Chief Justice Roberts might not be clear on when to “check the excesses" of Trump's presidency, but the ABA and two very different district court judges do.
I don’t see this going anywhere, the DOJ will attempt to stall as always!! It is nice to see judges from both sides understanding what Trump and his administration are doing is just flat out criminal, discriminatory and unconstitutional !!
Meanwhile, to provide a "distraction", Hegseth has ordered massive mobilization throughout US bases in the ME, which looks for all the world as an impending air attack upon Iranian nuclear enrichment installations, in concert with tRump's comrade-in-felonies Bibi...look out!
This would likely be in the nature of a "surgical strike" rather than a buy-in to a protracted conflict. US law has historically required that Congress issue a declaration of war in the latter circumstance, but in recent decades this has been honored only in the breach. For limited operations, it's advisable for the commander in chief to liaise with Congress, but it's not required.
Thanks Bad Bunny that’s very helpful. I wonder where the line between the two falls though and whether Trump would take any notice of it if Congress tried to invoke it.
Despite the public impression of the ABA as the umbrella organization representing the legal industry, it's a voluntary association and they may have an uphill battle to prove to the court's satisfaction that they have standing.
"These 'settlements' are apparently not in writing or enforceable by the law firms, so the President can change his mind at any time and impose an executive order if the firms stray too far from the President’s wishes—thus maintaining the coercive effect of the Policy even against 'settling' law firms.
This is analogous to the EOs Trump issued against various universities, which are likewise open-ended and intended to have the identical chilling and disequilibrating effect.
The lower courts judiciary have been the only reliable barrier to impeding the aberrant actions of the executive cince inauguration day, in the absence of any congressional check. I salute the ABA's skillfully written pleading and the proper actions of the two Massachusetts judges. Thank you, Chris, for your helpful and always informative reporting.
I don’t see this going anywhere, the DOJ will attempt to stall as always!! It is nice to see judges from both sides understanding what Trump and his administration are doing is just flat out criminal, discriminatory and unconstitutional !!
Meanwhile, to provide a "distraction", Hegseth has ordered massive mobilization throughout US bases in the ME, which looks for all the world as an impending air attack upon Iranian nuclear enrichment installations, in concert with tRump's comrade-in-felonies Bibi...look out!
Can he do this without congressional approval? (Brit here and I’m not entirely au fait with all your constitutional rules).
This would likely be in the nature of a "surgical strike" rather than a buy-in to a protracted conflict. US law has historically required that Congress issue a declaration of war in the latter circumstance, but in recent decades this has been honored only in the breach. For limited operations, it's advisable for the commander in chief to liaise with Congress, but it's not required.
Thanks Bad Bunny that’s very helpful. I wonder where the line between the two falls though and whether Trump would take any notice of it if Congress tried to invoke it.
Great tripleheader.
Despite the public impression of the ABA as the umbrella organization representing the legal industry, it's a voluntary association and they may have an uphill battle to prove to the court's satisfaction that they have standing.
Big standing problem. But who cares, because trump is bad.
"These 'settlements' are apparently not in writing or enforceable by the law firms, so the President can change his mind at any time and impose an executive order if the firms stray too far from the President’s wishes—thus maintaining the coercive effect of the Policy even against 'settling' law firms.
This is analogous to the EOs Trump issued against various universities, which are likewise open-ended and intended to have the identical chilling and disequilibrating effect.
The lower courts judiciary have been the only reliable barrier to impeding the aberrant actions of the executive cince inauguration day, in the absence of any congressional check. I salute the ABA's skillfully written pleading and the proper actions of the two Massachusetts judges. Thank you, Chris, for your helpful and always informative reporting.