this post was submitted on 18 Mar 2025
271 points (100.0% liked)

politics

21931 readers
3694 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

A federal judge criticized a Trump administration Justice Department lawyer who claimed they didn't have to follow the judge's oral order blocking deportations to El Salvador because it wasn't in writing.

Judge Boasberg questioned why the administration ignored his directive to return immigrants to the US. The DOJ lawyer repeatedly refused to provide information about the deportations, citing "national security concerns."

Frustrated, Boasberg ordered sworn declarations explaining what happened, quipping that he would issue a written order "since apparently my verbal orders don't seem to carry much weight."

top 28 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world 5 points 39 minutes ago* (last edited 2 minutes ago)

'You felt you could disregard it?'

Well, given that they disregarded it and are now standing before you arguing that they had the right to disregard it, I think it's safe to say that yes, they felt they could disregard it. And given that the migrants were deported anyway, your orders were completely ignored, his orders were being openly mocked on Twitter by Marco Rubio, and they will receive no punishment for doing so, I think it's safe to say that they were right.

Frustrated, Boasberg ordered sworn declarations explaining what happened, quipping that he would issue a written order “since apparently my verbal orders don’t seem to carry much weight.”

He's about to find out that his written orders carry even less. Remember, the Supreme Court ruled that he can't even be questioned about official acts, much less investigated. Trump could go on his Twitter knock-off tomorrow and tell this guy to go fuck himself with a chainsaw and there's fuck-all this judge can do about it.

[–] kescusay@lemmy.world 73 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Throw. That. Lawyer. In. PRISON. There may be no way to enforce the law on Trump himself, but make lawyers afraid to do his dirty work.

[–] cotus@midwest.social 21 points 1 hour ago (3 children)

Wouldn't Trump just pardon them?

[–] kescusay@lemmy.world 52 points 1 hour ago (2 children)

Make him do it. Make him do it over and over. New contempt charges every time one of these asshat lawyers refuses a lawful court order. Take up all of Trump's time with having to continuously pardon his own lawyers.

[–] Ferrous@lemmy.ml 5 points 30 minutes ago (1 children)

It literally takes trump 20 seconds to tell an aid to start paperwork for a pardon.

After 8 years of watching the legal system completely and utterly fumble any semblance of justice against Trump, it is bizarre to see you hail legal action as the ultimate method of dismantling the Trump regime. Big "I think Mueller is still going to bring Trump down!" energy.

Nothing will change until the ruling class have fear in their hearts, and if the most obstructive and radical thing you can imagine is "waste trumps time by making him pardon an extra 15 people" also happens to be the prevalent mindset of other liberals, then yall are mega doomed.

[–] frezik@midwest.social 3 points 16 minutes ago (1 children)

Nothing will change until the ruling class have fear in their hearts, and if the most obstructive and radical thing you can imagine is “waste trumps time by making him pardon an extra 15 people” also happens to be the prevalent mindset of other liberals, then yall are mega doomed.

Did anyone say it was the only method on the table?

[–] Ferrous@lemmy.ml 1 points 21 seconds ago

Fair enough. That was wrong of me to falsely insinuate.

However, I'd still posit that these sort of milquetoast strategies are so ineffective and distracting, that they ought to not be brought up at all since they defang otherwise radical people and distract from real solutions.

In other words, Trump and team would like nothing more than for the opposition to waste their time making him auto pen a document over the course of 15 minutes. These suggestions are worth less than nothing.

[–] Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world 3 points 36 minutes ago

Make him do it. Make him do it over and over. New contempt charges every time one of these asshat lawyers refuses a lawful court order. Take up all of Trump’s time with having to continuously pardon his own lawyers.

This would be at best a minor inconvenience that Trump would just sign with the auto-pen that he's going after Biden for using.

And we've seen literally dozens of Trump's high-profile lawyers watch their careers end in disgrace once Trump no longer has a use for them. And for every one that crashes and burns, there seems to be two more willing to take his place. Especially now that Trump is immune from prosecution, making it much less risky for them.

[–] deo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 27 minutes ago

He can't pardon a disbarment, though!

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world 4 points 13 minutes ago

No. You go through the bar and remove their license.

[–] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 2 points 27 minutes ago

They feel that they can ignore it because they can ignore it. Stop letting them!

[–] foggy@lemmy.world 103 points 3 hours ago

He didn't feel he could disregard it.

He successfully disregarded it.

[–] BigMacHole@lemm.ee 20 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Uh oh! This Judge sounds PISSED! SOON Trump is going to get a STERNLY WRITTEN LETTER! And if they DEFY that? OH Boy! ANOTHER letter will be on the way!

[–] bishbosh@lemm.ee 2 points 51 minutes ago (1 children)

I'd Like to See Ol Donny Trump Wriggle His Way Out of THIS Jam!

[–] P1k1e@lemmy.world 2 points 38 minutes ago

You guys literally got my overweight middle aged ass giggling like an imbecile in my office at work

[–] engene@lemmy.ca 44 points 2 hours ago

Enforce the law! Otherwise, there really is no turning back. US Democracy is dead. Fascism wins. 🇺🇸

[–] Flamekebab@piefed.social 33 points 2 hours ago

Well if the order wasn't enforced... yes?

These psychos aren't stopped by words.

[–] Nougat@fedia.io 58 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

☒ Soap box ☒ Ballot box ☒ Jury box ☐ Ammo box

[–] Allonzee@lemmy.world 2 points 19 minutes ago

Promises promises.

[–] kibiz0r@midwest.social 2 points 52 minutes ago

And if you put it in writing, it’ll be on the wrong letterhead.

Or you didn’t sign it.

Or you signed it with autopen.

[–] SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world 3 points 1 hour ago

So the judge is putting Trump in a cell for disobeying the law?

[–] NimdaQA@lemmy.world 75 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (1 children)

His written orders won’t do anything either. Who knew the constitution can be so easily ripped to shreds by simply ignoring it.

[–] arrow74@lemm.ee 35 points 2 hours ago

This should have been fixed in the 1800s when Andrew Jackson defied the Supreme Court, but it was ignored and here we are

[–] Nemean_lion@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 hour ago

They don't give a single fuck about any letter you make, any protest you do. Any law you say they broke. What the fuck are you going to do about ir? Until that answer is armed revolt they will not give a single fuck about anything you do.

[–] Shawdow194@fedia.io 21 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

What a strongly worded condemnation!

Anyway

[–] miss_demeanour@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 hours ago

You should have seen the glare of severe consternation the judge cast towards the back of the exiting lawyer!!!

[–] Noite_Etion@lemmy.world 4 points 1 hour ago

Judge SLAMS Trump with no legal action whatsoever.

[–] verdantbanana@lemmy.world 5 points 2 hours ago

way more than about Trump

legal precedents that uphold other legal precedents are being dismantled like they already were being done away with before Trump

more precedents that go away the more personal freedoms and civil liberties goes away

need a revolution