Poopiehead seems to think the things judges sign aren't rulings. If the judge signs it and it isn't a ruling then what is it, Poopiehead?Boorish dumbass thinks these are "rulings".
![]()
Poopiehead seems to think the things judges sign aren't rulings. If the judge signs it and it isn't a ruling then what is it, Poopiehead?Boorish dumbass thinks these are "rulings".
![]()
Since there is no constitutional question then Trump can't appeal to the USSC, right?These aren't constitutional questions dumbass. They are injunctions. They have no weight or bearing on the Executive other than the pretense.
You sad brainless little dipshit:Been there, done this, 49% of American voters voted for Trump, 49% is not a majority, not the “will of the people,” FACT
No kidding ? ;
These are recent ' Into the Nightsoil's' statements ;
"Sweden is not to the east of the UK "
" There is no such science as paleoclimatology "
" There is no such thing as an unwritten Constitution "
" There were WMD in Iraq "
"There is no "weaponization of the dollar"
"Covid does not kill ."
"It is not possible to have a variant of a variant. "(Subvariants do not exist )
"Israel doesn't want to eradicate Palestine "
"The Arctic isn't melting "
"I don't need to seek attention"
"The age of the earth is unknown "
" Genocide Joe is a socialist "
" Trump has committed no crime. "
Dumbass or troll ?
Both.
Can you show that in an actual court ruling or are you hoping bullshit will win the day?
It depends on how the funds have been allocated by Congress. Trump can't decide to simply not pay SS to anyone this year. He can't decide to close down the post office.
Care to provide us with this court order from Oct 17 2019? I am curious if you are even aware who was President in 2019 and 2020.
The law is specific about it needing to be a foreign country or a foreign government. Your list doesn't meet the requirements of the law.
As to your ask that a law must show something is unconstitutional before a judge can declare it unconstitutional, that would be ridiculous since the Constitution trumps any and every law.
For this reason, Defendants “cannot immunize [themselves] from violating” the Fifth
Amendment “by discriminating against only a subset of” transgender persons. Id. A ban on
gender dysphoria, even if it does not reach every transgender person, can nonetheless
discriminate against transgender persons as a class. Under Supreme Court precedent, “a law is
not immune to an equal protection challenge if it discriminates only against some members of a
protected class but not others.” Id. at 144 (cleaned up); see also Rice v. Cayetano, 528 U.S. 495,
516–17 (2000); Nyquist v. Mauclet, 432 U.S. 1, 7–9 (1977); Mathews v. Lucas, 427 U.S. 495,
504 n.11 (1976). Thus, Defendants cannot evade discriminating against transgender people
simply by labeling the policy as addressing gender dysphoria.
It never takes long for a brainless, uneducated leftist liar to be reduced to third grade insults.Poopiehead seems to think the things judges sign aren't rulings. If the judge signs it and it isn't a ruling then what is it, Poopiehead?
Technically, Trump can just ignore these rulings because they are unenforceable.Since there is no constitutional question then Trump can't appeal to the USSC, right?
Poor Poopiehead, doesn't realize he is in the second grade.It never takes long for a brainless, uneducated leftist liar to be reduced to third grade insults.
![]()
No judge has any authority to restrict President's authority over the executive branch, Poorboy.Poopiehead seems to think the things judges sign aren't rulings. If the judge signs it and it isn't a ruling then what is it, Poopiehead?
Not an appeal, Poorboy.Since there is no constitutional question then Trump can't appeal to the USSC, right?
Show us any statistic that proves the majority of Americans approve of disappearing people to internment camps extra-Constitutionally/without due process, or apologize for your stupid thread.Correction: Activist judges shouldn’t OBSTRUCT the will of the people
Activist judges shouldn’t block the will of the people
Our Founding Fathers created a system of checks and balances that serves as the foundation of our great American republic. While our founders envisioned the elected executive and representative branches as driving our republic, we have seen a giant shift in power to the unelected judicial branch and bureaucrats.
President Donald Trump’s November victory was the first step in restoring balance and order once again. Trump was chosen to break the mold, to challenge the entrenched powers, and to steer the country in a direction that better reflects the wills of the American people. But there is a significant hurdle standing in his way: judges who have used their position to undermine the will of the voters and the president’s agenda.
The will of the voters is clear. We’ve demanded change and an end to the status quo that has dominated Washington, D.C., for decades. For far too long, power in America has concentrated in two areas: the courts and the bureaucracy. This trend has persisted across administrations, both Democratic and Republican, and it has left citizens wondering who really holds the power in this nation. Is it the elected representatives of the people, or is it the judges and bureaucrats who seem to make decisions far outside the scope of their original mandate?
Trump was elected precisely to challenge these entrenched elites and bring real change to Washington. He has the strength and courage to push back against the elite political class to bring much-needed change to our government. But too often, Trump’s efforts have been blocked by judges who have overstepped their bounds and allowed their personal agendas to interfere with necessary policy changes.
The role of federal judges should not be to set foreign policy or to dictate how the president can enforce immigration law. The courts should respect the boundaries of their authority and allow the executive branch to carry out its constitutionally mandated duties. Instead, we see the continued safety risk to the American people that weak immigration law has caused.
![]()
Activist judges shouldn’t block the will of the people - Washington Examiner
But too often, Trump’s efforts have been blocked by judges who have overstepped their bounds and allowed their personal agendas to interfere with necessary policy changes.www.washingtonexaminer.com
Not even technical. For real. No judge has the authority to restrict the President's authority of the executive branch.Technically, Trump can just ignore these rulings because they are unenforceable.
But hey, pound those tiny insignificant little fists on the table till they bleed little man.
![]()
They got or are getting due process, Lurchy. They are criminals, and they are getting deported.Show us any statistic that proves the majority of Americans approve of disappearing people to internment camps extra-Constitutionally/without due process, or apologize for your stupid thread.
Ironic as you're the halfwit that doesn't understand the 3 co-equal branches of government enshrined in our Contitution.What do you think that means halfwit?