5 ms·
What about a lawsuit?
by outer_web 2y ago
What about a lawsuit?
- toomuchtodo 2y agoThis administration has already told a court that they are above the law. A lawsuit would be meaningless. https://www.axios.com/2025/03/16/trump-white-house-defy-judge-deport-venezuelans https://www.axios.com/2025/03/16/trump-white-house-defy-judg... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43384730 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43384730
- outer_web 2y agoHas a court found that they are above the law?
- darthrupert 2y agoYes. Trump v. United States, 603 U.S. 593 (2024)
- outer_web 2y agoHah my fault for not being specific. He is certainly not criminally liable for such actions. But it's a frighteningly common misconception that SCOTUS ruled he could do anything and not have it reversed by the courts.
- hairofadog 2y agoThat's a misconception shared by POTUS, unfortunately.
- outer_web 2y agoEh,that is the narrative he is trying to project so that when the courts issue injunctions or rulings against him he can claim to be victimized. Or that he tried his best to fulfill a campaign promise that can't be accomplished via exective orders. Many such cases.
- Forgeties79 2y agoIf these narratives get him what he wants, what does it matter?
- outer_web 2y agoHow would the narratives get him what he wants?
- throwaway5752 2y agoA lawsuit is never meaningless. One doesn't stop trying to enforce the law because a criminal is persistent. And someone that willingly breaks a law for immoral reasons and without being willing to face the consequences is a criminal.
- toomuchtodo 2y agoI agree that you must go through the motions to push to the maximum extent of judicial recourse. But, depending on your threat model, you must be prepared if recourse through the legal framework is not forthcoming. An injunction or favorable determination by a court is of little use if you're dead, for example (lots of other examples of irreversible harm, which needs no enumeration here). Trump's border czar [Tom Homan]: "I don't care what the judges think" - https://www.axios.com/2025/03/17/tom-homan-deportation-flights-trump-court-order https://www.axios.com/2025/03/17/tom-homan-deportation-fligh... - March 17th, 2025
- outer_web 2y agoI would add that pursuing legal recourse is the only way to reach that Supreme Court decision where either the administration is slapped down or the courts relinquish their Art III powers. Until then we're only approaching a potential constitutional crisis, where the administration has plenty of opportunity to back down.
- throwaway5752 2y agoA de facto surrendering of Art III is the same as the presumptive crisis. We are here, though, it's no longer a hypothetical to maneuver around.
- outer_web 2y agoIt is not in front of SCOTUS at the moment so we aren't "here" yet and the lower courts have not been surrendering to executive power.
- 2y ago
- starkparker 2y agoArticle covers this; injunctive relief comes too late when the damage to trust in payment finality is already done by the act. When the bad actors own the enforcement mechanisms against acting badly, a slap on the wrist injunction probably feels good, not bad. Like it's proof what they're doing is having the intended effect, so they should continue doing it
- outer_web 2y agoYou're saying there's nothing to be accomplished with a lawsuit because the administration ignoring the law makes it meaningless?
- darthrupert 2y agoWouldn't that require a working judiciary system?
- maximinus_thrax 2y agoWho will enforce the court ruling and how?
- outer_web 2y agoCivil servants who themselves face liability for failing to uphold the law. This is why P2025 wants to replace them.