4 ms·

It's impossible to know that for sure, these are not procedures based on open discussion and debate. The administration previously changed policy on undocument

by mrtksn 1y ago

It's impossible to know that for sure, these are not procedures based on open discussion and debate. The administration previously changed policy on undocumented workers in agriculture and hospitality a few times based on the social media reaction of far right influencers, business stakeholders and political organizations. On 4chan some are trying to organize mass plane ticket reservation to prevent people who are abroad from coming back "in time". So who knows, maybe the newly clarified situation catches up with the far-right influencers and they force a change in the current position and another clarification that says that this fee is for everybody. Edit: Well, actually this makes it open public discussion over live implementation :)

JumpCrisscross 1y ago
> these are not procedures based on open discussion and debate Or law. If anyone bothered challenging them under the APA, they’d almost all be found illegal. I get the companies being cowards. But where is the ACLU? Why aren’t cases being sponsored on behalf of victims of this childish autocracy that none of these rules followed the Administrative Procedures Act’s process? Does no stage AG want to stand up to a shakedown?
- jmward01 1y ago
  donate to them
  - JumpCrisscross 1y ago
    > donate to them They’re literally not fighting a fight I want them to fight, nor making any indication they want to. That translates into me looking for someone else to donate to.
- lurk2 1y ago
  > If anyone bothered challenging them under the APA, they’d almost all be found illegal. Why?
  - JumpCrisscross 1y ago
    > Why? It generally requires rulemaking to be done pursuant to a public-comment period and not be done in a way that is "arbitrary and capricious." I'm not familiar with the Immigration & Nationalisation Act(s), (as amended), so I don't know the degree to which public comment is required and judicial review permitted, but a last-minute rule like this would be expected to make it to the SCOTUS docket earlier in our republic.
- beefnugs 1y ago
  Complete haphazard system that creates mini tyrants in every border officer. "I didn't hear about the existing part... back to home country loser" "I don't have any tools to verify you had an existing blah blah, back on the plane loser" On the other hand companies with the right corruption chain will make up whatever paperwork they have to , to bypass any of these after-the-fact clarifying sound bites.
- JackC 1y ago
  Cases are being filed -- of ones with decisions, about 138 successful cases to block executive actions so far, and 91 unsuccessful. https://apnews.com/projects/trump-executive-order-lawsuit-tracker/ https://apnews.com/projects/trump-executive-order-lawsuit-tr... Meanwhile the Supreme Court has granted 16 out of 19 emergency petitions filed by the executive to overturn those rulings, grants that often require shifts in precedent without written reasoning, leading a Justice voting in the minority to describe the Court's current shadow docket practice as "Calvinball." So (a) they are filing cases (b) they are winning (c) the Supreme Court is giving every indication that the law will be whatever it needs to be to have those cases ultimately lose.
  - JumpCrisscross 1y ago
    > Supreme Court has granted 16 out of 19 emergency petitions filed by the executive to overturn those rulings, grants that often require shifts in precedent without written reasoning The emergency docket does not set precedent. (If you like your Roman law, it is analogous to how a consul acting with senatus contultum ultimum is empowered [1], versus a dictator, who can literally make law.) SCOTUS has been deferring to the administration around what happens while a case is being litigated. It’s stupid. But it’s not Aileen Cannon corrupt (not yet). (If I’m guessing correctly, they’re bending the knee with one leg and punting with the other. If the midterms swing even one house of the Congress, the judiciary regains its independence.) [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senatus_consultum_ultimum https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senatus_consultum_ultimum
    - nickthegreek 1y ago
      you say it doesn’t set precedent, but federal judges got admonished for not following the precedent from one of these shadow docket outcomes set like a month ago. > Joined by fellow conservative justice and Trump appointee Brett Kavanaugh, Gorsuch wrote that all Supreme Court orders carry the weight of precedent, regardless of whether or not they were issued in a shadow docket ruling. https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/judges-vexed-by-supreme-court-shadow-docket-rulings-trump-cases-2025-09-10/ https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/judges-vexed-by-sup...
- celdon25 1y ago
  Ever tried to get a remote job lately?
cyanydeez 1y ago
Also keep ib mind its trumps deep state soing tge enforcement so grift and corruption along woth racism is tge ballgame. Not rational policy interpretation.

by mrtksn 1y ago

JumpCrisscross 1y ago

> these are not procedures based on open discussion and debate Or law. If anyone bothered challenging them under the APA, they’d almost all be found illegal. I get the companies being cowards. But where is the ACLU? Why aren’t cases being sponsored on behalf of victims of this childish autocracy that none of these rules followed the Administrative Procedures Act’s process? Does no stage AG want to stand up to a shakedown?

jmward01 1y ago
donate to them
- JumpCrisscross 1y ago
  > donate to them They’re literally not fighting a fight I want them to fight, nor making any indication they want to. That translates into me looking for someone else to donate to.
lurk2 1y ago
> If anyone bothered challenging them under the APA, they’d almost all be found illegal. Why?
- JumpCrisscross 1y ago
  > Why? It generally requires rulemaking to be done pursuant to a public-comment period and not be done in a way that is "arbitrary and capricious." I'm not familiar with the Immigration & Nationalisation Act(s), (as amended), so I don't know the degree to which public comment is required and judicial review permitted, but a last-minute rule like this would be expected to make it to the SCOTUS docket earlier in our republic.
beefnugs 1y ago
Complete haphazard system that creates mini tyrants in every border officer. "I didn't hear about the existing part... back to home country loser" "I don't have any tools to verify you had an existing blah blah, back on the plane loser" On the other hand companies with the right corruption chain will make up whatever paperwork they have to , to bypass any of these after-the-fact clarifying sound bites.
JackC 1y ago
Cases are being filed -- of ones with decisions, about 138 successful cases to block executive actions so far, and 91 unsuccessful. https://apnews.com/projects/trump-executive-order-lawsuit-tracker/ https://apnews.com/projects/trump-executive-order-lawsuit-tr... Meanwhile the Supreme Court has granted 16 out of 19 emergency petitions filed by the executive to overturn those rulings, grants that often require shifts in precedent without written reasoning, leading a Justice voting in the minority to describe the Court's current shadow docket practice as "Calvinball." So (a) they are filing cases (b) they are winning (c) the Supreme Court is giving every indication that the law will be whatever it needs to be to have those cases ultimately lose.
- JumpCrisscross 1y ago
  > Supreme Court has granted 16 out of 19 emergency petitions filed by the executive to overturn those rulings, grants that often require shifts in precedent without written reasoning The emergency docket does not set precedent. (If you like your Roman law, it is analogous to how a consul acting with senatus contultum ultimum is empowered [1], versus a dictator, who can literally make law.) SCOTUS has been deferring to the administration around what happens while a case is being litigated. It’s stupid. But it’s not Aileen Cannon corrupt (not yet). (If I’m guessing correctly, they’re bending the knee with one leg and punting with the other. If the midterms swing even one house of the Congress, the judiciary regains its independence.) [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senatus_consultum_ultimum https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senatus_consultum_ultimum
  - nickthegreek 1y ago
    you say it doesn’t set precedent, but federal judges got admonished for not following the precedent from one of these shadow docket outcomes set like a month ago. > Joined by fellow conservative justice and Trump appointee Brett Kavanaugh, Gorsuch wrote that all Supreme Court orders carry the weight of precedent, regardless of whether or not they were issued in a shadow docket ruling. https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/judges-vexed-by-supreme-court-shadow-docket-rulings-trump-cases-2025-09-10/ https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/judges-vexed-by-sup...
celdon25 1y ago
Ever tried to get a remote job lately?

cyanydeez 1y ago

Also keep ib mind its trumps deep state soing tge enforcement so grift and corruption along woth racism is tge ballgame. Not rational policy interpretation.