“Vance and Musk question the authority of the Courts”

" It sort of feels like more than just a car brand "


musk.jpg



Haw, haw..............................................haw.
 
archives said:
“WASHINGTON (AP) — Top Trump administration officials are openly questioning the judiciary’s authority. Over the past 24 hours, officials ranging from billionaire Elon Musk to Vice President JD Vance have not only criticized a federal judge’s decision early Saturday that blocks Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency from accessing Treasury Department records, but have also attacked the legitimacy of judicial oversight, a fundamental pillar of American democracy, which is based on the separation of powers.“

“A corrupt judge protecting corruption. He needs to be impeached NOW!” said Musk. Musk also shared a post from a user who had suggested that the Trump administration openly defy the court order.“

“Deputy White House chief of staff of Stephen Miller called the ruling “an assault on the very idea of democracy itself.”

apnews.com

Vance and Musk question the authority of the courts as Trump's agenda faces legal pushback

Top Trump administration officials are openly questioning the judiciary’s authority to serve as a check on executive power as the new president’s sweeping agenda faces growing pushback from the courts.
apnews.com apnews.com

Looks like Judges are going to have to amp up their security, X’s Hitler youth aren’t going to like the Courts scolding their Master

After shitting on Congress, which the GOP Congress embarrassingly loves, is it any wonder Trump is now coming after the Judicial Branch? Appears those forecasts of threatening democracy are come to fruition even early than expected

But, but, but MAGA loves the Constitution
Click to expand...
Having a Federal Judge block a Presidential order seems to violate the separation of powers. The problem it is an issue that the court will solve :laugh: I wonder how that would go. :laugh:
 
FastLane said:
Having a Federal Judge block a Presidential order seems to violate the separation of powers. The problem it is an issue that the court will solve :laugh: I wonder how that would go. :laugh:
Click to expand...
If the Presidential order was to violently attack and occupy the Capitol Building, then seize members of Congress to prevent them from functioning, would that violate the separation of powers?
 
martin said:
Aren't allowed by whom?

Other judges. You see, mental child, The United States is founded on a system of law and law is settled in courts, by judges.
Click to expand...

You're the mental fucking pygmy Smarty, tell me any other organisation where the CEO doesn't have access to its financial data. It's clear enough that these judges are highly partisan and seek only to delay access. If necessary the issue will be decided by SCOTUS.
 
serendipity said:
You're the mental fucking pygmy Smarty, tell me any other organisation where the CEO doesn't have access to its financial data. It's clear enough that these judges are highly partisan and seek only to delay access. If necessary the issue will be decided by SCOTUS.
Click to expand...
Correct, judges.
 
martin said:
Aren't allowed by whom?

Other judges. You see, mental child, The United States is founded on a system of law and law is settled in courts, by judges.
Click to expand...
When judges overstep their authority we have an obligation to ignore their orders

"Joe Biden" Student loan forgiveness

Get a brain Marty
 
martin said:
If the Presidential order was to violently attack and occupy the Capitol Building, then seize members of Congress to prevent them from functioning, would that violate the separation of powers?
Click to expand...


Since it wasn't, you have no posint.
 
martin said:
Get an honest quote.
Click to expand...

In response to the Supreme Court's decision, President Biden made remarks on June 30, 2023, stating, "I believe that the Court's decision to strike down our student debt relief plan is wrong. But I will stop at nothing to find other ways to deliver relief to hard-working middle-class families." He announced intentions to pursue debt relief under the Higher Education Act of 1965, a different legal basis than the previously rejected plan under the HEROES Act.

@Grok
 
serendipity said:
If a judge tried to tell a general how to conduct a military operation, that would be illegal.

If a judge tried to command the attorney general in how to use her discretion as a prosecutor, that's also illegal.

Judges aren't allowed to control the executive's legitimate power.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1888607143030391287
View: https://x.com/JDVance/status/1888607143030391287?t=c64bRjGB6iJmP-2XobTT1g&s=19
Click to expand...
But no one is telling a general anything, nor commanding an AG, but we do have surrogates for the Executive questioning the existence of an independent Judiciary
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top