- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Supreme Court blocks Trumps appeal to fire Special Counsel Hampton Dellinger
Posted on 2/23/25 at 10:13 am
Posted on 2/23/25 at 10:13 am
They better figure out how to successfully impeach judges or this will go on for his entire term.
Politics Brief
Politics Brief
quote:
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Friday that Special Counsel Hampton Dellinger of the U.S. Office of Special Counsel will be allowed to remain in his position despite the Trump administration’s request to fire him.
Dellinger, appointed by former President Joe Biden in October 2023, was fired by President Donald Trump on Feb. 7. Dellinger quickly sued the Trump administration after his removal and received approval from a lower court to temporarily remain in his position. However, the Trump administration filed an emergency application to the U.S. Supreme Court, requesting the justices rule on the matter.
In a filing submitted Friday evening, however, the majority of justices declined to back the Trump administration’s appeal, allowing Dellinger to stay in his position temporarily.
Within the filing, two liberal justices, Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson, dissented, stating they would not have accepted the Trump administration’s appeal. Two conservative justices, Neil Gorsuch and Samuel Alito, also dissented, saying they would have granted the administration’s request to block the lower court’s ruling.
“The district court grappled with none of these complications before ordering Mr. Dellinger’s reinstatement. And if there are answers to the questions its remedial order raises, they appear nowhere in that court’s decision. Accordingly, I would vacate the district court’s order and remand with instructions to consider the ‘boundaries of traditional equitable relief,’” Justice Gorsuch wrote.
In Dellinger’s lower court order, the special counsel’s case is on hold until Feb. 26. With the order set to expire next week, a hearing is scheduled to consider an additional pause on Dellinger’s removal.
“Until now, as far as we are aware, no court in American history has wielded an injunction to force the President to retain an agency head whom the President believes should not be entrusted with executive power and to prevent the President from relying on his preferred replacement,” Acting Solicitor General Sarah Harris wrote.
13
Posted on 2/23/25 at 10:15 am to TigerB8
He can stay on but he has to clean the bathrooms now.
Posted on 2/23/25 at 10:16 am to TigerB8
That is a poorly written article.
Posted on 2/23/25 at 10:17 am to OysterPoBoy
Right. If forced, just let these people stay on but neuter them and give them no work to do.
Send them to the basement with the red stapler.
Send them to the basement with the red stapler.
Posted on 2/23/25 at 10:20 am to TigerB8
I thought Special Counsel served at the pleasure of the President.
What's going on?
What's going on?
Posted on 2/23/25 at 10:23 am to TigerB8
What did he even do? Yale Law and Boies Schiller partner indicates he was part of the lawfare crew. His OSC page is blank now. There has got to be a way to sideline people like this other than firing them.
Posted on 2/23/25 at 10:23 am to Bjorn Cyborg
quote:
Right. If forced, just let these people stay on but neuter them and give them no work to do.
The ruling appears to just be held in abeyance until the 26th, when the hearing occurs. It's not dismissed.
quote:
In light of the foregoing, the application to vacate the order of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia presented to THE CHIEF JUSTICE and by him referred to the Court is held in abeyance until February 26, when the TRO is set to expire.
This is just temporary pending the hearing on Feb 26. The primary issue is that it's not typical to hear appeals on TROs and Gorsuch/Alito thought this was one of the rare exceptions. The other 7 appear to disagree with this interpretation.
The issue with the article is that it doesn't appear Sontamayor/Jackson are "dissenting", ultimately, which is where the confusion appeared. They just would have denied the application to the USSC entirely.
Posted on 2/23/25 at 10:24 am to mtntiger
quote:
I thought Special Counsel served at the pleasure of the President.
What's going on?
That's a determination of the merits and the full hearing won't happen until the 26th.
And that's likely going to be the ruling, considering prior rulings of the DC COA about the nature of special counsels.
Posted on 2/23/25 at 10:25 am to TigerB8
Why would anyone fight to keep a job that the boss wants them out?
Weird mentality.
Weird mentality.
Posted on 2/23/25 at 10:29 am to TigerB8
No.
The Court did not grant immediate relief. It has not ruled in the merits.
God, I hate dumb people.
The Court did not grant immediate relief. It has not ruled in the merits.
God, I hate dumb people.
Posted on 2/23/25 at 10:32 am to TigerB8
Americans don’t take too kindly to anybody trying to make themselves into a king and rule like a self aggrandizing bloviating dictator. It doesn’t matter which side of the aisle you’re on. It’s anti-American.
*let alone a billionaire immigrant turned loose to fire veterans and other hard working republicans who hold federal careers.
You all should be happy that there are still republican federal judges that have a spine and are doing what they can do to be an obstacle to the oligarch takeover.
*let alone a billionaire immigrant turned loose to fire veterans and other hard working republicans who hold federal careers.
You all should be happy that there are still republican federal judges that have a spine and are doing what they can do to be an obstacle to the oligarch takeover.
This post was edited on 2/23/25 at 10:36 am
Posted on 2/23/25 at 10:34 am to TigerB8
Court has zero authority to do this. Just fire this asshat and tell the court to sign his paychecks if they feel that strongly about it. These judges are out of their minds. Instead of firing the guy outright, Trump can simply declare him not fit for the job - his positions undoubtedly requires some sort of background check. Pull whatever clearance / approval he has and that's it for him.
Posted on 2/23/25 at 10:35 am to CrystalPreserves
quote:
Americans don’t take too kindly to anybody trying to make themselves into a king and rule like a self aggrandizing bloviating dictator. It doesn’t matter which side of the aisle you’re on. It’s anti-American.
Retard
Posted on 2/23/25 at 10:38 am to CrystalPreserves
quote:
It’s anti-American.
Not letting the POTUS pick his own people is anti-american.
Posted on 2/23/25 at 10:42 am to CrystalPreserves
quote:
Americans don’t take too kindly to anybody trying to make themselves into a king and rule like a self aggrandizing bloviating dictator. It doesn’t matter which side of the aisle you’re on. It’s anti-American.
I’m sure you were thinking the same thing during the Clinton administration.
Posted on 2/23/25 at 10:45 am to udtiger
quote:Yep.
The Court did not grant immediate relief. It has not ruled in the merits. God, I hate dumb people.
I would not say that they are (necessarily) "dumb." More "uninformed."
The "dumb" comes into play when someone knowledgeable explains the procedural status of the case, and they continue to make the same uninformed argument
Here, SCOTUS simply declined to involve itself in a TRO that will expire by its own terms in a few days, in favor of allowing the trial court, to conduct a full evidentiary hearing on the merits.
The horror
In all seriousness, we see exactly the same victory dances or (alternatively) rending of clothing after almost every minor procedural ruling related in any way to Donald Trump.
They never learn because they do not WANT to learn. They thrive on a state of perpetual perceived martyrdom.
This post was edited on 2/23/25 at 11:07 am
Posted on 2/23/25 at 10:51 am to POTUS2024
quote:
Court has zero authority to do this
So when is the Supreme Court going to start getting involved with all of these ridiculous Federal Judge rulings? Most of them are on very shaky grounds and the only way to fix it seems to be an over ruling by the SC. Trump only has 2 years to make a difference so waiting several months to filter through the appellate courts is very detrimental to our democracy.
Posted on 2/23/25 at 10:53 am to bama1959
quote:
Most of them are on very shaky grounds and the only way to fix it seems to be an over ruling by the SC.
The court has 9 justices
Only 2 considered even entertaining the thought of overturning this TRO
Posted on 2/23/25 at 10:53 am to AggieHank86
quote:
Here, SCOTUS simply declined to involve itself in a TRO that will expire by its own terms in a few days, in favor of allowing the trial court, to conduct a full evidentiary hearing on the merits.
That a TRO was issued in the first place is what has people pissed off.
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News