- 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
SCOTUS upholds Trump suspension of DEI education grants/funding...for now
Posted on 4/4/25 at 4:40 pm
Posted on 4/4/25 at 4:40 pm
4
Posted on 4/4/25 at 4:41 pm to udtiger
quote:
Chief Justice John Roberts joined with the three liberal justices in dissent.
They’ve got the goods on him.
Posted on 4/4/25 at 4:42 pm to udtiger
quote:
"Respondents have represented in this litigation that they have the financial wherewithal to keep their programs running. So, if respondents ultimately prevail, they can recover any wrongfully withheld funds through suit in an appropriate forum," the court said. "And if respondents instead decline to keep the programs operating, then any ensuing irreparable harm would be of their own making."
Sounds like this doesn't come close to touching the merits, just the TRO requirements. It doesn't seem like these grants are a headshot to the programs.
Posted on 4/4/25 at 4:43 pm to prouddawg
quote:
quote:
Chief Justice John Roberts joined with the three liberal justices in dissent.
They’ve got the goods on him.
What a worthless frick
Posted on 4/4/25 at 4:44 pm to udtiger
quote:
What a worthless frick
Compromised, no doubt
Posted on 4/4/25 at 4:45 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Sounds like this doesn't come close to touching the merits, just the TRO requirements. It doesn't seem like these grants are a headshot to the programs.
So, what do you think Roberts's issue was with it?
Posted on 4/4/25 at 4:48 pm to udtiger
Let me guess, Roberts sided with the three other nut jobs?
Posted on 4/4/25 at 4:56 pm to hogcard1964
Yes he needs to be drawn and quartered.
Posted on 4/4/25 at 4:57 pm to Y.A. Tittle
quote:
what do you think Roberts's issue was with it?
I don't know. I don't think he authored an opinion. I can look later if he joined on one of the others.
Posted on 4/4/25 at 5:00 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
"Respondents have represented in this litigation that they have the financial wherewithal to keep their programs running. So, if respondents ultimately prevail, they can recover any wrongfully withheld funds
Help me understand this …if they have the “financial wherewithal” to keep their programs running- why would they be entitled to recover withheld funds?
Apparently they don’t need the funds to stay viable, so why would they be entitled to the taxpayer dollars withheld?
Posted on 4/4/25 at 5:01 pm to prplngldtigr
quote:
if they have the “financial wherewithal” to keep their programs running- why would they be entitled to recover withheld funds?
You're talking about baseline for program survival compared to total allocated funds. There is a large delta involved.
Posted on 4/4/25 at 5:03 pm to SlowFlowPro
So they would have to win overall. In other words- DEI programs SHOULD not only exist but be funded by taxpayers? And funded to whatever degree is above baseline even.
Posted on 4/4/25 at 5:06 pm to prplngldtigr
quote:
In other words- DEI programs SHOULD not only exist but be funded by taxpayers?
That's not really the argument.
Congress allocated this money for the programs. That money is already allocated (borrowed/printed, etc.) and will remain floating in the ether.
The Trump admin is trying to thwart the will of Congress via Executive fiat, by arguing Congress has no role in allocating the money it specifically allocates by statute.
It's not about a "should" or assessment of the propriety or nature of the programs/spending at issue. It's a question of Separation of Powers via the Constittuion.
Posted on 4/4/25 at 5:09 pm to SlowFlowPro
Another question- any idea how long the funding is allocated? One fiscal year? More?
If the respondents win, they win in perpetuity or at least til congress takes this out of allocated spending?
If the respondents win, they win in perpetuity or at least til congress takes this out of allocated spending?
This post was edited on 4/4/25 at 5:10 pm
Posted on 4/4/25 at 5:13 pm to prouddawg
quote:
John Roberts
He has become a little bitch lately.
Thankfully ACB voted correctly here
Posted on 4/4/25 at 5:14 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
taxpayers? That's not really the argument. Congress allocated this money for the programs. That money is already allocated (borrowed/printed, etc.) and will remain floating in the ether. The Trump admin is trying to thwart the will of Congress via Executive fiat, by arguing Congress has no role in allocating the money it specifically allocates by statute. It's not about a "should" or assessment of the propriety or nature of the programs/spending at issue. It's a question of Separation of Powers via the Constittuion.
This is abuse of the constitution by liberals. The founders didn’t intend for tyrannical Islamist or Marxist BS from 2 corrupted branches of the federal government to be protected against a president fighting to save the republic
Posted on 4/4/25 at 5:28 pm to prplngldtigr
quote:
the respondents win, they win in perpetuity or at least til congress takes this out of allocated spending?
The TPQ grants are five year programs and the SEED grants are 3 years with a 2 year renewal. There was a TPQ round last year Federal Register
This post was edited on 4/4/25 at 5:29 pm
Posted on 4/4/25 at 5:39 pm to dukkbill
Any idea what year this DEI related suit is in?
Also, do those 2 year renewals take place? Or does the money just keep flowing via an easy button.
Also, do those 2 year renewals take place? Or does the money just keep flowing via an easy button.
Posted on 4/4/25 at 5:41 pm to udtiger
quote:
Chief Justice John Roberts joined with the three liberal justices in dissent.
Justice Elena Kagan called the court's move a "mistake," and said the Trump administration did not defend the legality of canceling the education grants at issue in the case. In a dissent joined by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson said it is "beyond puzzling" that a majority of the court viewed the Justice Department's request for intervention as an emergency.
4 absolute clowns. Why would the government need to defend not giving out grants? They aren't entitlements!
Posted on 4/4/25 at 5:50 pm to prouddawg
We are lucky ACB was feeling like an American today cause if we are counting on her and Roberts we could be in for big disappointment
Page 1 of 2
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News