So far, at least nine (now ~40) (now ~160) judges, including Trump appointees, have called a halt to Trump executive actions

[essentialsaltes]

OK, this makes ten, if W appointee Joseph LaPlante releases his order tomorrow as asserted by Kyle Cheney.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Vance and Musk question the authority of the courts as Trump's agenda faces legal pushback​

'He gets to make the decisions!' Jim Jordan argues Trump can ignore judges​

"All I know is, again, Article Two, Section One, the very first sentence, 'The executive power shall be vested in a president,'" Jordan said, citing the Constitution. "I think it's important, 'a president of the United States of America,' not in bureaucrats, not in career people — in the president. The guy who put his name on the ballot."

 

[essentialsaltes]

Elon Musk Calls for Impeachment of Judges After DOGE Legal Blows​

 

[Aryeh Jay]

Legislation from the bench, time to replace some judges with those who will follow the law from the President.

 

[NxNW]

Elon Musk Calls for Impeachment of Judges After DOGE Legal Blows​

Why does the GOP hate law and order?

 

[Perpetual Student]

Legislation from the bench, time to replace some judges with those who will follow the law from the President.

Aren't they supposed to follow The Law? And aren't laws not supposed to come from the legislative branch?

 

[Nithavela]

Aren't they supposed to follow The Law? And aren't laws not supposed to come from the legislative branch?

The president of the USA is not part of the legislative branch, but of the executive branch of government.

 

[Perpetual Student]

The president of the USA is not part of the legislative branch, but of the executive branch of government.

That was exactly the point. The phrase "law from the president", as used by Aryeh Jay is meaningless.

 

[Sif]

'He gets to make the decisions!' Jim Jordan argues Trump can ignore judges​

"All I know is, again, Article Two, Section One, the very first sentence, 'The executive power shall be vested in a president,'" Jordan said, citing the Constitution. "I think it's important, 'a president of the United States of America,' not in bureaucrats, not in career people — in the president. The guy who put his name on the ballot."

I know I shouldn't be surprised, but, I am. I am surprised an elected official has absolutely no clue how the government works.

Of course, I have to consider the possibility that what this is is just the members of Trump's Party removing the cloak and just flat out admitting they want Trump to have absolute and total dictatorial powers.

 

[Nithavela]

That was exactly the point. The phrase "law from the president", as used by Aryeh Jay is meaningless.

I see that you are not familiar with Aryeh Jay's posting behaviour.

Just assume that everything he says is sarcastic.

 

[Pommer]

That was exactly the point. The phrase "law from the president", as used by Aryeh Jay is meaningless.

Imagine our friend typing with tongue firmly embedded in cheek.

 

[rjs330]

The president of the USA is not part of the legislative branch, but of the executive branch of government.

Exactly, he has control of the executive branch and all the agencies underneath it. He has the the authority and the right to hire/fire and organize it or reorganize it as he sees fit.

A judge should have no right to hinder a president's authority or actions in controlling the actions of the bureaucracies beneath him. If he orders people to look into the budgets and spending of those agencies under him they should have no right to stop it. There is nothing in the constitution that prohibits him from doing that.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Exactly, he has control of the executive branch and all the agencies underneath it. He has the the authority and the right to hire/fire and organize it or reorganize it as he sees fit.

Not if the laws for a particular role require him to, for example, give Congress reasons for termination and 30 days to consider them.

 

[rjs330]

I know I shouldn't be surprised, but, I am. I am surprised an elected official has absolutely no clue how the government works.

I think its you, who have no clue how givernement works. Trump is now showing the American people how it's been working for far too long. Each agency doing whatever they want even though they are under the president. And presidents have just left them alone to do and spend and waste our money.

Thats why he's got an unheard of over 50% approval rating. These obstructionist judges need to be put in their place. Their job is to interpret the law and the constitution and there is absolutely NOTHING in the constitution that prohibits the president from controlling, auditing, hiring, firing and organizing the agencies that are part of the executive branch.

 

[rjs330]

Not if the laws for a particular role require him to, for example, give Congress reasons for termination and 30 days to consider them.

I dont believe the law explicitly applies to ALL workers within the executive branch. He certainly doesn't have to provide reasons to congress for firing an incompetent aid worker or other staffers.

Congress would be very busy if that was the case.

As far as the IGs are concerned the law is unconstitutional and we'll find that out if it gets pushed forward. It's unconstitutional to limit the powers of authority within the branch. If congress wants IGs they should create the office under their authority.

 

[essentialsaltes]

I dont believe the law explicitly applies to ALL workers within the executive branch.

No, certainly not. But all these agencies and different classes of employees are governed by laws passed by Congress.

 

[Diamond72]

blocked a plan by Trump and Elon Musk to put 2,200 USAID employees on leave

That is the way the system works. They do what they can do but not everything is going to be successful. People are getting side tracked from how much Trump is accomplishing.

 

[rjs330]

That is the way the system works. They do what they can do but not everything is going to be successful. People are getting side tracked from how much Trump is accomplishing.

Its interesting what rhe left has focused on. The hiring and firing or layoffs of employees under his authority. And how foreign aid is spent, which also under his authority. The left is creating a constitutional crisis by trying to remove authority of the president to run the executive branch.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Its interesting what rhe left has focused on. The hiring and firing or layoffs of employees under his authority.

To the extent that it's illegal, yes. Presidents doing illegal things used to be considered a big deal in the US.

Nobody cares that Trump fired all the political appointees.

And how foreign aid is spent, which also under his authority.

The administration of the spending, sure, but Congress has appropriated funds for that task and no other.

 

[rjs330]

To the extent that it's illegal, yes. Presidents doing illegal things used to be considered a big deal in the US.

Nobody cares that Trump fired all the political appointees.

No the left is focused on bureaucrats being let go. We've seen it in various threads. The IGs aren't the only ones. And that certainly is a questionable law that deserves to be challenged.

The administration of the spending, sure, but Congress has appropriated funds for that task and no other.

Congress appropriated funds, but it's up to the executive branch to decide how to spend it. And thats up to the executive. And he has a firm constitutional right to make those decisions. And freezing the funds before they go out while their dispersement is looked at before they go out is a legitimate task.

Yet the left is filing to prevent the executive from doing his job. They arw the ones causing the constitutional crisis.