- 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: Judge Boasberg, ordered Trump DOJ provide the court with more info in writing by Noon
Posted on 3/18/25 at 9:38 am to AggieHank86
Posted on 3/18/25 at 9:38 am to AggieHank86
That's what I said yesterday. Every decision that doesn't go Trump's way is painted as the actions of a rogue activist judge who doesn't follow the Constitution. This board wants no check on the Executive right now. I suspect that would not be the case during a Dem administration.
0
Posted on 3/18/25 at 9:39 am to cajunangelle
quote:because he walked in the White House with a specific intent to do anything he felt like he should be doing, without any regard for law.
Up to 64 injunctions against Trump so far.
Blunderbuss approach is going to draw litigation.
This post was edited on 3/18/25 at 9:39 am
Posted on 3/18/25 at 9:40 am to AggieHank86
quote:
higher-level analysis.
typical from you
Posted on 3/18/25 at 9:43 am to Penrod
quote:I do not necessarily agree that any judge (whether the ruling was pro Dem, or pro GOP) was "acting in bad faith," but in that instance, you simply have to rely upon the Circuit Court or SCOTUS to fix it.
I already knew how it was supposed to work. I am asking how do we deal with judges who are acting in bad faith.
Posted on 3/18/25 at 9:45 am to Houag80
quote:Where is anyone here making that argument?
Please show where the Executive is acting illegally....and show your work. You are a fricking autistic retard.
The point is that litigants have ALLEGED that he has done so and that the Judiciary needs to answer that question.
Posted on 3/18/25 at 9:46 am to cajunangelle
These injunctions, while they may follow the letter of the law, are seen by most as manipulation of the system. A continuation of the lawfare that was pushed against Trump over the past 4 years.
The Dems are playing a game that is lose-lose for them. They are seen as the party that is for illegals already and now they are fighting to keep them here.
They lose in the court of public opinion first and will ultimately lose most of these cases.
All of the wrangling over legal aspects of this case are lost amongst 99% of the populace, despite the arguments of our resident attorneys. Americans voted to get the illegals out and that is what they want.
I hope the Dems keep it up. Their ratings will continue to drop.
The Dems are playing a game that is lose-lose for them. They are seen as the party that is for illegals already and now they are fighting to keep them here.
They lose in the court of public opinion first and will ultimately lose most of these cases.
All of the wrangling over legal aspects of this case are lost amongst 99% of the populace, despite the arguments of our resident attorneys. Americans voted to get the illegals out and that is what they want.
I hope the Dems keep it up. Their ratings will continue to drop.
Posted on 3/18/25 at 9:48 am to cajunangelle
quote:
Judge Boasberg, ordered Trump DOJ provide the court with more info in writing by Noon
I get the impression this judge is trying to set a contempt trap for Trump DOJ attorneys.
Since Boasberg has been Loomered I think this noon hearing will have a totally different tone than what was anticipated when the judge originally scheduled it. I anticipate the judge to be much more sheepish and less aggressive.
This post was edited on 3/18/25 at 9:49 am
Posted on 3/18/25 at 9:50 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
I support the Constitution and its limitations on government action
Anything in the Constitution provide limitations on judicial tyranny?
Posted on 3/18/25 at 9:50 am to GumboPot
quote:Absolutely NO ONE takes Loomer seriously, least of all a federal judge.
Since Boasberg has been Loomered I think this noon hearing will have a totally different tone than what was anticipated when the judge originally scheduled it. I anticipate the judge to be much more sheepish and less aggressive.
Posted on 3/18/25 at 9:51 am to cajunangelle
.
This post was edited on 3/18/25 at 10:25 am
Posted on 3/18/25 at 9:52 am to cajunangelle
This will turn more regular democrats away from the party
Posted on 3/18/25 at 9:54 am to AggieHank86
quote:
Absolutely NO ONE takes Loomer seriously, least of all a federal judge.
Forget Loomer and look at the accusations and the behavior of the judges daughter after being Loomered. The judge has a serious conflict of interest issue. He really needs to recuse himself.
Posted on 3/18/25 at 9:55 am to AggieHank86
quote:
If some future President Dem were to decide that it is good "domestic policy" to euthanize all GOP primary voters, I suspect that you would (rightly) demand for the Judiciary to intervene.
So in your mind, deporting illegal gang members is the equivalent of euthanizing legal republican voters? Just to be clear, both examples are damaging to each party's respective voter base?
Posted on 3/18/25 at 9:55 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Due to the novel applications of statutory law by the admin
If you weren't retarded, you would see that the judge thinking he has immigration and diplomatic authority over the president is the "novel application."
We all know you're just a statist. Your "I follow the constitution" lie only fools yourself.
Posted on 3/18/25 at 10:00 am to TenWheelsForJesus
Hankum wraps himself in the Constitution when it suits him. He sure didnt wrap himself in it for instance during Covid when people's rights were trampled, or when the Jan 6 defendants were held in a virtual gulag without a trial.
Or when in 2016 an election very well may have been stolen and judges refused to even hear cases.
Or when in 2016 an election very well may have been stolen and judges refused to even hear cases.
Posted on 3/18/25 at 10:03 am to AggieHank86
quote:
Maybe it is (lack of) education or maybe it is limited intelligence, But I genuinely believe that some of them just cannot process that sort of higher-level analysis.
What a presumptuous individual you must be to vomit out this stinking pile of horse manure when confronted with the truth.
You have absolutely no idea of the intelligence level of many posters on this board, yet you make broad sweeping accusations about them to bolster your cracked world view.
Your defense of your opinions by claiming superiority over others is a poor one, and indicative of a lack of strength of your argument.
We all know that if SFP and yourself were locked in a room together, you'd try to murder one other simply to establish that one of you was the most intelligent person in the room.
I'd wager that neither of you has ever admitted publicly that you were wrong about anything.
This post was edited on 3/18/25 at 10:10 am
Posted on 3/18/25 at 10:06 am to DaBama
quote:Analogies are lost on some.
So in your mind, deporting illegal gang members is the equivalent of euthanizing legal republican voters?
Posted on 3/18/25 at 10:06 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
They're filing lawsuits alleging the admin didn't follow the law/Constitution. Due to the novel applications of statutory law by the admin, and the admin possibly ignoring court orders, we're in pretty new territory here.
The Supreme Court already ruled on the 1790s act during the Truman administration. The state department has already identified this group as a threat to national security.
This judge is clearly ignoring a prior SCOTUS decision.
Posted on 3/18/25 at 10:08 am to antibarner
quote:You are either an idiot or an amnesiac. Perhaps both.
Hankum wraps himself in the Constitution when it suits him. He sure didnt wrap himself in it for instance during Covid when people's rights were trampled,
I repeatedly (and loudly) argued against any governmental mandates.
Posted on 3/18/25 at 10:09 am to AggieHank86
Take the loss and move along.
Page 5 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News