A pair of rulings both found the effort to suspend SNAP payments is likely illegal, with one judge issuing a TRO on Friday. Also: Appeals court rejects court's Bovino check-in order.
I don't see how the Bovino order to show up violates separation of powers because its sole purpose to to determine whether or not the defendant agency is violating a court order Surely a court is justified in taking investigative steps to be sure an order that has already been violated does not continue to be violated
At least people can eat and buy milk to wash the tear gass out of there eyes. Trump is the cruelest president America has ever been saddled with. I was raised by a psychopath and I know one when I see one.
Thank you for this coverage. Can you clarify what will happen if the Trump Administration appeals these two SNAP rulings? Will Judge McConnell’s TRO require the Trump Administration to distribute SNAP benefits during the appeals process? Or can Trump get out of disbursing funds while it is appealing these decisions?
Legally, what then is the remedy if a court issues a temporary restraining order because of continued violence and civil rights violations on the part of federal agents, but the feds repeatedly violate the TRO? Is the court not supposed to have any oversight?
Or is this merely saying that the court can only have oversight with respect to specific complaints of violations of the TRO by the government, rather than requiring a daily check-in?
Cautious here but administration could be conspicuous loser here. Seems a big deal if administration intentionally blows off RI order. Once that order is followed, hard to whine about Massachusetts order, and any others coming down pike.
I don't see how the Bovino order to show up violates separation of powers because its sole purpose to to determine whether or not the defendant agency is violating a court order Surely a court is justified in taking investigative steps to be sure an order that has already been violated does not continue to be violated
That makes too much sense for the government
True, but the appeals court should not suffer from a similar handicap...
And when "Chief" Bovino violates the J. Ellis' TRO again--where will the 7th Circuit be??
At least the SNAP decision will allow us to refuel as we try to stem the police state.
We have to keep fighting !!!!
At least people can eat and buy milk to wash the tear gass out of there eyes. Trump is the cruelest president America has ever been saddled with. I was raised by a psychopath and I know one when I see one.
Thank you for this coverage. Can you clarify what will happen if the Trump Administration appeals these two SNAP rulings? Will Judge McConnell’s TRO require the Trump Administration to distribute SNAP benefits during the appeals process? Or can Trump get out of disbursing funds while it is appealing these decisions?
Legally, what then is the remedy if a court issues a temporary restraining order because of continued violence and civil rights violations on the part of federal agents, but the feds repeatedly violate the TRO? Is the court not supposed to have any oversight?
Or is this merely saying that the court can only have oversight with respect to specific complaints of violations of the TRO by the government, rather than requiring a daily check-in?
The Judicial has zero oversight ability over the legislative or executive.
Like a Judge rules on what the law is, not decides or manages the President or a Congressman.
Ask yourself a simple question. Who is going to ENFORCE a ruling AGAINST the Legislative or Exectuvie branch?
At a FEDERAL level who controls LAW ENFORCEMENT?
At a FEDERAL LEVEL who PASSES laws?
At a FEDERAL LEVEL who INTEPRETS the law?
So why are you okay with a Judge telling a President what to do, but you're NOT okay with the President telling a CONGRESSMAN or a JUDGE what to do?
THAT'S "Separation of Powers", it prevents the centralization of power under one branch of Government.
Good question!
Appreciate your work trying to explain this thicket to us.
Thanks, Chris. I needed this.
Excellent , to the first. Disappointed but accept the reasoning to the second.
One step forward, two steps back.
Maybe not quite that clear? As you wrote earlier, with food to eat we can live to fight another day.
They shouldn't but they are human and not above fearing his retaliation.
Cautious here but administration could be conspicuous loser here. Seems a big deal if administration intentionally blows off RI order. Once that order is followed, hard to whine about Massachusetts order, and any others coming down pike.
This on the surface seems like a stronger case for mandamus than many.