- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- 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
re: Joe Biden did not ignore/defy the Supreme Court re: Student Loans
Posted on 2/12/25 at 9:38 am to lsu777
Posted on 2/12/25 at 9:38 am to lsu777
quote:
There is nothing nor any precedent to say the courts can decide how the executive branch runs executive branch departments in terms of spending, marketing etc unless those departments are not following the constitution
Well the last part is typically the issue.
DOGE itself is being litigated as to whether it was formed legally and has any ability to do any of this, also. You have to remember that part as well.
quote:
And even worse they are saying executive branch doesn’t have the right to audit spending on departments that fall under the executive which is even more bullshite
Again, see the above comments about DOGE. Audits are legal. That's what Inspector Generals are for (who were all just fired, again, in a possibly illegal/unconstitutional move). Is what DOGE is doing even an "audit"? I've never heard of an audit being done in this manner, which, again, is part of the various lawsuits.
quote:
I know you like to think the law is very complicated and you are the only one that can understand it,
I don't do this
1
Posted on 2/12/25 at 9:38 am to CarRamrod
quote:
so what emergency?
Ask Trump. I didn't support the spending.
Posted on 2/12/25 at 9:38 am to SlowFlowPro
You will catch a lot hate, but good post.
Educated me.
Educated me.
Posted on 2/12/25 at 9:38 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Your question is baked with an incorrect assumption. The court does have the authority to make the ruling. It may be overruled at some point, but the authority isn't in question.
This is wrong btw…the issue of..does lower courts have the ability to rule on things outside their district has never been established and is very much up in the air
And lower courts ruling on line item spending that otherwise doesn’t violate constitution again…never been established
And again lower courts ruling that auditing is not constitutional…well has never been established that na audit is unconstitutional
So me the court cases that prove me wrong of stfu
Posted on 2/12/25 at 9:39 am to SlowFlowPro
Shocked at OP. Shocked I tell ya'.
Posted on 2/12/25 at 9:40 am to SlowFlowPro
Never believe what the man Biden said himself, just move along folks. Just like when he said they have put together the largest organization to steal the election in 2020.
Shut up dude. I will take him at his word on this that he defied the Supreme Court. As we are learning through the unwrapping of the corruption of spending funds, there are many ways to fund his student loan forgiveness plan.
Shut up dude. I will take him at his word on this that he defied the Supreme Court. As we are learning through the unwrapping of the corruption of spending funds, there are many ways to fund his student loan forgiveness plan.
Posted on 2/12/25 at 9:41 am to lsu777
quote:
the issue of..does lower courts have the ability to rule on things outside their district has never been established and is very much up in the air
There has been 1 concurrence (by Thomas in his politicized era) that has never been addressed again by anyone else even with multiple opportunities to do so.
Posted on 2/12/25 at 9:41 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:It isn’t SOP for both parties.
I've said this is SOP for both parties since the NPC melt began.
Yes, Trump did have more EOs in his first term than Obama, Bush, and Biden.
He also had 64 or 65 TROs in his first term.
The closest after that is 14 for Biden.
The TOTAL for Obama through 8 years was 12 and for Bush, it was 6.
Your argument that it is “simply proper judicial procedure” is asinine, even when accounting for the difference in EOs.
That doesn’t even take into account his 2nd term.
It is a stall tactic used almost solely by the left that has been implemented against Trump at rates that far outshine all other presidents.
It has become a tool used by a politicalized judiciary.
Your refusal to acknowledge that is naivety of childlike proportions.
This post was edited on 2/12/25 at 9:42 am
Posted on 2/12/25 at 9:42 am to Scruffy
quote:have you forgotten he was once the most celebrated poster on this board???
SFP’s inability to focus on minutiae or contrasting details while constantly asserting that he is correct in every thread he is in is one of the major issues I have with him.
Posted on 2/12/25 at 9:42 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
I'm addressing stupid talking points, not making comments or judgments about the acts of the 2 admins referenced.
This is all well and good, but I would be hard pressed to sift through your post history to find this talking point delivered the other way around.
Posted on 2/12/25 at 9:44 am to Scruffy
quote:
It isn’t SOP for both parties.
So Republicans didn't file lawsuits to enjoin Biden and Obama EOs?
Posted on 2/12/25 at 9:45 am to WylieTiger
quote:
but I would be hard pressed to sift through your post history to find this talking point delivered the other way around.
I've never said Trump violated a court ruling, either.
Posted on 2/12/25 at 9:46 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Again, see the above comments about DOGE. Audits are legal. That's what Inspector Generals are for (who were all just fired, again, in a possibly illegal/unconstitutional move). Is what DOGE is doing even an "audit"? I've never heard of an audit being done in this manner, which, again, is part of the various lawsuits.
quote:
Well the last part is typically the issue. DOGE itself is being litigated as to whether it was formed legally and has any ability to do any of this, also. You have to remember that part as well.
quote:
Well the last part is typically the issue. DOGE itself is being litigated as to whether it was formed legally and has any ability to do any of this, also. You have to remember that part as well.
Go read the EO, it’s legal and trying to ignore it is just being naive. I don’t need to explain how renaming a existing department is legal
As far as the audit, if you have never heard of an audit like this then you have never been part of a real audit
quote:
I don't do this
Might not mean to but you do
Posted on 2/12/25 at 9:47 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:See, right here.
So Republicans didn't file lawsuits to enjoin Biden and Obama EOs?
This is your obfuscation and why I largely don’t respond to your posts.
You ignore the entirety of a post to pick a single line of dialogue to focus on.
If the use of TROs was SOP of both parties, you would see the same rate of usage.
It is like talking to an infant.
Posted on 2/12/25 at 9:48 am to SlowFlowPro
Exactly so it’s very much up in the air if they have the ability to do so
And again
Executive branch determines by line item how money allocated by congress is spent if it’s a department controlled by the EB. Never been in question
And again
Executive branch determines by line item how money allocated by congress is spent if it’s a department controlled by the EB. Never been in question
Posted on 2/12/25 at 9:49 am to lsu777
quote:
As far as the audit, if you have never heard of an audit like this then you have never been part of a real audit
I've never seen an audit before where random, curated spending is released publicly without full context.
quote:
Go read the EO, it’s legal and trying to ignore it is just being naive. I don’t need to explain how renaming a existing department is legal
Has the admin finally fixed their compliance issues with the Federal Advisory Committee Act? That was the main hold up initially.
It's hard to fine reporting on it now due to the SEO of the recent rulings.
Posted on 2/12/25 at 9:49 am to SlowFlowPro
Man just shut up and go away.
Posted on 2/12/25 at 9:49 am to SlowFlowPro
TLDR
Posted on 2/12/25 at 9:50 am to SDVTiger
quote:
Always defending the lefts actions
Always melting about Orange
ALWAYS. Without fail.
Posted on 2/12/25 at 9:51 am to Scruffy
quote:
This is your obfuscation and why I largely don’t respond to your posts.
You ignore the entirety of a post to pick a single line of dialogue to focus on.
I usually don't, but your post was built around what I considered a straw man, so I addressed that first.
If it's a straw man, the rest of the post is invalid.
quote:
If the use of TROs was SOP of both parties, you would see the same rate of usage.
Again, there is a major assumption baked into this declarative statement.
Page 8 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News