- 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
Trumps group needs a friendly district ct to issue temporary restraint orders
Posted on 4/20/25 at 8:59 pm
Posted on 4/20/25 at 8:59 pm
The only way to equalize the court treatment is to start replying in kind.
consider
Democrates organizing Lawfare implementation ought to be accused of treason, and a TRO issued that Democrats cannot meet in groups of 5 or more in person or on line till the matter is adjudicated.
Actblue ought to be accused of being an international illegal financing scheme and a TRO issued that no international transfers allowed till adjudicated.
States that are scaming Medicade need to be accused of fraud and a TRO issued forbidding FED support till matter adjudicated
Its the TRO process that's effectively controlling, not the adjudication
4
Posted on 4/20/25 at 9:02 pm to Trevaylin
Yea man let’s forum shop till we get what we want.
Do you know how checks and balances work?
Do you know how checks and balances work?
Posted on 4/20/25 at 9:05 pm to RFK
I do and they ain't working right now!
Posted on 4/20/25 at 9:08 pm to Trevaylin
The issue is that good district court judges don’t issue nationwide injunctions. It’s only the overtly political ones, and conservative judges in conservative districts generally don’t fit that bill.
This post was edited on 4/20/25 at 9:10 pm
Posted on 4/20/25 at 9:12 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
The issue is that good district court judges don’t issue nationwide injunctions. It’s only the overtly political ones, and conservative judges in conservative districts generally don’t fit that bill.
Congress needs to address this because district judges on both sides shouldn’t have that much power.
Posted on 4/20/25 at 9:15 pm to tigerpimpbot
quote:
Congress needs to address this because district judges on both sides shouldn’t have that much power.
Congress and SCOTUS imo.
I won’t go so far as to say nationwide injunctions should be 100% prohibited because who knows what could happen, but their application should be EXTREMELY limited.
Posted on 4/20/25 at 9:29 pm to Trevaylin
At this point I agree.
There are no penalties to be paid for a federal judge to break all laws when issuing Orders. You can claim jurisdiction when you do not have it. You can Order the other branches to do things that are solely within their power, you can impede government willy-nilly and nothing will happen to you. You do not have to face voters. You are not subject to any punishment. Removal by Impeachment in this political environment is impossible. You have a license to break the law. So, Trump should get some judges on his side to just rule whatever is politically convenient for them and go from there.
There are no penalties to be paid for a federal judge to break all laws when issuing Orders. You can claim jurisdiction when you do not have it. You can Order the other branches to do things that are solely within their power, you can impede government willy-nilly and nothing will happen to you. You do not have to face voters. You are not subject to any punishment. Removal by Impeachment in this political environment is impossible. You have a license to break the law. So, Trump should get some judges on his side to just rule whatever is politically convenient for them and go from there.
Posted on 4/20/25 at 9:32 pm to tigerpimpbot
quote:
Congress needs to address this because district judges on both sides shouldn’t have that much power.
And if Congress or the Supremes refuse to curb it, as they have so far, you have to force their hand.
Posted on 4/20/25 at 9:55 pm to shinerfan
yep
Posted on 4/21/25 at 3:54 am to RFK
Checks and balances ain't working dude, you think Dems give a frick about checks and balances, Dems judge shopping every day and all day, you think A TRO, or injunction is gonna be filled where conservative judges are, frick NO.
That's who the Dems are, they only care about thing and they been doing it almost yrs defend that
That's who the Dems are, they only care about thing and they been doing it almost yrs defend that
Posted on 4/21/25 at 4:51 am to Trevaylin
They have one and they use it. Matthew Kacsmaryk in the Northern District of Texas.
Posted on 4/21/25 at 5:08 am to RFK
quote:
Yea man let’s forum shop till we get what we want. Do you know how checks and balances work?
Yea and it doesn’t include district courts being able to stop the President of the United States, because they are not on the same level of authority.
Posted on 4/21/25 at 5:14 am to RFK
You obviously live in the fantasy land of the past where elected officials worked on behalf of the people.
Posted on 4/21/25 at 6:39 am to RFK
quote:
Do you know how checks and balances work?
Apparently checks and balances are only for Republicans and not Dimocrats.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News