen. The government lawyer responded: “I’m not in a position to answer that.”
Ali ordered USAID to pay all invoices for work performed before February 13 by midnight tomorrow and required the administration to identify officials who can testify under oath about compliance disputes.
deleted by creator
If you live in a red state, you can call your legislators.
You can lie to them and say you’re a republican voter.
It’s not like they don’t lie to you.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Having an out of state cell phone as your only number can’t be ruled out. They’ll ignore you anyway though.
Even “better,” they gave blanket immunity to a person who has the power to give blanket immunity for federal crimes. Anything the SCROTUS is willing to consider an “official act” by the president carries no consequences whatsoever for him OR anyone doing his bidding.
While true, in theory (not practice) Congress/Senate would remove the president for not abiding the judges conclusion. The fact that they haven’t voted to remove him after 2 weeks shows the constitution (law of the land) is no more.
The state should just wrap all federal buildings in their state with crime scene tape and say it’s a state crime to cross it. 10 years in prison no exception without permission to cross!
Or what? The court issues a bench warrant and demands their presence which they can do to literally anyone who isn’t the president.
The rest is on law enforcement to have enough balls to do as their profession demands.
deleted by creator
Then it still comes down to whether the cops will actually do their job and arrest said person or not. If they will, then that person rots in prison for contempt of court, which isn’t something Trump can pardon
deleted by creator
That’s contempt and a president can’t pardon you for that. You’d be at risk for 179 days in county and huge fines that also cannot be pardoned and it goes to judicial tribunal for appeal.
deleted by creator
I don’t actually. I think the judiciary is quite capable of killing a presidency let alone a president.
Appeals courts have exactly zero to do with contempt the only ones who can deal with that are other judges. Again it has nothing to do with the guy and everything to do with other branches of government fighting to keep their power so they aren’t expendable.
And yet you’re knowingly basing crazy arguments of ignorance from empty words.
It’s a Federal Judge, so they can ignore the bench warrant and get a pardon.
They cannot. Us Marshalls don’t give a good goddamn about a pardon you can only get after the fact. Post facto pardons are a legal question that isn’t fully answered but most sources say it’s criminal conspiracy which no the president couldn’t be charged with but literally any and every state could charge whomever one by one at the state level.
US Marshals report to the DOJ, which is part of the executive branch, all Trump needs to do is instruct the DOJ to stand down.
A. Technically yes but in practice no. They’re enforcement specifically at the behest of the judiciary, they are wildly unconcerned about whatever bullshit any other LE agency is up to and for that matter the executive branch as a whole.
B. They’re the least political enforcement agency, they’ll tell him to fuck himself because the oath to the constitution comes first.
C. They literally swear to ignore politics and execute whatever executive process is before them.
D. They’ve had armed standoffs with other three letter agencies specifically about not doing their job, after Ruby ridge they go out of their way to not be seen as biased or political.
You know the president can literally just say: “Lol nope. Pardoned.” And that’s it, right? That’s the point, the law is meaningless if you installed a king as ruler.
I don’t know that because that isn’t thing.
Contempt is judicial and unpardonable, and preemptive pardons aren’t likely to be held as legitimate.
A King could preemptively absolve someone of a crime that isn’t however how our government is ran and it’s super duper unlikely the judicial would rule in favor of removing all their power altogether.
deleted by creator
I have been, apparently that’s your best argument which is… Something I guess.
Being cynical isn’t an argument.
Contempt is, as a matter of fact, not a pardonable offense. The lawyer can be taken into custody by the court staff and held, by the courts until the contempt offense is resolved.
deleted by creator
A judgement made by the court can be revoked and reinterpreted by the same judiciary, it’s the basis of the judicial system.
What judicial system? You have a king and it’s lackeys lol