I have done several posts on this…..
Trump obeying the Courts…..
Trump gaming the Courts….
Trump defying the Courts….
The convicted criminal America President seems to be pushing 7 US Supreme Court judges to HAVE to Flex….
(The Justice Dept. lawyers ARE following the Trump/Miller orders…Not the Law )
The 2 that might not?
Altio and Thomas maybe too stupid to understand that IF they fuck this up against Trump, Miller and the other Trump minions ?
They could become the latest standing on the unemployment line….
Patience is running thin in the intensifying battle between the Supreme Court and President Trump, with the president’s allies heightening their criticisms as the justices burn midnight oil.
Just before 1 a.m. Saturday, the high court temporarily blocked the administration from deporting a group of alleged Venezuelan gang members to El Salvador under the rarely used Alien Enemies Act….
…
Court watchers view the lightning speed as an implicit rebuke of the Trump administration that suggested the justices did not think the administration would hold off on deportations.
At a lower court hearing nearly two hours after the ACLU filed its request at the Supreme Court, Deputy Assistant Attorney General Drew Ensign said the Department of Homeland Security was not aware of plans for any deportation flights Friday or Saturday.
But Ensign also added a caveat.
“I have also been told to say that they reserve the right to remove people tomorrow,” Ensign said.
At 12:56 a.m. in Washington, D.C., four minutes before the clock struck midnight in Texas, where the migrants are detained, the Supreme Court stopped the administration in its tracks.
“The Government is directed not to remove any member of the putative class of detainees from the United States until further order of this Court,” the court wrote in its one-page order.
Ed Whelan, a conservative legal scholar at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, wrote on X that the “only explanation” he could see was that the high court “does not trust the Trump administration to abide by its promise to the district court.”
“And given how unworthy of trust the Trump administration has proven to be, that’s an ample explanation,” Whelan continued….
…
Stunningly, the court refused to wait for Alito to finish his written statement, only briefly noting, “Statement from Justice Alito to follow.” Any written dissents are typically published alongside the majority’s order, but Alito’s did not come until nearly 24 hours later. …
…
And beyond the current case, there is no end in sight to the clash between the justices and Trump’s agenda. Since taking office, the Trump administration has already filed 10 emergency applications.
“John Roberts is ill equipped to keep the Court away from an actual constitutional crisis,” Josh Blackman, a conservative legal scholar and constitutional law professor at the South Texas College of Law Houston, wrote in a blog post for “The Volokh Conspiracy.”
“At this point, he is squirming in a pit of quick sand,” Blackman continued. “The more he flails his arms, the quicker he will sink. Anyone who reaches out to the Chief will descend just the same.” …
…
Context: There are two kinds of contempt proceedings: Civil and criminal.
- Civil contempt, which is outside of the president’s pardon power, seeks to force a party to comply, Noll explained. Trump is familiar with the concept.
- Criminal contempt, on the other hand, is more about “punishing disrespect” of court authority — but it is subject to a presidential pardon. Trump has experience with this, too.
Who enforces court orders?
In civil contempt proceedings, Noll said, the court has “really wide discretion” to choose remedies, which could include setting fines, freezing assets and, ultimately, ordering an arrest.
- Arrests would typically only occur when other remedies have been tried but failed.
Friction point: “Although civil contempt can involve being jailed until the person complies with the court order, that is enforced by the United States Marshals, who are part of the Department of Justice and thus under the president’s control,” wrote Erwin Chemerinsky, the dean of the UC Berkeley School of Law in a New York Times op-ed.
- Retired federal judge Nancy Gertner expressed a similar sentiment to NPR’s “Morning Edition,” saying, “if Trump wanted to fully not comply, he could direct the Department of Justice not to comply. At that point, you have a full-on constitutional crisis.”
- Such a directive, Noll told Axios, would be “completely unlawful.”
What we’re watching: If an improper effort to block the Marshals from conducting their duty occurs, there is a rarely used authority that allows a court to deputize different law enforcement offers to carry out their orders.
- But he noted, “You have to really sort of go back to the wild west” or the early 20th century “to find cases where private parties or law enforcement officers other than the Marshals were being used to enforce federal court orders.”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.