***** Official Trump 47 Admin Court Battles *****

425,234 Views | 3456 Replies | Last: 1 hr ago by heavens11
TRM
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to aggiehawg • 10:19a, 4/6/26
AG
KBJ isn't a decorator, how would she know what decorum is.
Reply Quote
9
rausr
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Rapier108 • 10:25a, 4/6/26
AG
Quote:
Clearly he is just gumming up the works because he can.


It's obvious that their strategy has been to "gum up the works" the entire time.

Sadly there are lots of "judges" who support this strategy.

One of the issues is that there are no negative consequences to their continued "gumming up the works."
So they can file away with no impunity, again and again and again.
And get drunk on their so-called power.

Until there is a (strong enough) disincentive for them, this ransacking of the legal system will continue.
Reply Quote
9
Rocky Rider
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to aggiehawg • 10:39a, 4/6/26
AG
aggiehawg said:
Quote:
The CJ has brought a bit of structure to oral arguments -- at least to the beginning.

The Attorney takes 60-120 seconds to give a "30,000 foot" overview of his client's position.

The CJ then starts the questioning with Justice Thomas, and then goes in order of tenure on the Court.

Twice in the Birthright Citizenship case Justice Jackson jumped in ahead of her turn, and stepped on the answers to questions that were posed by Justices on the Court longer than she has been.

She first did it at page 23 of the transcript, while Gorsuch was in the middle of asking a question. He ignored her and kept asking his question.

She then did it to Justice Barrett -- trying to jump in after Justice Gorsuch finished, when Justice Barrett was next. Justice Kavanaugh opted to not ask any questions in the first round.

In fact, she did it twice to Barrett -- coming back and trying to interject a question again when Barrett was still asking questions during the first round.

When she did it a 3rd time, Barrett just let her go.

Her inability to control herself, and her seeming indifference to the protocol the others all respect are the kinds of little things that end up with you occupying the William O. Douglas seat on the Court.

KBJ doesn't even know the word "decorum".


She's lived a life of privilege and those around her were discouraged from calling out her behavior/performance. The short version, her growth was stunted
Reply Quote
6
txags92
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to TRM • 10:40a, 4/6/26
AG
TRM said:
KBJ isn't a decorator, how would she know what decorum is.

She thinks it is horrible that you keep assuming the gender of whoever you are decoring.
Reply Quote
4
flown-the-coop
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to TRM • 5:25p, 4/6/26
AG
TRM said:
KBJ isn't a decorator, how would she know what decorum is.

She probably is more familiar with Santorum…
Reply Quote
Ag with kids
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to flown-the-coop • 6:02p, 4/6/26
AG
flown-the-coop said:
TRM said:
KBJ isn't a decorator, how would she know what decorum is.

She probably is more familiar with Santorum…



This guy?
Reply Quote
flown-the-coop
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Ag with kids • 6:04p, 4/6/26
AG
Ag with kids said:
flown-the-coop said:
TRM said:
KBJ isn't a decorator, how would she know what decorum is.

She probably is more familiar with Santorum…



This guy?

You pic didn't 'come' through but I recall it had something to do with froth and bubbles and butts. That's probably all I should say.
Reply Quote
1
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
4:42a, 4/7/26
Reply Quote
6
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
4:57a, 4/7/26
Not federal, but pretty interesting. .


Reply Quote
5
1 edit
ts5641
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to will25u • 5:50a, 4/7/26
will25u said:

This is the way. Get our own judges in on the act.
Reply Quote
6
nortex97
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
6:31a, 4/7/26
AG

Islamo-anchor babies.

Disgusting.

Old news now but I had forgotten Sotomayor schooling KBJ earlier;
Quote:
This is what's remarkable. And I remember talking to you, I think it was a Stotomayor concurring opinion. [WAJ Note here it is, Sotomayor Had To Explain The Law To KBJ Like She Was A 5th Grader] Yes. In another case, I don't even remember what the case was, but she basically said, hey, Brown Jackson, you don't even understand what this case is about.
And that's what we're seeing here, the Justices, the eight of them, and not just the so-called conservative justices. In many ways, the conservative justices tend to ignore Brown Jackson. They tend to not treat her as being serious, at least in their opinions. They don't give her the time of day to respond. But it's interesting that Sotomayor and now Kagan do feel the need because I think she's embarrassing their liberal wing of the court.

Reply Quote
5
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:23a, 4/7/26
Reply Quote
5
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:08a, 4/7/26
Reply Quote
2
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:14p, 4/8/26
Reply Quote
4
Jack Squat 83
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
1:23a, 4/9/26
AG
Is there a human alive that's been sued more than Trump?
I don't think you know me.
Reply Quote
6
Ag with kids
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Jack Squat 83 • 1:26a, 4/9/26
AG
Jack Squat 83 said:
Is there a human alive that's been sued more than Trump?

Reply Quote
2
nortex97
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to will25u • 5:09a, 4/9/26
AG
Quote:
Murphy found that "DHS disregarded the statutory procedures Congress enacted that govern TPS and provided a 'pretextual' rationale" for ending TPS amnesty for thousands of Ethiopians.
In December, DHS announced that it was ending TPS amnesty for Ethiopian nationals, and in a press release, warned that "Ethiopian nationals with no other lawful basis for remaining in the United States have 60 days to voluntarily depart" from the country.

DHS also warned that after February 13, the agency "may arrest and deport any Ethiopian national without status after their TPS has been terminated."

"Temporary Protected Status designations are time-limited and were never meant to be a ticket to permanent residency," a spokesperson from the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) said in a statement at the time. "Conditions in Ethiopia no longer pose a serious threat to the personal safety of returning Ethiopian nationals."

He, too, will join the list of Biden-appointed losers on appeal. 'Pretextual' fraud is not the president of the USA.

Oral argument re: 2 other TPS cases at SCOTUS April 29th.

Can't wait for justice DEI's interjections and inane questions/hypotheticals in that one.
Reply Quote
7
TRM
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:22a, 4/9/26
AG
Don't feel like looking for the tariffs thread.
Reply Quote
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:32p, 4/9/26

Reply Quote
7
1 edit
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:34p, 4/9/26
I think... Fake Republican won't be on Ohio ballot.



and...

Reply Quote
7
1 edit
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
1:00p, 4/9/26
Reply Quote
6
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
1:10p, 4/9/26
Reply Quote
4
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:52p, 4/9/26
Reply Quote
4
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:36p, 4/9/26
Reply Quote
5
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:18p, 4/9/26
According to this judge, I guess journalist can just walk around and do whatever the hell they want at the Dept of War/Pentagon. Just let them in SCIFs too. 1st amendment violation.. HA.

Reply Quote
5
nortex97
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:51a, 4/10/26
AG
Holy crap, this guy must have just put his career in jeopardy at Columbia U.
Reply Quote
4
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:51p, 4/10/26
Reply Quote
6
nortex97
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to will25u • 3:30p, 4/10/26
AG
Waht? Standing? I thought that didn't matter any longer.
Reply Quote
4
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to nortex97 • 4:13p, 4/10/26
AG
nortex97 said:
Waht? Standing? I thought that didn't matter any longer.

It never did other than a habeas petition by a deportee.
Reply Quote
4
techno-ag
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to nortex97 • 5:07p, 4/10/26
AG
nortex97 said:
this guy must have just put his career in jeopardy at Columbia U.

Tenure.
The left cannot kill the Spirit of Charlie Kirk.
Reply Quote
3
1 edit
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
5:37p, 4/10/26

Reply Quote
5
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to will25u • 5:45p, 4/10/26
AG
As has been stated over and over, court jurisdiction over deportations under immigration laws is very, very limited.

Habeas in cases of mistaken identity, stuff like that. This not a criminal issue (for the most part) so due process issues are even reduced. Is prioritizing deportations of a particular nationality that has been shown to repeatedly committing fraud upon the US and taxpayers truly an Equal Protection question? I think not.
Reply Quote
7
nortex97
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to aggiehawg • 7:30a, 4/11/26
AG
Yes, but little 'details' like standing and jurisdiction rarely factor into Biden-Obama judges when they have something political to make a stand on.
Great to see/read:

This is actually encouraging to me, as I think her insolence here reflects her frustration with some pending decisions, likely.

But in the big picture Mark is right about leftists.
Reply Quote
7
Bulldog73
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:27p, 4/11/26
AG
Rejoice you bootleggers and white lightening fans, the 5th Cicuit and Edith Jones in particular have your backs.
https://redstate.com/wardclark/2026/04/11/moonshine-wins-big-158-year-ban-on-home-distilling-ruled-unconstitutional-n2201194

Maybe this is not a Trump admin court win, but maybe a victory for the common man vs. government taxation and regulation.

Quote:
Writing for a three-judge panel, Circuit Judge Edith Hollan Jones said the ban actually reduced tax revenue by preventing distilling in the first place, unlike laws that regulated the manufacture and labeling of distilled spirits on which the government could collect taxes.
She also said that under the government's logic, Congress could criminalize virtually any in-home activity that might escape notice from tax collectors, including remote work and home-based businesses.

So fire up those home stills and make some methyl alcohol to go blind from! (JK- as a reasoning conservative libertarian, I like most things that neuter Big Brother.)
Reply Quote
3
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
1:28p, 4/13/26
Reply Quote
3
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.