3 ms·
One of the worst instances of this was when the government lawyers essentially replied "We thought only the written orders count" when asked why they didn't com
by fabian2k 1y ago
One of the worst instances of this was when the government lawyers essentially replied "We thought only the written orders count" when asked why they didn't comply. I'm not a lawyer, but from the reactions of actual lawyers this is not how it works in court, at all.
- mikeyouse 1y agoCato - one of the few actually principled right-leaning think tanks have written extensively about this (and other instances of Trump administration contempt). It’s just as bad as you’ve described and infuriating for anyone who actually values the rule of law. https://www.cato.org/commentary/carousel-contempt https://www.cato.org/commentary/carousel-contempt
- firesteelrain 1y agoCourts rarely punish agencies for contempt and trust erodes, but shame no longer works and two cases aren’t proof of a systemic collapse.
- mikeyouse 1y agoThose ‘two cases’ were from the first months of this term - needless to say there have been many further cases since then. And more to the ‘systemic collapse’ point, Appeals Courts staffed by Trump-appointed flunkies are gutting the contempt proceedings and the Supreme Court is refusing to step in.. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna223873 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna223873
- firesteelrain 1y agoFair, but linking more cases doesn’t automatically prove systemic collapse either. Appeals and the Supreme Court setting boundaries is still part of how separation of powers works, even if you dislike the outcomes. The deeper question is whether courts still have effective levers to enforce compliance, and right now contempt looks more symbolic than binding.