Shock: DC Circuit Court Actually <i>Follows Supreme Court Precedent,</i> Overrules Partisan Democrat Judge and Gives Green Light to Trump to Cut EPA Grants

Shock: DC Circuit Court Actually Follows Supreme Court Precedent, Overrules Partisan Democrat Judge and Gives Green Light to Trump to Cut EPA Grants

Is our judges learning?

On Friday, I wrote that Justice Gorsuch, joined by Justice Kavanaugh, blasted lower courts for repeatedly ignoring Supreme Court rulings.

A lot of the fights are over Trump's cancelling of payouts to Democrat shill organizations. The reason the Supreme Court is getting angry is this: Cases about money, claims about whether the government owes someone money or must honor a contract, are to be resolved only in the Federal Claims Courts, which are Article I courts -- courts run by the Executive itself -- and not Article III courts, courts established by Congress to be party of the Judicial Branch.
Left-wing judges serving in Article III courts repeatedly ignore this because they want to take these cases to attack Trump. And the Supreme Court keeps telling them "Cases involving money disputes must be, as they always have been, taken up by the Article I Federal Claims Courts," and the left-wingers in the Article III courts keep pretending that they're very confuse by this 140+ year old arrangement and keep pretending they've found nifty new arguments that allow them to take the cases themselves, and issue emergency injunctions.
And that's the key. If a case goes to the Federal Claims Courts, they go through a normal trial process to determine if money is owed.
But these left-wing DEI judges don't want to go through a trial. They want to issue emergency injunctions on their own authority, right now, without the bother and delay of a fact-finding trial.
So they keep asserting they have jurisdiction, and then issue emergency injunctions demanding Trump pay the lefties off.
And no matter how many times the Supreme Court reminds them that, yes, cash-money claims against the government are in the jurisdiction of the Federal Claims Courts and not you bitter DEI judges appointed by Biden and Obama, they keep crediting left-wing litigants' arguments as overcoming this historic division.
And thus the anger. They haven't just explained this. They've explained it ten times now, and they're angry that they even have to explain it, because this is well-settled law going back more than a hundred years.
Here is some of Gorsuch's rebuke:

Lower court judges may sometimes disagree with this Court's decisions, but they are never free to defy them. In Department of Ed. v. California, 604 U. S. ___ (2025) (per curiam), this Court granted a stay because it found the
government likely to prevail in showing that the district court lacked jurisdiction to order the government to pay grant obligations. California explained that "suits based on 'any express or implied contract with the United States' " do not belong in district court under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), but in the Court of Federal Claims under the Tucker Act. Id., at ___ (slip op., at 2) (quoting 28
U. S. C. §1491(a)(1)).

The Administrative Procedure Act is a law giving people the right to sue for unfair rules and regulations promulgated by Executive-branch personnel. These are pseudolaws, not ever passed by Congress but instead churned out by federal bureaucrats, and because they are constitutionally iffy, citizens have the right to sue if they claim they're unfair or unreasonable.
Lowly (left-wing) district court judges keep claiming that disputes that are obviously about money -- which are in the jurisdiction of the Federal Claims Courts -- might maybe possibly be seen as "unfair rules," so they keep asserting that they have jurisdiction to hear these cases.
And the Supreme Court keeps saying: No, disputes about money are for the Federal Claims Courts, please stop asserting jurisdiction you don't have just so you can stick it to Trump.
And they keep saying: But we wanna.

Rather than follow that direction, the district court in this case permitted a suit involving materially identical grants to proceed to final judgment under the APA. As support for its course, the district court invoked the "persuasive authority" of "the dissent[s] in California" and an earlier court of appeals decision Californiarepudiated. Massachusetts v. Kennedy, ___ F. Supp. 3d ___,
___ (Mass. 2025), App. to Application 232a (App.).
In other words: Rather than taking the Supreme Court's opinion as the law, the lowly leftwing district courts are choosing to elevate Ketanji Brown-Jackson's sole dissent in the case into the law they will follow. They're ignoring the Supreme Court's actual rulings and deciding "But we like Ketanji Brown-Jackson's dissent better, so now that's the law."

That was error. "[U]nless we wish anarchy to prevail within the federal judicial system, a precedent of this Court must be followed by the lower federal courts no matter how misguided the judges of those courts may think it to be." Hutto v. Davis, 454 U. S. 370, 375 (1982) (per curiam).

The DC Circuit Court of Appeals apparently heard the message and overruled the disgusting partisan Judge Chutkan -- who rules that every Democrat is in the right and every Republican and J6er is a terrorist who must be jailed without bail-- and acknowledged controlling Supreme Court rulings that Trump may order grants rescinded.

In a major win for the Trump administration, a D.C. Circuit Court panel lifted an injunction on Tuesday that attempted to block the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from terminating "climate" grants to several nongovernmental groups.
In a 2-1 decision, the panel agreed that the EPA can move forward with cutting grants totaling $16 billion to five nonprofit organizations "to promote the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions." Judges Neomi Rao and Greg Katsas sided with the government, while Judge Cornelia Pillard dissented.
The administration announced its plans to end distribution of the funds in March over what the D.C. Circuit panel described as "concerns about conflicts of interest and lack of oversight." This prompted the intended grant recipients to sue in federal court, which resulted in D.C. District Judge Tanya Chutkan issuing an injunction ordering the administration to continue dispersing the monies.
(Most Americans are likely familiar with Chutkan's egregious conduct in the Biden administration's lawfare against then-candidate Donald Trump and Jan. 6-related cases.)
Writing for the majority in Tuesday's ruling, Rao concluded that Chutkan "abused [her] discretion in issuing the injunction" in the first place. The circuit judge further noted that "while the district court had jurisdiction over the grantees' constitutional claim, that claim is meritless."
"The grantees are not likely to succeed on the merits because their claims are essentially contractual, and therefore jurisdiction lies exclusively in the Court of Federal Claims," Rao wrote. "Moreover, the equities strongly favor the government, which on behalf of the public must ensure the proper oversight and management of this multi-billion-dollar fund. Accordingly, we vacate the injunction."

The article notes that judges are finally starting to comport their rulings with the actual law. Hit the link for more.

Posted by: Ace at 05:04 PM

Comments

(Jump to bottom of comments)

1 first.

Posted by: Mister Scott (Formerly GWS) at September 02, 2025 05:03 PM (0N4FZ)

2 "Is our judges learning?"

Maybe they want to keep their jobs for life plan.

Posted by: Mister Scott (Formerly GWS) at September 02, 2025 05:04 PM (0N4FZ)

3 Howdy!

Posted by: Emmie celebrates the Audacity of Trump! at September 02, 2025 05:05 PM (FMtrg)

4 So many lamp posts, so little time.

Posted by: Field Marshal Zhukov at September 02, 2025 05:07 PM (wBaIH)

5
Prediction for homo cory gay booker's fake "engagement":

It will be one of those PERPETUAL fake "engagements."

Like, he'll be "engaged" to this broad for the rest of his queer life.

Posted by: Soothsayer at September 02, 2025 05:09 PM (7SWUk)

6 Wake me when Heller, McDonald, or Bruen are followed by districts, OR circuits.

(yeah yeah there's incremental movement, but imagine - try to imagine - if a district or circuit simply disregarded a SCOTUS ruling, say the absurd and despicable Obergefell vomit, for even a week - whole country would come to a halt and SCOTUS would vituperatively over-rule/enforce in hours)

Posted by: rhomboid at September 02, 2025 05:09 PM (U/Byj)

7
I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you.

Posted by: Hadrian the Seventh at September 02, 2025 05:11 PM (kkTda)

8 Chutken is one of the worst. She tortured the Jan 6th paraders...

Posted by: It's me donna at September 02, 2025 05:11 PM (VE6XX)

9 I'm glad to see these decisions but is there really a shift or is this Dr. Evil's "throw me a frickin' bone here"?

Posted by: Wally at September 02, 2025 05:11 PM (7CamO)

10 The "ruling" that's pissing me off the most is the Tariff ruling... WTF ?

Posted by: It's me donna at September 02, 2025 05:13 PM (VE6XX)

11
LOLOLOLOL...

I just heard another amusing Internet term for some of these Tik Tok Goblins:

SSRI Forehead

How did I not see this before, you are all asking. Right?

Evidently, a telltale sign of a goblin on Anxiety meds (long term) is a wicked receding hairline. Now you can't un-see it, right?

Posted by: Soothsayer at September 02, 2025 05:13 PM (7SWUk)

12 Oh, and happy 80th anniversary of Japan's surrender.

And note that, contrary to the blathering of the vapid affirmative action psycho Obama, the emperor did not participate in the ceremony.

Also, note that Yoko Ono's uncle was the junior foreign ministry rep on the USS Missouri that day (guy in top hat holding a briefcase).

Posted by: rhomboid at September 02, 2025 05:13 PM (U/Byj)

13 Yet in Calif, a Fed Judge says the President can't use Federal Troops, even in cases of blatant Lawlessness to even SUPPORT law enforcement.

Which is weird, because I've spent months of my life on US Navy ships doing Drug Enforcement Ops... where we would carry a 4 Man Coast Guard Unit to do any actual arresting, but we did the boarding and searching.

Posted by: Romeo13 at September 02, 2025 05:14 PM (mP0Kj)

14 2 "Is our judges learning?"

Maybe they want to keep their jobs for life plan.

Posted by: Mister Scott (Formerly GWS) at September 02, 2025 05:04 PM (0N4FZ)

---

Maybe they just want to keep their lives.

As noted above ... so many lampposts.

Posted by: The_Hoser at September 02, 2025 05:14 PM (f4jia)

15 Democrats sure get grumpy when there is any attempt to reduce their handouts from the gub'mint. You'd think the feds were taking money they had actually earned away from them.

Republicans don't even get so angry when the gub'mint decided so seize more of their money.

Posted by: PaleRider at September 02, 2025 05:14 PM (MgMHF)

16 Prediction for homo cory gay booker's fake "engagement":

It will be one of those PERPETUAL fake "engagements."

Like, he'll be "engaged" to this broad for the rest of his queer life.
Posted by: Soothsayer at September 02, 2025 05:09 PM (7SWUk)

To be fair....you don't know his fiancé. She...uh...lives in Canada....in a small town...near the Arctic Circle....

....oh, and they don't have phones there.

Yeah.

Posted by: naturalfake at September 02, 2025 05:15 PM (iJfKG)

17 Follow the money.

Grifters prefer money laundered thru the courts because there's no sense getting dirty when the mimosas are chilled with precision.

Posted by: Rev. Wishbone at September 02, 2025 05:15 PM (fy28E)

18 6 Wake me when Heller, McDonald, or Bruen are followed by districts, OR circuits.

(yeah yeah there's incremental movement, but imagine - try to imagine - if a district or circuit simply disregarded a SCOTUS ruling, say the absurd and despicable Obergefell vomit, for even a week - whole country would come to a halt and SCOTUS would vituperatively over-rule/enforce in hours)
Posted by: rhomboid
======
You should read Hollow Hope by Gerald Rosenberg. Essentially, until Congress and the President take the field, court are always your conditional ally in the matter of rights. The quickest way to ensure compliance is remove federal dollars from jurisdictions that violate the 2nd amendment. Same as it is for harboring illegals--when Uncle Sugar ends the checks for states and municipalities, then the ruse ends.

Want to accelerate the trend, allow private citizen lawsuits against state and local officials for violating constitutional rights and kill their qualified immunity for such in courts.

Qualified immunity is an odious doctrine developed by the Rehnquist court in order to stop lawsuits from criminal defendants suing illegal actions by law enforcement.

Posted by: whig at September 02, 2025 05:15 PM (WDjG6)

19 Also, note that Yoko Ono's uncle was the junior foreign ministry rep on the USS Missouri that day (guy in top hat holding a briefcase).

Posted by: rhomboid at September 02, 2025 05:13 PM (U/Byj)

Was there much Wailing and Gnashing of Teeth?

Posted by: Romeo13 at September 02, 2025 05:15 PM (mP0Kj)

20 Chutken is one of the worst. She tortured the Jan 6th paraders...
Posted by: It's me donna at September 02, 2025 05:11 PM (VE6XX)

Can someone be held in contempt of the supreme court?

Posted by: Aetius451AD work phone at September 02, 2025 05:15 PM (zZu0s)

21 Cory Booker is engaged?!?!? I'll bet the fiancee's name is Peg.

Posted by: Wally at September 02, 2025 05:15 PM (7CamO)

22 People think it don't be like that, but it do.

Posted by: Oscar Gamble at September 02, 2025 05:15 PM (f4jia)

23 Tanya Chutkan. What a horrible bitch that one is.

Also, Our Betters being such a bunch of idiots is bad enough, but getting shit on by foreigners with dumb names like Chutkan adds insult to injury. If I'm going to be bled dry by a gang of dull-normal parasites, can they at least be Americans, FFS?

Posted by: Worst Earl Flloyd-George at September 02, 2025 05:16 PM (DB1SB)

24 You know who's happy, Jerry Nadler is retiring?

His belt.

Howie Carr Show

Some people did some ting... And we made $30 Million Dollars ..

Posted by: Mister Ghost at September 02, 2025 05:17 PM (TGPs7)

25
Yoko Ono's uncle was the junior foreign ministry rep on the USS Missouri that day (guy in top hat holding a briefcase).

Posted by: rhomboid

============

Ha! I wish there was original audio from that footage. There's, like, original newsreel voiceover but not the waves and wind and guys talking.

Posted by: Blonde Morticia at September 02, 2025 05:17 PM (lCaJd)

26 Accordingly, we vacate the injunction.

——————-

Bailiff, whack her on the pee pee.

Posted by: Duke Lowell at September 02, 2025 05:17 PM (u73oe)

27
Here's a recent example of a goblin with "SSRI Forehead":

https://is.gd/yAFAeK

Posted by: Soothsayer at September 02, 2025 05:17 PM (7SWUk)

28 Qualified immunity is an odious doctrine developed by the Rehnquist court in order to stop lawsuits from criminal defendants suing illegal actions by law enforcement.
Posted by: whig at September 02, 2025 05:15 PM (WDjG6)

Yup, Qualified Immunity AND Sovereign Immunity, are both doctrines that make lie to the idea that we are a Republic, where everyone is equal under the law.

Posted by: Romeo13 at September 02, 2025 05:17 PM (mP0Kj)

29 21 Cory Booker is engaged?!?!? I'll bet the fiancee's name is Peg.
___

So won't you smile for the camera?
I know they're gonna love it

Posted by: Chuck Martel at September 02, 2025 05:17 PM (Dv3i1)

30 So WWII started on 1 September, and finally ended on 2 September. Never realized that before.

Posted by: Bulg at September 02, 2025 05:18 PM (77rzZ)

31 Did Yoko's dad sing?

Posted by: Boss Moss at September 02, 2025 05:18 PM (SiPZg)

32 Can someone be held in contempt of the supreme court?
Posted by: Aetius451AD
======
Yes, it happened to a sheriff in Chattanooga TN area for letting the townspeople lynch someone whose case was pending. United States v. Shipp in 1906.

Posted by: whig at September 02, 2025 05:18 PM (WDjG6)

33 "Oh, the Supreme Court. I thought you said the Supine Court. My bad."

Posted by: Backpedaling liberal judge at September 02, 2025 05:18 PM (pMi6S)

34 Timing on Booker makes a lot of sense. He's obviously running in 2028. He can't do so single because the same rumors he's trying to downplay get highlighted. He needs to get engaged now, married in a year or two...and ready for campaigning.

It's all performance art for these folks.

Posted by: Orson at September 02, 2025 05:19 PM (dIske)

35 Looks like Rao decided that Slutkin ‘abused her discretion,’ which is a tough standard to meet on appeal. Decisions left to a trial court’s discretion are hard to reverse on appeal, unless it was fairly egregious. This was.

Posted by: Herald for Sir Elric the Blade at September 02, 2025 05:19 PM (3+IIj)

36 Yes six years of hell on earth

Posted by: Miguel cervantes at September 02, 2025 05:19 PM (bXbFr)

37
So many lamp posts, so little time.
Posted by: Field Marshal Zhukov

The judges know nothing will happen to them so what the heck.

Posted by: Bertram Cabot, Jr. at September 02, 2025 05:19 PM (63Dwl)

38
Tanya, The Lotus Eater >>>> Tanya Chutkan

Posted by: Hadrian the Seventh at September 02, 2025 05:20 PM (kkTda)

39 4 So many lamp posts, so little time.
Posted by: Field Marshal Zhukov

Let us water the Lampposts of Liberty with the vertebrae of traitors.

Posted by: zombie at September 02, 2025 05:20 PM (pMi6S)

40 >>Yet in Calif, a Fed Judge says the President can't use Federal Troops, even in cases of blatant Lawlessness to even SUPPORT law enforcement.

Read the decision again. He said Trump can't send any new troops but the 300 that are already there can stay.

So many of these rulings are performative. They don't really expect them to stand. Theater is what the left does better than anything.

Posted by: JackStraw at September 02, 2025 05:20 PM (viF8m)

41 Some lucky lady has to beard Spartacus? What in God's name do you have to pay a woman to be degraded like that?

Posted by: Worst Earl Flloyd-George at September 02, 2025 05:20 PM (DB1SB)

42 Prediction for homo cory gay booker's fake "engagement":

It will be one of those PERPETUAL fake "engagements."

Like, he'll be "engaged" to this broad for the rest of his queer life.
Posted by: Soothsayer at September 02, 2025 05:09 PM (7SWUk)

To be fair....you don't know his fiancé. She...uh...lives in Canada....in a small town...near the Arctic Circle....

....oh, and they don't have phones there.

Yeah.
Posted by: naturalfake at September 02, 2025 05:15 PM (iJfKG)
——

The old ‘summer camp stud’ story ….

Posted by: Herald for Sir Elric the Blade at September 02, 2025 05:21 PM (3+IIj)

43 Is our judges learning?
++++
0.00% chance.

The judge sees a personal risk of some kind, or the Party has to pick its battles and is going to let this one reach the proper conclusion to set the battlespace for the actually important action: the tariff suit.

Posted by: Joe Mannix (Not a cop!) at September 02, 2025 05:21 PM (zxP/x)

44 If you are born of two American citizens (in good standing) in a foreign country you are an American citizen.

ONLY American citizens should be allowed to run for any elected office or be nominated as a judicial official. Period.

Posted by: Braenyard - some Absent Friends are more equal than others _ at September 02, 2025 05:21 PM (TxhP3)

45
TV ad for Sorcerer 1977:

https://is.gd/7wZZxg

Posted by: Soothsayer at September 02, 2025 05:21 PM (7SWUk)

46 The article notes that judges are finally starting to comport their rulings with the actual law. Hit the link for more.
++++
They need SCOTUS much less angry for the next round. They don't want to risk SCOTUS overruling them just because they've been so recently awful.

If they're prepping for the tariff case, anyway. I suspect they are. That one is for all the marbles.

Posted by: Joe Mannix (Not a cop!) at September 02, 2025 05:22 PM (zxP/x)

47 And bet tje Commissar Judge will live to rule over the government again

Posted by: Skip at September 02, 2025 05:22 PM (+qU29)

48 How much of the reported violence at the Astrodome during Katrina was real?

Posted by: Boss Moss at September 02, 2025 05:22 PM (SiPZg)

49 It's a start.

Posted by: WisRich at September 02, 2025 05:23 PM (G0vdT)

50 another gift for Trumpmas! Woohoo!

Posted by: sock_rat_eez at September 02, 2025 05:23 PM (ppG5b)

51 Booker and his intended could get married: it wouldn’t change my evaluation of him!

Posted by: NemoMeImpuneLacessit at September 02, 2025 05:24 PM (Wj1DV)

52 Morticia there's pretty good audio from MacArthur, at the microphone set up. But nothing else I know of, as you say.

Mac apparently barfed just minutes before, in the flag quarters of the ship, according to witnesses due to extreme nervousness. Doesn't sound like him, but interesting.

Posted by: rhomboid at September 02, 2025 05:24 PM (U/Byj)

53 Yup, Qualified Immunity AND Sovereign Immunity, are both doctrines that make lie to the idea that we are a Republic, where everyone is equal under the law.
Posted by: Romeo13

Sovereign immunity is preferable because for a long time, government employees engaged in illegal behavior were personally liable under the ultra vires std. Not the taxpayer who did no wrong. Focusing on 'government' as the wrongdoer has led to innocent taxpayers paying for outlaw government employees which is in reverse of who has liability.

Posted by: whig at September 02, 2025 05:24 PM (WDjG6)

54 The judge sees a personal risk of some kind, or the Party has to pick its battles and is going to let this one reach the proper conclusion to set the battlespace for the actually important action: the tariff suit.
Posted by: Joe Mannix (Not a cop!) at September 02, 2025 05:21 PM (zxP/x)

Hope Trump has a plan B... I don't trust SCOTUS

Posted by: It's me donna at September 02, 2025 05:24 PM (VE6XX)

55 51 Booker and his intended could get married: it wouldn’t change my evaluation of him!
___

An 'arrangement', then. Kind of like Alex Soros and Humid Abedin.

Posted by: Chuck Martel at September 02, 2025 05:25 PM (Dv3i1)

56 So many of these rulings are performative. They don't really expect them to stand. Theater is what the left does better than anything.
Posted by: JackStraw at September 02, 2025 05:20 PM (viF8m)
---------------

I wonder if these performative rulings are designed more to garner donations for the DNC than anything? And, I also wonder if the DNC has fallen into the trap of believing their own nonsense, because, miracle of miracles, after such a ruling the donations flood in...thanks in large part to NGO's which funneled taxpayer dollars to the DNC.

Posted by: blake - semi lurker in marginal standing (tT6L1) at September 02, 2025 05:25 PM (tT6L1)

57 Whoever got engaged to Spartacus walked into her plastic surgeon's office that same day with a photo of Michelle Obama and a big fat check, and told him "now listen here - whatever else happens, I don't want this permanent hate grimace etched on my bitter visage when I can finally cut this fairy loose and go Get My Groove Back, you hear me?"

Posted by: Worst Earl Flloyd-George at September 02, 2025 05:25 PM (DB1SB)

58 If they're prepping for the tariff case, anyway. I suspect they are. That one is for all the marbles.
Posted by: Joe Mannix (Not a cop!)
========
My guess is that Scotus will issue a stay until it hears oral arguments whenever its term commences in October.

Posted by: whig at September 02, 2025 05:25 PM (WDjG6)

59 Did Yoko's dad sing?
Posted by: Boss Moss

Better than she did, I'm guessing.

Posted by: Bulg at September 02, 2025 05:26 PM (77rzZ)

60 "28 Qualified immunity is an odious doctrine developed by the Rehnquist court in order to stop lawsuits from criminal defendants suing illegal actions by law enforcement.
Posted by: whig at September 02, 2025 05:15 PM (WDjG6)

Yup, Qualified Immunity AND Sovereign Immunity, are both doctrines that make lie to the idea that we are a Republic, where everyone is equal under the law.

Posted by: Romeo13 at September 02, 2025 05:17 PM (mP0Kj) "

These!

Posted by: sock_rat_eez at September 02, 2025 05:26 PM (ppG5b)

61 Hope Trump has a plan B... I don't trust SCOTUS
___

Ursula Van der Lyer capitulated fairly quickly on the tarrifs. I would hate it if she knew, probably from Roberts, that the fix was in.

Posted by: Chuck Martel at September 02, 2025 05:27 PM (Dv3i1)

62 Is Booker's fiancee Rosario Dawson, or did she already get paid for being his beard in the last presidential contest?

Posted by: Teresa in Fort Worth, Plucky Comic Relief, AoS Ladies Brigade - Eat the Cheesecake, Buy the Yarn. at September 02, 2025 05:27 PM (SRRAx)

63 Two Trump appointees, one Lightworker.

Posted by: torabora at September 02, 2025 05:27 PM (KtOUo)

64 Tanya, The Lotus Eater >>>> Tanya Chutkan
Posted by: Hadrian the Seventh

For the first time, I saw the Star Trek episode with "tranya" on Saturday night.

Posted by: Bulg at September 02, 2025 05:28 PM (77rzZ)

65 So somebody says this is VD day. Is that true?

Posted by: Jasmine Crockett, Scratching Her Cooter at September 02, 2025 05:28 PM (paSBy)

66 I'll bet Booker has a friend like massively heterosexual Obama had a friend and they were just peas in a pod, shooting hoops and free-style rapping on the court side.

Posted by: Rev. Wishbone at September 02, 2025 05:28 PM (fy28E)

67 This was only a panel, so en banc review is possible. They still have a chance to fuck it up.

Posted by: Biff Pocoroba at September 02, 2025 05:29 PM (XvL8K)

68 Weatherwise, today has been near perfect, mid seventies, dry, the occasional cloud or breeze.

Posted by: From about That Tim at September 02, 2025 05:29 PM (RE0lB)

69 Glad to see they're doing it. Because if they don't do it, they have to issue orders to Hegseth and his troops.
My classical Latin is for shit anymore so I don't want to have to relearn it.

Posted by: gKWVE at September 02, 2025 05:29 PM (/zv3Y)

70 For $20 any day can be VD Day.

Posted by: Boss Moss at September 02, 2025 05:29 PM (SiPZg)

71 So somebody says this is VD day. Is that true?
Posted by: Jasmine Crockett

Victory Over Democrats Day? We can only hope.

Posted by: Bulg at September 02, 2025 05:29 PM (77rzZ)

72 This was only a panel, so en banc review is possible. They still have a chance to fuck it up.
Posted by: Biff Pocoroba at September 02, 2025 05:29 PM (XvL8K)
-------------

I believe a request can be made for an en banc review but the court can refuse.

Posted by: blake - semi lurker in marginal standing (tT6L1) at September 02, 2025 05:30 PM (tT6L1)

73 If the SCOTUS overrules the plain letter of the law, passed by Congress, concerning Trump’s delegated power to set tariffs, it will be time to revisit Marbury vs. Madison!

Posted by: NemoMeImpuneLacessit at September 02, 2025 05:30 PM (Wj1DV)

74 Democrats quote the Constitution like athiests quote the Bible.

Posted by: nurse ratched at September 02, 2025 05:30 PM (W2Pud)

75 I wouldn't get too excited. 2-1 ruling with 2 Trump appointees vs 1 Obama appointee. When there's a majority of non-Trump appointees on the panel they'll go back to stupid rulings.

Posted by: lymond at September 02, 2025 05:31 PM (Jvjtu)

76 Democrats quote the Constitution like athiests quote the Bible.
Posted by: nurse ratched at September 02, 2025 05:30 PM (W2Pud)

--------------------

Replace "atheists" with Democrat. But yeah, you've got a point.

High nurse!

Posted by: blake - semi lurker in marginal standing (tT6L1) at September 02, 2025 05:31 PM (tT6L1)

77 spot-on, JS! it's just gone unchallenged for so long many have forgotten that it's all theater. leftists maybe most of all ...

Posted by: sock_rat_eez at September 02, 2025 05:31 PM (ppG5b)

78 For the first time, I saw the Star Trek episode with "tranya" on Saturday night.
Posted by: Bulg at September 02, 2025 05:28 PM (77rzZ)
-----------
Kirk, with a pair of deuces, bluffs an alien holding four king plus the joker.

Posted by: Captain Obvious, Laird o' the Sea at September 02, 2025 05:32 PM (WvZaB)

79 s going to let this one reach the proper conclusion to set the battlespace for the actually important action: the tariff suit.

Why don't we get the names of the plaintiffs on these incredibly anti-American lawsuits? If you are so proud that you can torpedo tariffs and reduce the negotiating strength of the Executive, cause hundreds of billions of revenue to be lost so that the $37T debt escalates even quicker to insolvency, and benefit "small businesses" that are nothing more than storefronts of the CCP. I think We The People should not only get names, but home addresses and names of family members of every single asshole that files these destructive lawsuits.

Posted by: Unknown Drip Under Pressure at September 02, 2025 05:32 PM (KhyP1)

80 Hope Trump has a plan B... I don't trust SCOTUS
Posted by: It's me donna

If agreements are already made between countries, then the lawsuits from corporations or individuals from those nations are going to be mooted. It is also less likely that foreign corporations, etc. have standing to challenge constitutional powers of tariffs which date back to the origins of the US republic.

The thin reed of hope is that Scotus overturns an emergency finding by the president as retaliatory tariffs have a specific intelligible principle under the JW Hampton case (delegation doctrine)--that is to retaliate against unfair tariffs levied by another nation on US products. The arguments on tariffs are between nations, not individual companies nor individuals which points toward the old case of Curtiss Wright v. US. In that, the president is considered the sole organ for international policy and when his power is augmented by Congressional law, his power is at its maximum (see Justice Jackson's concurrence in Youngstown Sheet and Tube v. Sawyer).

Posted by: whig at September 02, 2025 05:32 PM (WDjG6)

81 If Trump loses the tariff case he’ll just find another way to do it. IIRC, even the district court that originally decided he couldn’t do it this way laid out a roadmap for him to do it. I think this is all theater.

Posted by: Sir Elric the Blade at September 02, 2025 05:32 PM (3+IIj)

82 But...what is SCOTUS going to do about the rogue judges?

Aren't they also the de facto administrators of the judicial branch?

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (with a beret and a Gauloises) at September 02, 2025 05:33 PM (L5An7)

83 >>I wonder if these performative rulings are designed more to garner donations for the DNC than anything?

Probably more than anything. We are always demanding that our representatives in DC fight for us even when we know they are going to lose. The left does the same and they respond with dollars.

They are still losing. That's all I care about.

Posted by: JackStraw at September 02, 2025 05:33 PM (viF8m)

84 FWIW, this snippet of JW Hampton case in 1928 is worthwhile,
"Congress has the authority to legislate and regulate commerce and customs dues. § 315 of the of the Tariff Act (42 Stat. 85

delegated authority to the Executive to raise the rate fixed by the statute (the "flexible tariff provision"). Delegation of rate-fixing to commissions was not unusual, and customs duties are similar to rate-fixing, Justice Taft said: "If it is thought wise to vary the customs duties according to changing conditions of production at home and abroad, it may authorize the Chief Executive to carry out this purpose, with the advisory assistance of a Tariff Commission appointed under Congressional authority." Nuff said.

Posted by: whig at September 02, 2025 05:33 PM (WDjG6)

85 Democrats quote the Constitution like athiests quote the Bible.

If it wasn't for the Democrats, I never would have learned about the Good & Plenty clause of the Constitution.

Posted by: Unknown Drip Under Pressure at September 02, 2025 05:33 PM (KhyP1)

86 I saw Pair Of Deuces warm up the crowd for Nadler and Biden at a rally in Battery Park in October 2020.
It stunk.

Posted by: gKWVE at September 02, 2025 05:33 PM (/zv3Y)

87 Looked up Judge Pillard. Her father was the first openly gay psychiatrist in the US. She was an Obama appointment. Both facts explain a lot

Posted by: Smell the Glove at September 02, 2025 05:34 PM (ipRl8)

88 Conditioning appropriations has always been the obvious primary tool available against "sanctuary" lawlessness. And that it has not even been considered illustrates how disastrous the GOP is (they'd never advance anything remotely like this). Thus we get all the discretionary things on the margins - no Section 8 housing, Medicaid ban, etc - which are all good, but far less powerful as attention-getters.

If I were Homan or Miller on day one I would have ordered a compilation of all federal law enforcement/legal support to "sanctuary" jurisdictions. From that menu, using discretion, quietly suspend as much as possible (basically anything not relating to violence or national security). LA wants to be a lawless mess in rebellion? Let it find out what it's like when the DOJ FBI ATF et al say "yeah, we'll get to that, some time" when a massive financial scam hits their residents. Or a host of other crimes victimizing the voters of such pathetic places.

Of course easily done would be perp walks for employers and local officials. I am willing to hope/believe they're waiting for the right case and mechanics where they could likely get a conviction. This grace period will end soon.

Posted by: rhomboid at September 02, 2025 05:34 PM (U/Byj)

89 Is our judges learning?

Don't be looking too closely at them and theirs, more likely.

Posted by: L - No nic, another fine day at September 02, 2025 05:34 PM (NFX2v)

90 Getting their names and addresses won’t do any good if they live in Communist China!

Posted by: NemoMeImpuneLacessit at September 02, 2025 05:34 PM (Wj1DV)

91 And what's all this shit about fudge-packing the Supreme Court?

Posted by: Jasmine Crockett, Scratching Her Cooter at September 02, 2025 05:35 PM (paSBy)

92 Tranya, with a very young Clint Howard

Posted by: Smell the Glove at September 02, 2025 05:35 PM (ipRl8)

93 Kirk, with a pair of deuces, bluffs an alien holding four king plus the joker.
Posted by: Captain Obvious
_______

If there's only one joker, then you know you're holding the highest possible hand with five kings. How could he bluff him?

Posted by: Biff Pocoroba at September 02, 2025 05:35 PM (XvL8K)

94 The Three Commandments are "Be Kind", "Choose Love" and "Judge Not". Says so in the First Epistle of Karen to the Aspenians.

Posted by: David French at September 02, 2025 05:36 PM (/zv3Y)

95 72 This was only a panel, so en banc review is possible. They still have a chance to fuck it up.
Posted by: Biff Pocoroba at September 02, 2025 05:29 PM (XvL8K)
-------------

I believe a request can be made for an en banc review but the court can refuse.
Posted by: blake

There will not be an en banc on this issue simply because Scotus has made it clear that doing such is futile--Court of Claims has jurisdiction period. It is settled law beyond the Resist brotherhood of hacks in blacks. And if the Resist hacks continue, they are likely to get bitchslapped on other issues as well like firings.

Posted by: whig at September 02, 2025 05:36 PM (WDjG6)

96 "Looked up Judge Pillard. Her father was the first openly gay psychiatrist in the US. She was an Obama appointment. Both facts explain a lot
Posted by: Smell the Glove"

Psychiatrists are notoriously crazy themselves.

Posted by: fd at September 02, 2025 05:36 PM (vFG9F)

97 Well, justice is blind, but they should know braille, yes?

Posted by: Eromero at September 02, 2025 05:36 PM (jgmnb)

98 If there's only one joker, then you know you're holding the highest possible hand with five kings. How could he bluff him?
Posted by: Biff Pocoroba at September 02, 2025 05:35 PM (XvL8K)
---------
Kinda the point.

Posted by: Captain Obvious, Laird o' the Sea at September 02, 2025 05:36 PM (WvZaB)

99 Kirk could bluff his way into an orgy of green women.

And the they gave us Picard.

Posted by: Rev. Wishbone at September 02, 2025 05:36 PM (fy28E)

100 88 Conditioning appropriations has always been the obvious primary tool available against "sanctuary" lawlessness. And that it has not even been considered illustrates how disastrous the GOP is (they'd never advance anything remotely like this). Thus we get all the discretionary things on the margins - no Section 8 housing, Medicaid ban, etc - which are all good, but far less powerful as attention-getters.

If I were Homan or Miller on day one I would have ordered a compilation of all federal law enforcement/legal support to "sanctuary" jurisdictions. From that menu, using discretion, quietly suspend as much as possible (basically anything not relating to violence or national security). LA wants to be a lawless mess in rebellion? Let it find out what it's like when the DOJ FBI ATF et al say "yeah, we'll get to that, some time" when a massive financial scam hits their residents. Or a host of other crimes victimizing the voters of such pathetic places.
---
Second reconciliation bill is being teed up now. So we shall see.

Posted by: whig at September 02, 2025 05:37 PM (WDjG6)

101 We're behaving our asses this week:

The Department of Defense will be conducting training and exercise drills in parts of Philadelphia during the week of Aug. 31 to Sept. 6, the city announced on Saturday.

Philly officials say the drills are part of routine Department of Defense drills in cities across the United States and are not in response to any specific events.

Posted by: L - No nic, another fine day at September 02, 2025 05:38 PM (NFX2v)

102 The courts have been bending us over on the Second Amendment. They have openly defied SCOTUS on the Bruen ruling. They refuse to issue an injunction on those cases where there is irreparable harm. The cases they remanded are mired in abuse. Liberal state judges have played keep away from SCOTUS.

But don’t worry, Kavanaugh says they will get around to it. Some day.

*pull my finger*

Forgive me if I’m not excited about this.

Posted by: Vengeance at September 02, 2025 05:39 PM (WgtUE)

103 Five kings?!

Posted by: NemoMeImpuneLacessit at September 02, 2025 05:40 PM (Wj1DV)

104 No more Kangz.

Posted by: Boss Moss at September 02, 2025 05:41 PM (SiPZg)

105 Kinda the point.
Posted by: Captain Obvious
_____

Haven't seen that episode in at least 40 years, so no recollection. But what could the alien have thought Kirk was holding if there is no possible higher hand? I don't get the point.

Posted by: Biff Pocoroba at September 02, 2025 05:41 PM (XvL8K)

106 BTW a federal lib judge ruled that Trump’s deployment of the military to LA violated the constitution Another judge ruled his tariffs are unconstitutional.

We are far from cleaning up the courts.

Posted by: Vengeance at September 02, 2025 05:41 PM (WgtUE)

107 Oh, the Joker as a what-you-will card!

Posted by: NemoMeImpuneLacessit at September 02, 2025 05:42 PM (Wj1DV)

108 If Trump loses the tariff case he’ll just find another way to do it. IIRC, even the district court that originally decided he couldn’t do it this way laid out a roadmap for him to do it. I think this is all theater.
Posted by: Sir Elric the Blade at September 02, 2025 05:32 PM (3+IIj)
++++
He'll try. But the consequences will be dire whether he succeeds in that or not. Trump *cannot* lose this one. It's for all the marbles. Congress needs to make sure it doesn't matter either way.

Posted by: Joe Mannix (Not a cop!) at September 02, 2025 05:42 PM (zxP/x)

109 73 If the SCOTUS overrules the plain letter of the law, passed by Congress, concerning Trump’s delegated power to set tariffs, it will be time to revisit Marbury vs. Madison!
Posted by: NemoMeImpuneLacessit
=============
My guess is Scotus will dispose of this case via no standing for individuals or corporations to challenge because the negotiations between sovereign countries allocate no power for individuals nor corporations to affect those. Same reason it is so difficult to sue sovereign countries in US courts. Also this case deals with Congress having plenary constitutional power to tax and delegating that power by legislation to the President. In the case of tariffs, the Court already answered that via JW Hampton case back in 1928.

Still cited as THE precedent regarding delegation of powers by legislative to the executive.

Posted by: whig at September 02, 2025 05:42 PM (WDjG6)

110 Super 301?

Posted by: Boss Moss at September 02, 2025 05:42 PM (SiPZg)

111 Psychiatrists are notoriously crazy themselves.
==
Join me for dinner?

Posted by: Dr. Lector at September 02, 2025 05:43 PM (RrGxW)

112 Japanese missed their big chance. Had they allowed 12 year old Yoko to sing at the Surrender Signing, there might never have been an occupation, at all.

Posted by: Don't Worry, Kyoko at September 02, 2025 05:43 PM (oftw2)

113 Some lucky lady has to beard Spartacus? What in God's name do you have to pay a woman to be degraded like that?
Posted by: Worst Earl Flloyd-George at September 02, 2025 05:20 PM (DB1SB)

I'm sure it's been said already, but just in case...
Twenty dollars, same as in town.

Posted by: OneEyedJack at September 02, 2025 05:44 PM (Hx0tZ)

114 106 BTW a federal lib judge ruled that Trump’s deployment of the military to LA violated the constitution Another judge ruled his tariffs are unconstitutional.

We are far from cleaning up the courts.
Posted by: Vengeance
========
Hacks in black are just throwing shit on the wall hoping something will stick now. They are destroying the very law that they claim they are defending. And Scotus is getting sick of it.

Posted by: whig at September 02, 2025 05:44 PM (WDjG6)

115 I started reading the opinion.
Normally, the appeal court will note all the basis for appeal and then only discuss in detail the one (easiest) grounds for their ruling.
Here, they went through each and every point of why each basis for clown judge Clunken's ruling and why it "is real retarded."

My fave was the Administrative Procedures Act discussion.
Like, "you all know damned good and well there is very specific caselaw on this and you flat-out ignored all of it to make that ruling."

Posted by: People's Hippo Voice at September 02, 2025 05:44 PM (MC8h6)

116 There were no actual cards in the Corbomite Maneuver: just high stakes bluffing. A somewhat amusing episode, after watching it many times!

Posted by: NemoMeImpuneLacessit at September 02, 2025 05:45 PM (Wj1DV)

117 FWIW, this snippet of JW Hampton case in 1928 is worthwhile,
"Congress has the authority to legislate and regulate commerce and customs dues. § 315 of the of the Tariff Act (42 Stat. 85 delegated authority to the Executive to raise the rate fixed by the statute (the "flexible tariff provision"). Delegation of rate-fixing to commissions was not unusual, and customs duties are similar to rate-fixing, Justice Taft said: "If it is thought wise to vary the customs duties according to changing conditions of production at home and abroad, it may authorize the Chief Executive to carry out this purpose, with the advisory assistance of a Tariff Commission appointed under Congressional authority." Nuff said.
Posted by: whig at September 02, 2025 05:33 PM (WDjG6)
++++
The ruling is that Trump exceeded that delegated authority. Whether that ruling has merit or not, I do not know.

Posted by: Joe Mannix (Not a cop!) at September 02, 2025 05:45 PM (zxP/x)

118 Isn't Booker with Rosario Dawson, who when she shuts up and dances with no bra looks pretty decent?

Posted by: SimoHayek at September 02, 2025 05:45 PM (Uh88k)

119 I don't think Kirk's two handed chop would be that effective.

Posted by: Boss Moss at September 02, 2025 05:46 PM (SiPZg)

120 @96 fd, definitely I took a lot of testimony from them and several caused the judge , the plaintiffs attorney and me to go "wow". As nuts or nuttier than their patients

Posted by: Smell the Glove at September 02, 2025 05:46 PM (g8vhM)

121 The ruling is that Trump exceeded that delegated authority. Whether that ruling has merit or not, I do not know.
Posted by: Joe Mannix (Not a cop!) at September 02, 2025 05:45 PM (zxP/x)
------------------

Any bets as to whether or not the ruling laid out the specific areas in which President Trump exceeded his authority or the court just hand waved away citing precedent?

Posted by: blake - semi lurker in marginal standing (tT6L1) at September 02, 2025 05:47 PM (tT6L1)

122 Hacks in black are just throwing shit on the wall hoping something will stick now. They are destroying the very law that they claim they are defending. And Scotus is getting sick of it.

Just wait until the SHTF!

Posted by: NemoMeImpuneLacessit at September 02, 2025 05:47 PM (Wj1DV)

123 I don't think Kirk's two handed chop would be that effective.
Posted by: Boss Moss at September 02, 2025 05:46 PM (SiPZg)
-----------
Akhkhkh ssss fffff!!

Posted by: Gorn Captain at September 02, 2025 05:47 PM (WvZaB)

124 Foreign entities are bringing (and bribing) the tariff cases to US courts.

Posted by: runner at September 02, 2025 05:48 PM (g47mK)

125 I don't think Kirk's two handed chop would be that effective.
Posted by: Boss Moss
______

Seems like you'd at least use it up side the head instead of the base of the neck.

Posted by: Biff Pocoroba at September 02, 2025 05:49 PM (XvL8K)

126 Watch Tren de Aragua go boom.

https://tinyurl.com/3y7jxww5

Posted by: JackStraw at September 02, 2025 05:50 PM (viF8m)

127 But don’t worry, Kavanaugh says they will get around to it. Some day.

*pull my finger*

Forgive me if I’m not excited about this.
Posted by: Vengeance
======
Lighten up Frances, there are a fair number of wins as well including striking down the idiotic CA ammo law. A lot of ATF cases are resulting in government settlements which hacks in black cannot overturn and so on.

I will tell you now, there is not currently and probably never will be desire on Scotus to overturn the NFA nor the 1968 GCA. You want to end those laws, focus on Congress and legislatures changing the law or lessening it like dropping the tax to zero on suppressors and sbrs.

Then win the argument with the average citizen who believe in Hollyweird about how a 50 BMG can be suppressed to a mouse fart via a suppressor. On the GCA, embrace removing the requirement for serial numbers and parts kits being constructively considered necessary for background checks.

Fight the winnable battles as this is a siege campaign, not a lightning one battle wins all type war.

Posted by: whig at September 02, 2025 05:50 PM (WDjG6)

128 Ot: when looking up tips on doing planks, why do I see so many pictures of people doing planks wrong? It makes ME feel better, but still.

Posted by: Aetius451AD work phone at September 02, 2025 05:52 PM (zZu0s)

129 Super 301?
Posted by: Boss Moss at September 02, 2025 05:42 PM (SiPZg)

301, 302- whatever it takes.

Posted by: Aetius451AD work phone at September 02, 2025 05:53 PM (zZu0s)

130 Ot: when looking up tips on doing planks, why do I see so many pictures of people doing planks wrong? It makes ME feel better, but still.
Posted by: Aetius451AD work phone at September 02, 2025 05:52 PM (zZu0s)
--------------

Are you sure I'm doing planks wrong?

Posted by: Blondie McBusty at September 02, 2025 05:54 PM (tT6L1)

131 121 The ruling is that Trump exceeded that delegated authority. Whether that ruling has merit or not, I do not know.
Posted by: Joe Mannix

Go read JW Hampton Meatpacking case first. Essentially for Trump to exceed his authority--it has to a) directly contradict statutes, b) it has to have no intelligible principle behind it. The burden is on the plaintiffs to show both by a preponderance of evidence and to get an injunction, must show the likelihood they will succeed at trial plus irreparable harm. In addition, they must meet standing requirements as in some decisions involving international affairs are political questions where solely Congress and the president have power, not courts.

Unless Scotus wants to overrule literally centuries of deference in tariff laws dating back literally to the First Congress, plus the delegation of much of its enforcement to the president, the plaintiffs will lose.

Posted by: whig at September 02, 2025 05:54 PM (WDjG6)

132 Had 12 year old Yoko Ono been allowed to sing at the surrender signing, we would have resumed bombing, with nukes!

Posted by: NemoMeImpuneLacessit at September 02, 2025 05:56 PM (Wj1DV)

133 Thanks, whig, for actually knowing the cases and the law!

Posted by: NemoMeImpuneLacessit at September 02, 2025 05:57 PM (Wj1DV)

134
The White House
@WhiteHouse

🇺🇸 ON VIDEO: U.S. Military Forces conducted a strike against Tren de Aragua Narcoterrorists. The strike occurred while the terrorists were at sea in International waters transporting illegal narcotics, heading to the U.S. The strike resulted in 11 terrorists killed in action.

Posted by: ShainS -- Muslim Commie Momscrawny 2028: Free Weights for Every Cuck! at September 02, 2025 05:57 PM (U/Czr)

135 going back more than a hundred years."

Dang. That be old.

Missed out on the previous thread. We're talking with co owners about buying them out on vaycay condo. Can I claim all the perks n'stuff on the loan papers?
If not, why not?

Posted by: man at September 02, 2025 05:58 PM (tubbA)

136 ... Unless Scotus wants to overrule literally centuries of deference in tariff laws dating back literally to the First Congress, plus the delegation of much of its enforcement to the president, the plaintiffs will lose.
Posted by: whig at September 02, 2025 05:54 PM (WDjG6)
++++
This is a political case, not a legal one.

Which way are the political winds blowing at SCOTUS? I don't know.

I want Congress to just act now. Codify it and send Trump a new enabling act. Take it off the table, and reduce the risk of a SCOTUS defeat to zero (beyond possibly having to pay back some of the collected tariffs for part of this year - that would suck, but wouldn't be an abject disaster on an ongoing basis).

Posted by: Joe Mannix (Not a cop!) at September 02, 2025 05:58 PM (zxP/x)

137 As of yesterday Texas now recognizes all 50 states concealed carry permits.

Posted by: An Observation sez Trump is my President at September 02, 2025 05:59 PM (Da7Vv)

138 Fucking Picard.

Posted by: eleven at September 02, 2025 06:00 PM (fV+MH)

139 @131 whig, spot on. The Congress maintained the authority in the 1962 and 1974 laws to overrule the President. The SC will find it's a political issue between the executive and legislative branches and reverse

Posted by: Smell the Glove at September 02, 2025 06:00 PM (g8vhM)

140 As of yesterday Texas now recognizes all 50 states concealed carry permits.
--------
While a victory, a part of me wishes Texas had said "no" to California, New York, and Illinois.

Posted by: Crusader at September 02, 2025 06:00 PM (TN0g+)

141 Judicial activism is alive and well in this country and will only get worse.

Posted by: AlaBAMA at September 02, 2025 06:01 PM (YObWY)

142 Any bets as to whether or not the ruling laid out the specific areas in which President Trump exceeded his authority or the court just hand waved away citing precedent?
Posted by: blake

Has to do with the emergency provisions but the problem for the courts is that a number of countries have already negotiated settlements on tariffs which basically undercuts any plaintiffs from those nations being able to maintain standing. Once the agreements are made, it becomes more like an executive agreement with another country under delegated authority from Congress to the prezy. My guess is that the court will walk away from the landmine with Roberts Court declining standing or using mootness depending on the plaintiffs involved.

Essentially the lower courts and plaintiffs are arguing that the President is acting unreasonable--but that demands a very high std to get an injunction let alone win a case--proving arbitrary and capricious means that Trump can demonstrate no rational reason why he levied those tariffs--any rational reason provided then must be given deference by the courts (not hacks in black) requiring the plaintiffs to prove irrational application of the tariffs to them.

Posted by: whig at September 02, 2025 06:02 PM (WDjG6)

143 While a victory, a part of me wishes Texas had said "no" to California, New York, and Illinois.
Posted by: Crusader at September 02, 2025 06:00 PM (TN0g+)
----------------

If one has a CA permit, one should use it to get an AZ permit. AZ recognizes the CA permit process and will allow a CA permit holder to get an AZ permit.

Posted by: Blondie McBusty at September 02, 2025 06:02 PM (tT6L1)

144 126 Watch Tren de Aragua go boom.

https://tinyurl.com/3y7jxww5
Posted by: JackStraw at September 02, 2025 05:50 PM (viF8m)

Hellfire from a Helo? Didn't look like a 5 inch round.

Posted by: Romeo13 at September 02, 2025 06:02 PM (mP0Kj)

145 Ot: when looking up tips on doing planks, why do I see so many pictures of people doing planks wrong? It makes ME feel better, but still.

Posted by: Aetius451AD work phone at September 02, 2025 05:52 PM (zZu0s)

--------------

I tried the RFK Jr and Pete Hegseth challenge last weekend: the 100 push-ups was easy; but could only manage 30 pull-ups in 10 minutes.

Posted by: ShainS -- Muslim Commie Momscrawny 2028: Free Weights for Every Cuck! at September 02, 2025 06:02 PM (U/Czr)

146 137 As of yesterday Texas now recognizes all 50 states concealed carry permits.
Posted by: An Observation sez Trump is my President at September 02, 2025 05:59 PM (Da7Vv)

Do all 50 states have a concealed carry permit?

Posted by: AlaBAMA at September 02, 2025 06:03 PM (YObWY)

147 /crud, off sock.

Posted by: blake - semi lurker in marginal standing (tT6L1) at September 02, 2025 06:03 PM (tT6L1)

148 I want the Supremes to get mad, and mad enough to crush these lower court crackpots. They are doing enough harm now, just think what they have done on their day to day duties.

Posted by: Oldcat at September 02, 2025 06:03 PM (8avO+)

149 >> could only manage 30 pull-ups in 10 minutes.

Depending on your build/size, pullups can be a challenge.

Even when I was rock climbing on the regular, pullups were a whore for me.

Posted by: garrett at September 02, 2025 06:04 PM (a9WGd)

150 "The strike resulted in 11 terrorists killed in action.
Posted by: ShainS"

They died doing what they loved.

Posted by: eleven at September 02, 2025 06:04 PM (fV+MH)

151 SCOTUS by and large are lazy and will take the easy way out: whig has it right - they will defer to the Executive.

Posted by: NemoMeImpuneLacessit at September 02, 2025 06:04 PM (Wj1DV)

152 As of yesterday Texas now recognizes all 50 states concealed carry permits.
Posted by: An Observation sez Trump is my President at September 02, 2025 05:59 PM (Da7Vv)

Do all 50 states have a concealed carry permit?

Posted by: AlaBAMA at September 02, 2025 06:03 PM (YObWY)

Probably for government people if nobody else.

Posted by: Oldcat at September 02, 2025 06:04 PM (8avO+)

153
Arizona Free Enterprise Club
@azfec

Collusion Exposed 🚨

During the 2022 election, Katie Hobbs wasn’t just hiding from debates and reporters, she was being protected by Arizona PBS and ASU leadership. Newly released emails show ASU President Michael Crow and PBS leaders actively worked to tilt the scales in Hobbs’ favor, breaking long-standing rules and abusing taxpayer-funded resources.

This is blatant election interference by institutions that are supposed to remain neutral. That’s why the Arizona Free Enterprise Club has filed a Hatch Act complaint against ASU and is calling for a full investigation into this outrageous misuse of power.

Arizonans deserve fair elections, free from collusion, corruption, and taxpayer-funded bias. It’s time for accountability.

https://is.gd/yPPQlv

Posted by: ShainS -- Muslim Commie Momscrawny 2028: Free Weights for Every Cuck! at September 02, 2025 06:05 PM (U/Czr)

154 I will tell you now, there is not currently and probably never will be desire on Scotus to overturn the NFA nor the 1968 GCA.

The NFA is clearly unconstitutional; 1. you can't tax a right. 2. The 2nd amendment follows and modifies the main body's taxing power not the other way around. However the US Gov Knows the NFA is unconstitutional. When a law is found unconstitutional it is as if it never existed, and the government would be liable financially for every arrest and imprisonment under the NFA, the same way DC was liable for every arrest and false imprisonment under the law it lost in Heller. That cost DC 100's of millions of dollars in damages. The gov would owe billions in damages as soon as the NFA becomes unconstitutional. That is why it will never be found unconstitutional.

Posted by: An Observation sez Trump is my President at September 02, 2025 06:05 PM (Da7Vv)

155 could only manage 30 pull-ups in 10 minutes.

Depending on your build/size, pullups can be a challenge.

Even when I was rock climbing on the regular, pullups were a whore for me.
Posted by: garrett at September 02, 2025 06:04 PM (a9WGd)

bet they don't let you in that gym no more.

Posted by: Oldcat at September 02, 2025 06:05 PM (8avO+)

156
list of the "5" "languages" lisa fraud cook "speaks"

- English
- Jive
- Shuck
- Ghetto
- Bullshit

Same as jasmine crockett.

Posted by: Soothsayer at September 02, 2025 06:06 PM (7SWUk)

157 Meanwhile, two of Supreme Court Chief Justice John Robert's BFF's have been very busy attacking President Trump. Lawfare architect Norm Eisen is providing legal representation for mortgage fraud Maven Lisa Cook, and Judge James Boasberg just released a wannabe Trump assassin who traveled to Washington, D.C. for the express purpose of murdering the President.

Posted by: Sam Adams at September 02, 2025 06:06 PM (X+xvk)

158 I didn't know that DC courts were allowed to follow SC precedents. I thought only KBJ's dissents were binding.

Posted by: Eeyore at September 02, 2025 06:07 PM (s0JqF)

159 This is a political case, not a legal one.

Which way are the political winds blowing at SCOTUS? I don't know.

I want Congress to just act now. Codify it and send Trump a new enabling act. Take it off the table, and reduce the risk of a SCOTUS defeat to zero (beyond possibly having to pay back some of the collected tariffs for part of this year - that would suck, but wouldn't be an abject disaster on an ongoing basis).
Posted by: Joe Mannix

Not really. The problem for the plaintiffs is Congress already has the power to take back their delegation of power in tariffs by passing a legislative veto. They have remained silent. Challenging the law itself as unconstitutional is a dead end as it is patently so by history and usage by other presidents. That leaves application of the law which is the weakest of all challenges--essentially the plaintiffs want Scotus to overturn THIS president's policy actions under it as the law itself is constitutional.

As mentioned above, any time plaintiffs want the court to substitute its judgment for the political branches, it usually always declines to do so. There is also the problem with standing and mootness.

Posted by: whig at September 02, 2025 06:07 PM (WDjG6)

160 Mi tink mi gwarn tek mi own lyf...

Posted by: Judge Asshead Chutkan, Jamaican Savage at September 02, 2025 06:07 PM (R/m4+)

161 Do all 50 states have a concealed carry permit?

IANAL: probably, but nearly impossible for the average Joe to get in some jurisdictions!

Posted by: NemoMeImpuneLacessit at September 02, 2025 06:07 PM (Wj1DV)

162 Fucking Picard."

Nope. Wouldn't be prudent.

Posted by: Bill Riker at September 02, 2025 06:07 PM (tubbA)

163 They died doing what they loved.

Posted by: eleven at September 02, 2025 06:04 PM (fV+MH)

-------------

They were all just off to Harvard this month ...

Posted by: ShainS -- Muslim Commie Momscrawny 2028: Free Weights for Every Cuck! at September 02, 2025 06:08 PM (U/Czr)

164 My arthritic elbows don't like pull-ups. They're okay with chin-ups, though.

Posted by: blake - semi lurker in marginal standing (tT6L1) at September 02, 2025 06:08 PM (tT6L1)

165 Again, the Commissar Judges are doing what the Democrats/Marxists can't do to stop Trump

Posted by: Skip at September 02, 2025 06:08 PM (+qU29)

166 Essentially the lower courts and plaintiffs are arguing that the President is acting unreasonable--but that demands a very high std to get an injunction let alone win a case--proving arbitrary and capricious means that Trump can demonstrate no rational reason why he levied those tariffs--any rational reason provided then must be given deference by the courts (not hacks in black) requiring the plaintiffs to prove irrational application of the tariffs to them.
Posted by: whig at September 02, 2025 06:02 PM (WDjG6)

These people are 1000 percent for sanctions when they don't like somebody. They are fundamentally dishonest. Be funny if someone used this precedent to fund Israel.

Posted by: Oldcat at September 02, 2025 06:08 PM (8avO+)

167 Judge James Boasberg just released a wannabe Trump assassin who traveled to Washington, D.C. for the express purpose of murdering the President.

Posted by: Sam Adams

In that case, apparently DC grand jury refused to indict the woman last week. So woman is sent home with monitoring while the DoJ has to step up its investigations. No double jeopardy when a grand jury refuses to indict.

Posted by: whig at September 02, 2025 06:09 PM (WDjG6)

168 Same as jasmine crockett"

MeToo

Posted by: Babs Billingsley at September 02, 2025 06:10 PM (tubbA)

169 I hope some laws are put in place to prevent the massive abuse of government powers against its citizens in the future. Especially if we lose in 2028.

Posted by: AlaBAMA at September 02, 2025 06:10 PM (YObWY)

170 Not really. The problem for the plaintiffs is Congress already has the power to take back their delegation of power in tariffs by passing a legislative veto. They have remained silent. Challenging the law itself as unconstitutional is a dead end as it is patently so by history and usage by other presidents. That leaves application of the law which is the weakest of all challenges--essentially the plaintiffs want Scotus to overturn THIS president's policy actions under it as the law itself is constitutional.

As mentioned above, any time plaintiffs want the court to substitute its judgment for the political branches, it usually always declines to do so. There is also the problem with standing and mootness.
Posted by: whig at September 02, 2025 06:07 PM (WDjG6)
++++
They aren't claiming that the law is unconstitutional, as far as I know. They are arguing that Trump isn't complying with that law, and has overstepped his delegated authority.

There may well be no merit to that argument - I suspect there isn't - but that does *not* mean SCOTUS will rule on the merits.

Posted by: Joe Mannix (Not a cop!) at September 02, 2025 06:11 PM (zxP/x)

171 Watch Tren de Aragua go boom

If Fish & Wildlife ever gets IR and missiles, we're in trouble.

Posted by: DaveA at September 02, 2025 06:11 PM (FhXTo)

172 “Qualified” immunity makes sense.

However, most definitely not when they break the law. As it is now, the only thing a successful lawsuit accomplishes is to enrich attorneys and impoverish the taxpayer. The rogue cop shop doesn’t see any penalty, the municipality has to float another bond issue (throw it on the pile with the rest) and raise property taxes.

There has to be full support of duly sworn law enforcement, and the public should be held to high standards as well. Cops have little incentive to be nothing but “tourists in blue” and.take a nap behind the shuttered K-mart till their shift is over. The “leaders” will throw them under the bus so quickly if something goes sideways. Morale, recruiting and retention suffers as a result.

Posted by: Common Tater at September 02, 2025 06:13 PM (ZSozY)

173 These people are 1000 percent for sanctions when they don't like somebody. They are fundamentally dishonest. Be funny if someone used this precedent to fund Israel.
Posted by: Oldcat at September 02, 2025 06:08 PM (8avO+)

Yeah, funny how seizing Russian Civilians Boats and Planes was AOK, even though we are not at war with them...

And somehow NAMING individuals to be 'sanctioned' is somehow NOT a Bill of Attainder...

But Trump can't do what just about every President has, and set Tariff policy.

Posted by: Romeo13 at September 02, 2025 06:13 PM (mP0Kj)

174 Blake -

What’s a chin-up vs. a pull-up?

Posted by: NemoMeImpuneLacessit at September 02, 2025 06:13 PM (Wj1DV)

175 NOOD

Posted by: IrishEi at September 02, 2025 06:13 PM (3ImbR)

176 The NFA is clearly unconstitutional; 1. you can't tax a right. 2. The 2nd amendment follows and modifies the main body's taxing power not the other way around. However the US Gov Knows the NFA is unconstitutional. When a law is found unconstitutional it is as if it never existed, and the government would be liable financially for every arrest and imprisonment under the NFA, the same way DC was liable for every arrest and false imprisonment under the law it lost in Heller. That cost DC 100's of millions of dollars in damages. The gov would owe billions in damages as soon as the NFA becomes unconstitutional. That is why it will never be found unconstitutional.
Posted by: An Observation
========
No, it does not work that way. Basically the Scotus can and does refuse to apply their rulings retroactively including any liability for past actions. This also includes leaving people in prison for in serious criminal cases if their case was decided before Scotus change the law (common enough in search and seizure)

The reason that the NFA is likely to survive rest with Scotus judges and other elites being a bit sensitive to letting people like Troon boy getting machine guns right now.

Posted by: whig at September 02, 2025 06:14 PM (WDjG6)

177 Jasmine Crockett likes to pretend she is a hood rat, but she actually attended a Ritzy prep school in St Louis that charges $30,000 / year to go there. That school has an average SAT score of 1350.

Posted by: An Observation sez Trump is my President at September 02, 2025 06:15 PM (Da7Vv)

178 There may well be no merit to that argument - I suspect there isn't - but that does *not* mean SCOTUS will rule on the merits.
Posted by: Joe Mannix

Joe, the decision on merits (not a facial one on constitutionality--but as applied) becomes whether Trump acted arbitrarily and capricious. As I explained above, that is a very high bar to overturn by plaintiffs and the fact that lower court Obama and Biden judges thought otherwise is not really a valid marker for what Scotus will do. Look up political question doctrine sometime.

Posted by: whig at September 02, 2025 06:16 PM (WDjG6)

179 Do all 50 states have a concealed carry permit?
———

At one time, recently, if you asked “what Firearms laws does the state of Vermont have?” the answer was “there aren’t any”. I haven’t checked but I’m sure the AWFLs and usual suspects have enacted a bunch of stupid legislation by now.

Posted by: Common Tater at September 02, 2025 06:17 PM (ZSozY)

180 netanyahus head of cyber diddling is going to be in court tomorrow, over zoom, that is unless hes whackd by mossad before hes there.

Posted by: n at September 02, 2025 06:19 PM (h/Xe2)

181 No, it does not work that way. Basically the Scotus can and does refuse to apply their rulings retroactively including any liability for past actions. This also includes leaving people in prison for in serious criminal cases if their case was decided before Scotus change the law (common enough in search and seizure)

As usual you are full of shit. The Heller loss cost DC $450,000,000 in damages. NY is also liable for its false arrests under the Sullivan law it lost in Bruen. What part of "It is as though it never existed" do you not understand? An unconstitutional law grants no power and it never did.

Posted by: An Observation sez Trump is my President at September 02, 2025 06:22 PM (Da7Vv)

182 Poaching:

The Federal Reserve was created to care for and protect the fortunes of the wealthiest Americans and their bankers.

The gauges used to determine rates are pegged to aggregate data that is skewed by the fortunes of the wealthy. ...

,,,the 'Establishment' is squirming like no other period in memory. They control all the levers of influence & continue to lose.

They will never stop trying to put things back in place which means wealth accumulation is skewed in favor of the wealthy.
Barriers disguised as good deeds keep the masses corralled in a pool of self-doubt, content with keeping up with the Jones' via high credit card bills and living paycheck to paycheck.

To break the system individuals must establish their own priorities.
Buying crap you don't need shouldn't be on that list.
_proprietary

Posted by: Braenyard - some Absent Friends are more equal than others _ at September 02, 2025 06:25 PM (TxhP3)

183 Blake -

What’s a chin-up vs. a pull-up?
Posted by: NemoMeImpuneLacessit at September 02, 2025 06:13 PM (Wj1DV)
------------

Palms toward versus facing away. Toward? Chin-up.

Posted by: blake - semi lurker in marginal standing (tT6L1) at September 02, 2025 06:26 PM (tT6L1)

184 : An Observation sez Trump
--------------------------

And you are a dog that eats its on vomit. - continually -

Posted by: Braenyard - some Absent Friends are more equal than others _ at September 02, 2025 06:27 PM (TxhP3)

185 I don't think Kirk's two handed chop would be that effective.
Posted by: Boss Moss at September 02, 2025 05:46 PM

Sssssssss.

Posted by: The Slow Newsday Gorn at September 02, 2025 06:32 PM (jc0TO)

186 >>>The reason that the NFA is likely to survive rest with Scotus judges and other elites being a bit sensitive to letting people like Troon boy getting machine guns right now.
Posted by: whig
-------------

Something must be done about crazy people on the streets.
'Involuntary confinement' is a legal term but putting them in a controlled environment is not cruel.

Posted by: Braenyard - some Absent Friends are more equal than others _ at September 02, 2025 06:33 PM (TxhP3)

187 Something must be done about crazy people on the streets.
And our liberal culture is at fault by giving crazy concepts and ideas credence.
Teachers and others in positions of cultural perpetuation (lawyers, judges, preachers) must be credible models of stable citizenship otherwise eliminate or not allowed to participate in those professions of influence.

Posted by: Braenyard - some Absent Friends are more equal than others _ at September 02, 2025 06:38 PM (TxhP3)

188 By the way, for those who might be interested, Physicists are quietly admitting that energy is NOT a conserved quantity, something that I discovered by accident in the 1980's. I guess that is more of my own vomit that I eat.

Posted by: An Observation sez Trump is my President at September 02, 2025 06:42 PM (Da7Vv)

189 "They've explained it ten times now, and they're angry that they even have to explain it, because this is well-settled law going back more than a hundred years."

I wrote almost the extract same thing here a few weeks ago, word for word.

Posted by: El Mariachi - Attorney at Law at September 02, 2025 06:52 PM (D1vbu)

Processing 0.03, elapsed 0.036 seconds.
15 queries taking 0.0099 seconds, 198 records returned.
Page size 122 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.