this post was submitted on 10 Feb 2025
321 points (99.7% liked)

politics

19916 readers
3456 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 in Rhode Island ordered the Trump administration to unfreeze federal funding, accusing it of violating a previous court ruling.

The lawsuit, filed by 22 states and D.C., argues the freeze is unconstitutional and causing harm. Trump, JD Vance, and Elon Musk have suggested defying court orders.

The administration appealed the ruling, while legal experts warn officials like the Treasury Secretary could face contempt charges if they ignore it.

The case tests executive power limits and judicial authority.

top 46 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

Ok, the last time he violated a judge's orders, the charges were much more serious and he was facing potential jail time, both from the criminal trial he was a part of and the gag order imposed on him.

He all-but told the judge to go fuck himself on a daily basis right outside the courtroom, violated the gag order ten fucking times, and received exactly no punishment. And that was when he was a criminal defendant.

He's now President of the United States, has all three branches of government in his back pocket, and was basically anointed as a king by the Supreme Court, who declared he's all but immune from prosecution.

And this judge thinks he's going to obey his orders this time? He told you guys to fuck off on the daily when he was a civilian, and y'all did exactly nothing about it. Now he's POTUS. The fuck is he planning on doing about it now when he violates his orders again? Send out more orders? Trump could literally tell this guy to go fuck himself and his orders with a chainsaw live on television and there's fuck-all he can do about it.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 4 hours ago

So the circus continues. Another day, another contempt-of-decency performance from the executive branch’s greatest hits. McConnell’s ruling isn’t just a legal smackdown—it’s a neon sign flashing “constitutional arson in progress.”

Funny how “irreparable harm” gets shrugged off like a minor paperwork error. The admin’s playbook? Gaslight, obstruct, project until the courts buckle under sheer audacity. Democracy’s not just teetering—it’s doing backflips off a cliff while they bet on which branch breaks first.

[–] Punchshark 44 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (3 children)

Curious if there will be a "straw that broke the camels back" moment with america and this president or is everything he ever does just going to be taken by the public. Im sure the french would have a guillotine out by now

[–] [email protected] 43 points 5 hours ago (3 children)

I just wanna know where all the “I need guns to fight back against tyranny” people are. They’re reeeeal quiet.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 3 hours ago

a not insignificant portion of those people support the current administration. tyranny to them is Dems in control of government.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Responsible gun owners don’t crow about their weapons.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Sure, but there are PLENTY of irresponsible ones screaming that nonsense every time a school shooting happens. It’s not like they’re rare specimens.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 hours ago

Guess who the irresponsible ones voted for.

[–] Punchshark 8 points 5 hours ago

I agree. Lots of talk, all the walking has been backwards...

[–] [email protected] 17 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (1 children)

Fascism is not exactly sustainable. If not the people or the military, he is bound to piss off someone close to him enough to betray him eventually.

The issue is how many lives will be lost in the process.

[–] Punchshark 9 points 5 hours ago (2 children)

I'm very curious to what will be the "moment"

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 hour ago

Looking for the next assassination of Arch-Duke Ferdinand?

[–] [email protected] 11 points 5 hours ago

Yeah. This is definitely what I would call "the cool zone".

In the moments between bouts of existential dread, I am at the edge of my seat!

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 hours ago

I was hoping for a reenactment of Our American Cousin during halftime, myself.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 5 hours ago

Ya'll have primed him to ignore your shit because nothing serious has ever happened to him from the courts. You fucking baffoons. Lay in your bed.

[–] [email protected] 78 points 8 hours ago (3 children)

I’m sure he’ll listen this time judge.

[–] [email protected] 26 points 6 hours ago (2 children)

I'm actually really hoping he doesn't. It's better we get this over with sooner than later. Piss the courts and the legislature off before he has gathered enough of a foothold

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 hour ago

Speed run the end of democracy! LFG!

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 hour ago

This is really the ideal path. Fracture fast, begin the healing.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (1 children)

It is literally in their playbook, ignore court orders. Dark Gothic MAGA is terrifying

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 hours ago

This video is prophetic and I highly encourage everyone to watch it. It sounds like a conspiracy theory except we see virtually all of it happening in front of our own eyes right now.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

I know right? Usually felons don’t listen to the legal system.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 hours ago

Especially when they have not one but 34 felony convictions.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 5 hours ago

And if he Doesnt?

[–] [email protected] 50 points 7 hours ago (3 children)

It will be really interesting for the supreme court to decide if a president can be held in contempt of court.

[–] [email protected] 43 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

It doesn’t even need to go that far. The next step after failure to comply with a court order would be dispatching the US Marshalls. They report to the DoJ, so I’d say that’s pretty unlikely.

Scholars and pundits are saying that act of inhibiting their own accountability will be the official end of the US government as it was designed, and the official beginning of an authoritarian regime.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 6 hours ago

That "official acts" rule is gonna do a lot of heavy lifting.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 7 hours ago

Do they bite the hand that feeds them to appease their ego.

[–] [email protected] 30 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (4 children)

I think the judge is mistaken. This is an official act. That means it’s not constrained by things like rulings. In fact, law just isn’t applicable. They really should put more effort into staying up-to-date. /s

[–] [email protected] 8 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Well, supreme Court already said if it's an official act, then he is immune. So if he decides a court order but it's an official act, then he can't be guilty.

Great job there scotus

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

I get your point, but just because you and your freedom are immune to prosecution doesn't mean your money and property are safe from seizure. For example, if it's believed that Mar-a-Lago was used in the process of a crime, like withholding documents or discussing illegal things, then it can be seized in civil asset forfeiture and Trump would have to prove his innocence to get it back. Same with his money. I think it's possible in the current context to find a judge willing to try this. I have no idea how the execution of such an order would play out. But there are still interesting cards unplayed.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 hours ago

I have no idea how the execution of such an order would play out.

It wouldn't. The order would get appealed, the appeal would be slow walked so it wouldn't be executed in a timely manner, and eventually, it would find its way to the supreme ~~kangaroo~~ court and be deemed unconstitutional to seize the assets of the acting president ~~for life~~.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 7 hours ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 15 points 7 hours ago (4 children)

One would hope that’s not necessary!

[–] [email protected] 14 points 7 hours ago

And yet here we are

[–] [email protected] 10 points 7 hours ago

The internet has taught me that there is no such thing as sarcasm that everyone can detect.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 7 hours ago

This is the timeline where that guy took POTUS. It's necessary.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 hours ago

Don’t ever use the /s. I don’t and look how awesome I am.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 hours ago

I’m not saying you’re wrong in your opinion here, but I am gonna ask what happens if Trump does not comply with a federal judge’s order or the order from a state judge that would have implications and federal rulings?

I think the courts already determined that you can’t prosecute a sitting president, are there no repercussions?

[–] [email protected] 12 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Or else....??

Another strongly worded letter?

[–] [email protected] 15 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

I guess in a perfect world, impeachment and removal from office. If that fails then military coup? I don't see either of those things happening.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Well it's not Jan 6th yet. This country only does coups on Jan 6th.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 hours ago

What? Did something else happen on some Jan 6 besides a friendly peaceful neighborhood protest?

(/s)

[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 hours ago

If a judge can garnish my wages or dictate the terms of a company bankruptcy settlement then they should be able to take control of the payments relevant to their ruling.

[–] swordgeek 0 points 6 hours ago

Hah!

Good luck with that.