A provision “hidden” in the sweeping budget bill that passed the U.S. House on Thursday seeks to limit the ability of courts—including the U.S. Supreme Court—from enforcing their orders.
“No court of the United States may use appropriated funds to enforce a contempt citation for failure to comply with an injunction or temporary restraining order if no security was given when the injunction or order was issued,” the provision in the bill, which is more than 1,000 pages long, says.
The provision “would make most existing injunctions—in antitrust cases, police reform cases, school desegregation cases, and others—unenforceable,” Erwin Chemerinsky, the dean of the University of California Berkeley School of Law, told Newsweek. “It serves no purpose but to weaken the power of the federal courts.”
You can’t legislate Constitutional overrides. Legislation either conforms to the Constitution, or it is declared invalid and gets sent back to Congress for reworking. It doesn’t matter if it passes both Houses and gets signed by the President. If the Judiciary rules that it violates the Constitution, it gets thrown out. That’s how this works.
Yeah well the thing is:
If no one enforces the judiciary’s edicts, but they all say aye to whatever trump’s new decree of the day is then Judicial is just standing there foot in mouth …Technically, the consitution never explicitly gave the Supreme Court the power to overturn laws, its just a precedent set by Marbury vs Madison, and congress and the president at the time just went along with it. I could totally see the military use this logic and go “Hmm… seems legit” and proceed to ignore court orders.
Erm … So you actually don’t have a body whose job it is to make sure the government adheres to the constitution? It’s just a happy little accident?
What the actual fuck …
We do, supreme judicial authority is given to the SC in article 3 of the Constitution. This person you’re replying to isn’t being very clear that the explicit power to overturn laws was established in Marbury v Madison.
This power is called Judicial Review and it was understood to be the way the SC is supposed to work. A Federalist power grab by John Adams forced the SC to be explicit and say “we can overturn laws because that’s the only way the SC is coequal to the other branches”.
In other words, Judicial Review was always an IMPLIED POWER of the court, but a court case made them spell it out.
Well you see, we make them swear on a Bible and they wouldn’t defy God of course.
Yeah very similar vibes to Australia having political freedom of speech only thanks to it being “implied” in the constitution. :/
A King, a priest, a rich man and a sellsword are in a room. Those three man tell the sellsword to kill the other two. Who lives and who dies?
I know how to do this, Astrid. The sell sword lives, and joins the brotherhood.
Someone with standing has to file a case in court, then get a ruling in their favor.
Until then, this would stand.
Makes you think about the headline. “Could disarm US Supreme Court” is at that point hyperbolic and misleading.
This only works if everyone is honorable and defends their power. Just the writing of this bill (and others) shows the legislature’s willingness to cede their own power. I have little confidence that the current SCOTUS bench will do anything to keep their own. Add to that a weakness in our 3 branch system that only one branch has the power of force.
Yeah well congress is currently controlled by ass clowns so here we are.
Americans need to start building guillotines
Or at least exercising their constitutional right to brandish firearms.
The longer it takes to get there, the greater the harm to fix it.
The issue is a lot of the gun nuts fearing tyranny are fine with this cause it’s their team. Republicans have always been hypocrits, and now we can point to chances where they could have fulfilled their dream, but instead have become the bootlicking cowards we all knew them to be.
That would require effort.
“No court of the United States may use appropriated funds to enforce a contempt citation for failure to comply with an injunction or temporary restraining order if no security was given when the injunction or order was issued,” the provision in the bill, which is more than 1,000 pages long, says.
The provision “would make most existing injunctions—in antitrust cases, police reform cases, school desegregation cases, and others—unenforceable,” Erwin Chemerinsky, the dean of the University of California Berkeley School of Law, told Newsweek. “It serves no purpose but to weaken the power of the federal courts.”
This is the kind of legislation you would use to pave the way for fascism. It sets the stage for autocracy. It has in mind a ruler. There’s no other explanation.
We already have a basic problem
Governance ideally is people of good intentions coming together to make things better
Conservatives don’t have good intentions
Prosecutors control law enforcement
Courts have no way to enforce their rulingsThe only solution left, the Blue States should secede to Canada.
I don’t remember inviting you guys.
What if we don’t want you?
We don’t, for the record.
We already know you’re all exceptionally friendly.
deleted by creator
What in the actual fuck?
? why would you think I have any opinions on Doug Ford, let alone want to fellatio the man.
I think your team based politics is showing. (And a great reason to not want to absorb even the blue parts of the us)
deleted by creator
I am Canadian and don’t think the us (blue or otherwise) would be a good fit in our federation. Not saying we can not have great relations, but even the best and most left of the us is kinda crazy town to most of the world.
Make your own blue union, with hookers and blackjack. Just leave us out of it.
180%. Minnesota etc need to seriously look at how to do so, despite the precedent set by the traitors nearly two centuries ago.
to what end? he is already not following any of the SCOTUS orders that are not convenient to him and receiving no consequences for it
I think this might be to make sure the defacto castration of the courts is now written into law
so he can be even more of a Dictator?
More like “I already am, but now I won’t have to pretend as much”
and the “braves” aren’t doing anything to save their home
It’s amazing that it took the US 10 times less time than Russia to become a full dictatorship. Putin started openly cracking down on opponents in 2011, 11 years into his rule (technical Medvedev was prez at that time, but not really). It amuses me to no end that some americans believe that the US is going to turn back into a democracy on its own, without them taking up arms against maga.
Several people the courts ordered released, were released. So it isn’t true that he isn’t following any of the scotus orders. People are saying that this law change will allow him to ignore all orders without threat of being held in contempt. I’m not sure that interpretation is correct. And even so, I imagine that scotus can just declare it unconstitutional. That will put the question in the hands of the people scotus asks to enforce their contempt rulling. I imagine if those people refuse, the court can ask for volunteers to be deputized. So all in all it isn’t clear where this is going.
oh please, he is already ruling like a king and nobody is doing anything. This is another move of the goal post to justify inaction
You are welcome to your opinion, no matter how little logic you used to form it. Now get out there, get more radicalized and make luigi pround.
This protects him even if the Dems take back Congress or the Republicans finally turn on him.
Again, to what end? there is already enough to seriously consider actual treason charges with everything he has done in the last 8 years. If they wanted to actually go after him, they’d have enough to bury him for the rest of his, hopefully, short life…
If the Courts can’t enforce rulings against him l, then there isn’t even a theoretical check on his executive power. So even if he were impeached he could refuse to leave office, with no courts able to compelling the justice department to drag his ass out of the white house.
they already cannot enforce their rullings on him
Incoming: voted for by all democrats
Not even one single Democrat voted for this bill in the House. What makes you think they’ll do it in the Senate? I understand Democrats suck, but come on.
I could see Fetterman voting for it.
Ok yeah actually that’s fair lmao.
Also Schumer will find some excuse to make it seem not as bad
A six figure excuse.
Didn’t they vote for cloture? That is basically passing the bill.
No.
They voted to allow the government not to shut down, lol.
SC should threaten to declare Trump an outlaw
Which would do what?
an outlaw is somebody who is not protected by the law
AKA, if someone does to him something which will be remembered up there with John Brown, there is nothing they can do about it 🥰
It’s crazy that the Supreme Court need to have guns, but I wouldn’t expect anything else from the US
Everyone needs to have guns.
nazis wouldn’t be so emboldened if every leftist have guns to keep them in check
Lol buddy, this is America. If more people having guns was the solution, we wouldn’t be here right now.
Maybe if a certain political party hadn’t spent decades convincing its voters to disarm themselves, we wouldn’t have 90% of guns owned by fascists.
Guns are evil until you need them.
Maybe if a certain political party hadn’t spent decades convincing its voters to disarm themselves,
Which party was this, because it sure as shit wasn’t in the US.
Problem is not enough leftists. Most democratic voters are liberals that tend to be very anti-gun
Only a third of people own guns. That could be basically all of MAGA and no Democrats.
