SNAP benefits cut!!! Musk gets a trillion dollars!

Damocles said:
Leftist demands, leftist filibuster, poor people as "leverage", Democrat shutdown.
Click to expand...
Ya except you are ignoring Trump and his Admin are defying Congress, who put aside Emergency Funds for this (a law) and Courts have ordered them to distribute them... but the Trump Admin is refusing.

Shocking that figures no where in your analysis. Absolutely shocking as it is so not like you to point finger at one side while ignoring the other while later claiming you are not just a partisan actor here.
 
Althea said:
Well, lying to starving people is your jam. trump is the one who went to the Supreme Court to further deny food deliveries.
Click to expand...
He went to defend the separation of power. The judge overstepped his power and demanded Trump do something that was beyond his power. SCOTUS agreed and granted a stay.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TOP
FastLane said:
He went to defend the separation of power. The judge overstepped his power and demanded Trump do something that was beyond his power. SCOTUS agreed and granted a stay.
Click to expand...
LMFAO. What was beyond his power was the denial of SNAP benefits. What happens if he just gets the fuck out of the way?
 
Althea said:
Well, lying to starving people is your jam. trump is the one who went to the Supreme Court to further deny food deliveries.
Click to expand...
Not at all.... When you deliver food boxes you can tell them what you believe to be true if you like... I prefer the truth...
 
FastLane said:
He went to defend the separation of power. The judge overstepped his power and demanded Trump do something that was beyond his power. SCOTUS agreed and granted a stay.
Click to expand...
LIE!

That is not why SCOTUS granted a stay.

Administrative Stays on emergency appeals are almost, if not 100% granted as no one Justice decides whether whatever issue is being presented will be Stayed until a court hearing can be scheduled which can take months or over a year.

The temporary stay just gives the Justice issuing it time to walk the issue over to the full panel who will consider whether this gets a full stay or no stay and if the issue will be heard.

So NO, the scotus did NOT agree, and as always you lie about almost everything you say.
 
Althea said:
They don't believe you.
Click to expand...
Oh, they absolutely do.And I answer all their questions.... Obviously.It's a big concern , and they want to know how long this might last , and what they should do... That's one of the things we also help with beside the food and personal items supplies...
 
QP! said:
LIE!

That is not why SCOTUS granted a stay.

Administrative Stays on emergency appeals are almost, if not 100% granted as no one Justice decides whether whatever issue is being presented will be Stayed until a court hearing can be scheduled which can take months or over a year.

The temporary stay just gives the Justice issuing it time to walk the issue over to the full panel who will consider whether this gets a full stay or no stay and if the issue will be heard.

So NO, the scotus did NOT agree, and as always you lie about almost everything you say.
Click to expand...
MORON . Federal courts are only supposed to be stayed when the party asking for the stay is LIKELY to win on a full hearing.

...courts evaluate four key factors: likelihood of success on the merits, irreparable harm to the applicant, injury to other parties, and the public interest.

 
FastLane said:
MORON . Federal courts are only supposed to be stayed when the party asking for the stay is LIKELY to win on a full hearing.

...courts evaluate four key factors: likelihood of success on the merits, irreparable harm to the applicant, injury to other parties, and the public interest.

Click to expand...
NO IDIOT FALSE. You magats need to SHUT UP and listen and you are ALWAYS wrong, because you are stupid.

The stay is a two part process. The Administrative stay done by one single Justice who is basically the mail carrier for each district who CARRIES OVER the issue to the entire court who then puts in place full stay or no stay.

It is that FULL COURT STAY you are referring to where the justices in granting THAT stay, do so on the basis of whether the believe the issue will succeed or fail on the merit.

Every Appellate Court has ONE SINGLE JUSTICE, who puts in place the Administrative Stay, and those Justices DO NOT decide for all other Justices ON THEIR OWN, if this issue is likely to succeed on the merits or not as no one Justice can determine that.
 
the distinction between an administrative stay and a full (or merits) stay issued by a Justice or the Supreme Court is subtle but crucial.


Let’s break it down clearly:



⚖️ 1. Administrative Stay —​


Definition:
An administrative stay is a short-term procedural order temporarily pausing the effect of a lower court ruling.
It’s issued to preserve the status quo while the higher court (or the Justice assigned to that circuit) decides whether to grant a full stay or other relief. It does not entail an examination of the merits or likelihood of success.


Purpose:


  • To prevent the lower court decision from taking effect before the Justice or full Court has time to review the stay application in detail.
  • It’s essentially a “time out” — not a ruling on the merits.

Who grants it:


  • A single Justice (the “Circuit Justice” responsible for that circuit, e.g., Justice Alito for the 5th Circuit, Justice Kagan for the 9th, etc.) can issue it unilaterally.
  • It can also be entered by the Court collectively in rare cases.

Duration:


  • Very short — often a few days or until the full Court (or the Circuit Justice) decides on the full stay application.

Legal effect:


  • Temporarily freezes the lower court’s order.
  • Does not signal how the Justice or Court will rule on the merits of the full stay.
  • It’s purely procedural to maintain stability while considering the issue.


⚖️ 2. Full (Merits) Stay —​


Definition:
A full stay (also called a “stay pending appeal” or “stay pending certiorari”) is a formal Court order suspending the lower court’s decision throughout the appeal or until further order.


Purpose:


  • To prevent the lower court ruling from taking effect while the case is being appealed or while certiorari is being sought.
  • It’s issued only if the applicant meets strict standards.

Legal standards (from Nken v. Holder, 556 U.S. 418 (2009)):


  1. A reasonable probability of success on the merits of the appeal.
  2. Irreparable harm to the applicant if the stay is denied.
  3. No substantial injury to other parties.
  4. The public interest favors the stay.

Who grants it:


  • Can be granted by the single Circuit Justice initially, or the full Supreme Court after reviewing the application.

Duration:


  • Lasts until the appeal or petition for certiorari is resolved, or until the Court lifts it
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top