5 ms·

Right, it’s a delay, not a final veto. But when that delay applies nationwide, it functions like a veto until SCOTUS steps in, which can take months or years I

Right, it’s a delay, not a final veto. But when that delay applies nationwide, it functions like a veto until SCOTUS steps in, which can take months or years If the executive avoids appeals to dodge precedent, that’s a separate (and valid) concern. But the solution isn’t to stretch injunction power beyond its legal limits It is about who gets to block national policy for everyone, based on one local case. That kind of sweeping relief was never authorized by Congress

vkou 1y ago
> until SCOTUS steps in, which can take months or years It doesn't take months or years for SCOTUS to determine whether or not they will take a case. If they don't want to take it, they are fine with the arguments made in the lower courts, and tough shit, but that means that the loser is in the wrong. > If the executive avoids appeals to dodge precedent, that’s a separate (and valid) concern. You're damn right it's a valid concern. It's a valid concern because this removed the only mechanism that there was to force them to address it.
- firesteelrain 1y ago
  It needs to work it’s way through the lower courts.. circuit, district, etc That’s the months and years part We can’t be circumventing the process at the lower levels by forum shopping
  - paulryanrogers 1y ago
    > We can’t be circumventing the process at the lower levels by forum shopping So fix forum shopping by making the president a king?
    - firesteelrain 1y ago
      Come on. Nobody is making the president a king just because we expect lawsuits to follow the normal path through the courts. Wanting judges to stay in their lane isn’t authoritarian, it’s basic constitutional structure.
      - paulryanrogers 1y ago
        He can sign unconstitutional EOs, and the only folks who can get relief are those who have a lawyer on call, or a class action, or can pull enough strings to get their case appealed to the court which he clearly has in his back pocket. (In addition to other fun things like immunity from criminal prosecution forever, cannot even be investigated in most cases, and cannot be disqualified from office after inciting a riot to stop the transfer of power.)
- agensaequivocum 1y ago
  It does take them months or years when they don't care to enforce something. Multiple times they've refused to reinstate a preliminary injection in "assault" weapon bans because it's inappropriate to get involved at a preliminary stage. Then we get a final judgment well we really need "more percolation first." But when it comes to other issues like transgender mutilation surgeries, abortion, or Trump they'll happily step in and reinstate an injection or issue one. DC v Heller filed in 2003 supreme court decision in 2008 NYSRPA v Bruen filed 2018 decision 2022. Miller v Bonta filed in 2018 still pending after being GVRd after bruen. Currently waiting for 521 days for another opinion from the 9th. Young v Hawaii filed 2012 GVRd then dismissed in 2022 as Bruen answered the same issue. Harrel v Raoul filed 2023 in 2024 the Supreme Court declined to reinstated the preliminary injunction that the Appeals court stayed. Still pending. Ocean State Tactical v Rhode Island filed in 2022. The Supreme Court declined to instate a preliminary injunction in May of 2025. Still pending. Renna v Bonta currently at 675 days waiting for an opinion from the 9th. Boland v Bonta currently at 675 days waiting for an opinion from the 9th. Palmer v Lombardo currently at 781 days waiting for an opinion from the 9th. Koons v Platkin currently at 612 days waiting for an opinion from the 3rd. There are many more cases with the same pattern.
  - firesteelrain 1y ago
    Courts are not the only remedy Petition to change laws, vote, protest, write news articles, start a podcast, donate to causes or org’s you believe in, etc Use the process and framework that is provided
    - magicalist 1y ago
      > Petition to change laws change what law, lol, it's in the constitution.
      - nobody9999 1y ago
        >> Petition to change laws >change what law, lol, it's in the constitution. To be fair, the Constitution is the law of the land. And it can be changed. You just need 2/3 of each house of Congress and the legislatures of 3/4 of the states to agree that such a change is a good idea.[0] It's hard to do (and rightly so), but absolutely doable -- in fact, we've done it 28 times already. [0] Meaning any such change would require broad-based support. Which is a good thing, imho.
kelnos 1y ago
Please stop with the weasel words. "Functions as a veto" is not what's happening, and wielding the "veto" word is just a disingenuous attempt to make a weak argument sound stronger. > until SCOTUS steps in, which can take months or years If SCOTUS decides that something is urgent, they'll step in immediately. If they wait months or years, then they are signalling that the harm of waiting is not high enough to take up their immediate attention.
- firesteelrain 1y ago
  SCOTUS has to wait for the process below it to play out. It’s not designed to jump at every grievance instantly

vkou 1y ago

> until SCOTUS steps in, which can take months or years It doesn't take months or years for SCOTUS to determine whether or not they will take a case. If they don't want to take it, they are fine with the arguments made in the lower courts, and tough shit, but that means that the loser is in the wrong. > If the executive avoids appeals to dodge precedent, that’s a separate (and valid) concern. You're damn right it's a valid concern. It's a valid concern because this removed the only mechanism that there was to force them to address it.

firesteelrain 1y ago
It needs to work it’s way through the lower courts.. circuit, district, etc That’s the months and years part We can’t be circumventing the process at the lower levels by forum shopping
- paulryanrogers 1y ago
  > We can’t be circumventing the process at the lower levels by forum shopping So fix forum shopping by making the president a king?
  - firesteelrain 1y ago
    Come on. Nobody is making the president a king just because we expect lawsuits to follow the normal path through the courts. Wanting judges to stay in their lane isn’t authoritarian, it’s basic constitutional structure.
    - paulryanrogers 1y ago
      He can sign unconstitutional EOs, and the only folks who can get relief are those who have a lawyer on call, or a class action, or can pull enough strings to get their case appealed to the court which he clearly has in his back pocket. (In addition to other fun things like immunity from criminal prosecution forever, cannot even be investigated in most cases, and cannot be disqualified from office after inciting a riot to stop the transfer of power.)
agensaequivocum 1y ago
It does take them months or years when they don't care to enforce something. Multiple times they've refused to reinstate a preliminary injection in "assault" weapon bans because it's inappropriate to get involved at a preliminary stage. Then we get a final judgment well we really need "more percolation first." But when it comes to other issues like transgender mutilation surgeries, abortion, or Trump they'll happily step in and reinstate an injection or issue one. DC v Heller filed in 2003 supreme court decision in 2008 NYSRPA v Bruen filed 2018 decision 2022. Miller v Bonta filed in 2018 still pending after being GVRd after bruen. Currently waiting for 521 days for another opinion from the 9th. Young v Hawaii filed 2012 GVRd then dismissed in 2022 as Bruen answered the same issue. Harrel v Raoul filed 2023 in 2024 the Supreme Court declined to reinstated the preliminary injunction that the Appeals court stayed. Still pending. Ocean State Tactical v Rhode Island filed in 2022. The Supreme Court declined to instate a preliminary injunction in May of 2025. Still pending. Renna v Bonta currently at 675 days waiting for an opinion from the 9th. Boland v Bonta currently at 675 days waiting for an opinion from the 9th. Palmer v Lombardo currently at 781 days waiting for an opinion from the 9th. Koons v Platkin currently at 612 days waiting for an opinion from the 3rd. There are many more cases with the same pattern.
- firesteelrain 1y ago
  Courts are not the only remedy Petition to change laws, vote, protest, write news articles, start a podcast, donate to causes or org’s you believe in, etc Use the process and framework that is provided
  - magicalist 1y ago
    > Petition to change laws change what law, lol, it's in the constitution.
    - nobody9999 1y ago
      >> Petition to change laws >change what law, lol, it's in the constitution. To be fair, the Constitution is the law of the land. And it can be changed. You just need 2/3 of each house of Congress and the legislatures of 3/4 of the states to agree that such a change is a good idea.[0] It's hard to do (and rightly so), but absolutely doable -- in fact, we've done it 28 times already. [0] Meaning any such change would require broad-based support. Which is a good thing, imho.

kelnos 1y ago

Please stop with the weasel words. "Functions as a veto" is not what's happening, and wielding the "veto" word is just a disingenuous attempt to make a weak argument sound stronger. > until SCOTUS steps in, which can take months or years If SCOTUS decides that something is urgent, they'll step in immediately. If they wait months or years, then they are signalling that the harm of waiting is not high enough to take up their immediate attention.

firesteelrain 1y ago
SCOTUS has to wait for the process below it to play out. It’s not designed to jump at every grievance instantly