The background here is interesting. Late last night, U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan called for an unusual hearing on a federal holiday to hear the arguments of 14 states who are seeking a temporary restraining order (TRO) against Elon Musk and the Dept of Govt Efficiency (DOGE).
It’s interesting because Judge Chutkan called for the hearing today just 45 minutes after Trump’s U.S Solicitor General asked the Supreme Court to intervene on the matter of judicial TRO’s issued against President Trump’s Title II authority. Last night in another case, Acting Solicitor General Sarah Harris filed an “APPLICATION TO VACATE THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA AND REQUEST FOR AN IMMEDIATE ADMINISTRATIVE STAY” with the Supreme Court. [pdf HERE] 45 minutes later Chutkan called for today’s TRO hearing.
District Judge Chutkan refused to issue the TRO today, saying she would take up the matter later.
(Via Politico) – […] the judge said granting the temporary restraining order sought as part of a lawsuit brought by Democratic attorneys general required much clearer evidence that DOGE’s actions were causing grave, permanent damage. Instead, she said, states had relied primarily on news reports that speculated about the risks of Musk and DOGE’s actions, some of which she said could potentially be remedied in further litigation.
“I’m not seeing it so far. … It’s sort of like a prophylactic TRO and that’s not allowed,” Chutkan said, adding that she hoped to issue a ruling within 24 hours. “The courts can’t act based on media reports. We can’t do that.”
[…] Chutkan’s skepticism of their position follows another judge’s rejection of a restraining order on DOGE’s efforts to access databases within a handful of federal departments. Chutkan repeatedly cited the decision by U.S. District Judge John Bates as she noted her skepticism. (more)
Over the weekend, the Trump administration, in the application to the Supreme Court, outlined the series of Lawfare tactics the president has faced, telling the high court that lower court rulings “irreparably harm the Presidency by curtailing the President’s ability to manage the Executive Branch in the earliest days of his Administration.”
“The district court’s order exemplifies a broader, weeks-long trend in which plaintiffs challenging President Trump’s initiatives have persuaded district courts to issue TROs that intrude upon a host of the President’s Article II powers,” wrote Solicitor General Sarah Harris.
Judge John Bates support for President Trump, ruling discussion on CTH HERE.
Judge Gregory Katsas support for President Trump, ruling discussion on CTH HERE.
She’s hedging, because she knows, at least suspects, SCOTUS is going to shut Lawfare down.
Agreed 100%
And the obvious…she wants to keep her job
If any of the most obvious leftist lawfare Judges want to pretend to have any objective credibility at all they have to throw PDT’s administration a bone now and then
The realization that they unwittingly bought hook, line and sinker the lawfare scam before, making illegal rulings, never in a lifetime thought Trump would be back in office.
It was on thing to be empowered, in the safe security of Brain dead Joe and intellectually challenged Garland to run cover for them. But with thousands of terrorists gone from DOJ, and Kash Patel ready to start claiming heads to add to his tool belt, how about you take your POS filings somewhere else. I’m trying to avoid sanctions, disbarment and indictments myself. This court is closed for business to all this lawfare junk. Fool me once.
They were told he would either be in jail or not live to the next election.
Ain’t gonna happen ; she’s toast .
Beach friends, aka Sheldon Snook, are quite active on their grapevine these days
No worries. The Tsunami is coming.
If the SC does not shut this treasonous activity down, all bets are off. We can’t go on like this. We MUST have an honest government. If not, WAR.
We are already at war. We’ve been fighting a Cold Civil War since before Trump 45 arrived in Washington. That Cold Civil War has gone hot a few times (Floyd Riots for example), but it has generally proceeded beneath the threshold of violence. This is a good thing.
And hopefully things will stay cold as we pull down the post-liberal autocratic order and replace it with a renewed order based on a revived constitutional system, a reduced administrative state, a revitalized national culture, and a realist foreign policy based on rock solid national interest.
The chief danger of a Hot War is not posed by us, but by a diminished opponent who is now beginning to understand that Trump 47 has his strategic act together and that he will not be deterred from his chosen course.
Some within this opposition are already openly calling for direct violence to defeat our movement before we work our way through the institutions that our opponent has long dominated. If the Cold Civil War goes Hot, it will be the other side that strikes the first match. Out of frustration. Out of desperation. And out of time.
Well said, they are dangerous because they are afraid.
Sometimes violence is a reaction to fear. Because control is no longer possible.
Excellent commentary.
SCOTUS and especially Roberts knows if they do not shut this nonsense lawfare down then THEY will become the next target of the nationwide tsunami of MAGA outrage and DOGE scrutiny.
Roberts is a coward. He will protect himself and his own little world above all else. He is not going to risk bringing the righteous anger of tens of millions of American down on his own head.
Roberts is vain. He cannot bear being mocked and exposed. That will happen if Musk comes after him.
Roberts has always feared the retaliation by the Left. Now with PDJT back in office with a massive landslide win, Roberts also has to fear retaliation by the MAGA base. Roberts might try to thread the needle between the two. But he has to see MAGA has the upper hand today.
With or without Mary McCord.
As usual they have blatantly overreached, and the law of consequences begins.
We can give her 2 brownie points for being able to think her way out of a paper bag.
well, it was wet. So, there’s that!
Or possibly stopped-clock syndrome…
She doesn’t want DOGE looking into her HUGE FINANCIAL GAINS in the last 4 years.
They most likely WILL. DOGE her Elon.
I hope so!
DOGE Style!!!
DOGE has six ways from Sunday to get back at you. /s
especially after Judge Jack McConnell was found out to have received over 100 million for his NGO
and now there will be no help from the Obama/Biden camps nor funds to cover up, protect
these rogue judges because Elon and Doge has taken an ax to their typical funding arms
…or how many Jamaican NGO’S that Chutkan started?
It’s too late.
It’s coming.
DOGE already has the goods on Judge Chutkan and those 17 State AGs.
And given that, every District Court Judge going along with the atrocious Lawfare attempts to slow down the MAGA tsunami is lifting up a poster that says “Impeach Me! Impeach Me!”
As those 17 state AG’s! Talk about insurrection!
Absolutely. With 25 years of experience as a lawyer there are many things (mostly bad) that I could say about the legal system. Some fact. Some opinion. But two things I know with absolute certainty about judges. One; they hate to lose elections. Two; they hate to be overruled.
She be reading the tea leaves.
I know what they say about lawyers, but I love you Eric. 😉
What’s the difference between a dead skunk and a dead lawyer laying on the road?? There’s skid marks in front of the skunk.
hahahaha
It was so cold, I saw a lawyer with his hands in his own pockets.
AS AN EX-BANKER.
Other than SEX,
Or
being in the room when your children are born.
NOTHING is more satisfying than repossessing a Lawyers Car.
Wonder what Ratcliffe and the DOGE boys have found in the judge’s bank records and in her text/email conversations with Jack Smith and BiteMe’s WH, in direct violation of Federal laws? Maybe she has decided that she is not, in fact, interested in taking the fall for the swamp creatures who have been directing her steps…It’s all fun and games, isn’t it Tanya, until the indictments start dropping!
Tanya never thought President Trump would win the election! 😉
🎯
Hope you’re right, however, I never count a bird in the bush to be mine.
By the way Sundance will doge ever look into the judges?
I am sure it was fully intentional, when Elon said “Buerocrat Millionaires” and it was that simple little sentence that struck terror in the black hearts of many in DC.
Its a shot across the bow, a threat without making a threat,..and any who can’t explain their wealth are vulnerable…and KNOW it.
IMHO – Judges’ personal finances would require the DOJ to investigate based on probable cause, unless the IRS found a red flag on a judge’s tax returns (which I doubt would occur).
From your lips to God’s ear…. It’s past time, but a win is still a win
She realizes in her peer group she is likely to be a laughing stock, as the various lawfare efforts increase the chances an emergency petition might be granted.
It sure appears Thomas, Gorsuch, and Alito are primed to chop this one Federal judge enjoining 50 states business down in scope. Would Robert’s join? Us v Trump indicates he well might. Then only Barrett is an X factor, and she seems to have a less activist more traditional mind set Regarding the envisioned roles of the three branches. My guess is an opinion could be crafted that she would go along with.
Chutkan gets left on a sawed off limb if she issues a TRO, especially after Bates got religion.
Just a an educated guess admitedly.
If there is a majority in favor of Trump, Robert’s would likely join in. The most senior justice writes the opinion or assigns it. Robert has the most seniority as CJ.
If Robert’s isn’t in the majority, Thomas would have seniority. Roberts might join in just to stop a too conservative opinion by Thomas.
Who would have thought that Papa Bush put the one in place, chomping at the bit to destroy much of what Bush helped to create .
Barrett is uniparty through and through and thus supports the lawfare. The only consistent theme in her rulings is that government can do whatever it wants to its citizens.
Kavanaugh would certainly join the three solid conservatives on this one. Overreach is one of his pet issues.
Plus she’s already got a track record of hinky looking decisions against President Trump from previous lawfare cases, so she no doubt wants to cover her 6.
That has never seemed to stop them before. What else could happen to her that could give her the pause we see here?
All of these activists getting impeached. Some are being sought now. Add them all to the list and wash them out forever
Maybe impeached, but not removed from the bench. Takes a 2/3 senate vote to convict and remove, and there will be no democrat who will come close to voting to impeach any of these activist, ideological “judges.”
as stated below impeachment is a waste of time. Speaker Johnson does not need to spend time on this impeachment kabuki theater. House needs to pass a budget, it’s been 2005 since the last budget.
DOGE revelations.
the money is drying up
Agree.
I just posted this on another thread:
Dealing with Trump, who is not only the President, but also certainly one of the most powerful men on the planet- that is heavily supported incidentally, AND then Elon, an actual genius that happens to be the richest man on earth, it appears that these realities are having an impact on how a few Judges are reading the tea leaves..
And how perceptive and wise of them- we’re shocked!
They are not quite as bad as the broken clock, but they are close.
DJT is an actual genius long before Elon.
And what do you do when the shields are lowered?
I came here to say almost exactly that.
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/71/475/
There’s SCOTUS precedent going back to 1866. It’s actually all BS. If all of these instances of court interference weren’t ex-parte I’m pretty sure the SCOTUS precedent would have come up. And if they denied or ignored SCOTUS precedential rulings, I have no idea what sort of “punishment” would result. Judges being punished doesn’t happen that often… certainly not often enough. But I remind myself if it was easy, the left would absolutely destroy the center and right leaning judges relentlessly so it’s probably better this way… still. These are bad people.
Glad this has come to pass sooner and not later
… and probably realizing she’s heading for losing her job…
Exactly, The hangman’s noose is tightening. Up until now in the dimension of criminal government (Congress), they only bloviate with the phrase “wasteful govt spending”as if they’re truly shocked. And as usual they’ll try to hand it off to there pals in the black robes. Only thing is this time it’s looking like real bonifide high crimes and treason. More than enough to go around. CYA or C ya this is soooo juicy Sundance, thank you.
Psalm 37:3-5
Smile.
Yea! Oh happy day!
I concur..
And the left’s lawfare arm KNOWS the potential downside of these TRO cases is a SCOTUS ruling that truncates the power of federal district judges….
The problem is it slows the momentum of the Trump Train. All these TRO’s will take time to resolve and there is no guarantee the Robert’s SC will intervene at all much less decide in our favor.
I suspect she has read the thousands of comments telling Trump to deport her.
Wow! Most upvotes ever!
I’m not so sure she’s hedging her bet, I think it more likely she’s checking it. I think she wants to stand down for the moment and avoid being directly included in an adverse ruling by the Supremes, hoping that the Supremes will hold true to their usual course and issue a narrow ruling against Dellinger in the case now before them.
A narrow ruling by the court will leave open alternate avenues of attack against Trump’s presidency. America’s enemies will evaluate these remaining avenues, adjust the nuances of their attacks, and the Lawfare against Donald Trump and his presidency will continue unabated.
I have to disagree that “she knows, at least suspects, SCOTUS is going to shut Lawfare down.” Quite the contrary, I think she knows that shutting down Lawfare is the last thing that this spineless court will do. To reach this conclusion she needs only to examine the court’s recent history in this regard. From the pdf of the Dellinger case that you so kindly provided, “In the last five years, this Court has twice held that restrictions on the President’s authority to remove principal officers who serve as the sole heads of executive agencies violate Article II” (emphasis added). Yet here again, for the third time, we find ourselves.
The ink on the upcoming SCOTUS ruling will have not yet dried before Chutkan and her fellow travelers resume their attack.
Perhaps, but she is looking to have hearing for an injunction, which will last longer, until appealed.
Chutkan is definitely listening to the jungle drums on this issue.
According to this, DOGE is all legal.
https://x.com/KanekoaTheGreat/status/1890091158107570262
thank you for that link
If what Obama did was illegal, it wouldn’t bother the left to destroy it as soon as it serves another master. They are without conscience and without shame. The leftists in the EU imported murders and rapists. When of of the leftist’s daughter was raped and murdered, it didn’t seem to faze them at all. This mental disorder approaches being irredeemable.
As I understand it, the USDS was created by . . . wait for it . . . XO. If that is true, then Congress has, um, no standing in dismantling it. 🤞🙏
True, but the reality is that Obama’s Congress fully funded it…to do nothing but transfer money elsewhere.
PTrump inherited a fully-funded department, rebranded it, gave it a new direction, and told them to spend the money they already have allocated to them by Congress.
All Congress critters can do…is defund it.
Do you think they will defund it? In any event, responding to Daniel, what Obama did is not illegal, is it?
Putting the USDS together was one of the few things Obama did that was completely legal and above-board. He created the department, and persuaded Congress fully fund it.
And yes, Congress has the power to defund any part of the budget they desire. Whether they have the will to do it, is a very debatable point.
Delicious. 🤤 brilliant. So zippy created the back door that drumpfT is using.
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1887038847629877714.html
praise be to DOGE!
full Tom Renz @RenzTom thread reader. 😉
please share liberally.
I just took an informal inventory of our “arsenal”: Holy Water, Silver Crosses, Garlic, and . . . SUNLIGHT! It seems like we’ve totally got this.
CYA mode.
She is just trying to make it seem like she is fair. She is also afraid the Suoreme Court will make her look bad.
in my best Forest Gump voice, “Corrupt is as corrupt does.”
They already have once and she refused to listen to them. She knows she’s now walking in a minefield and the next step may be her last.
She’s trying to preserve future litigation. The problem the Govt Party has created with Lawfaring this is they could create a situation in which they cannot litigate later on. They risk SCOTUS foreclosing on all of their efforts as “cry wolf” events.
Plus, they risk the GOP Congress getting swept up in MAGA and simply legislating many of these courts out of existence. Plus, SCOTUS could write an opinion that calls these “rulings” what they are – Lawfare – opening the door for the GOP to remove these judges.
EVERYONE in DC remembers just how brilliantly Trump remade the courts in his first term. And he had the full help of Repubs in Congress.
> She’s trying to preserve future litigation.
My reaction as well.
Highly recommend Treepers go here:
Joe Rogan #2272 — MIKE BENZ
Yes, Benz did a great job and Rogan was smart to just shut up and listen.
How is this guy still alive?
In addition to dropping the hammer on TROs that disrespect executive authority under Article II, district court judges continue to push the envelope with nationwide restraining orders just like they did with Trump 45.
The Supremes probably dislike that because it encroaches on their supremacy within the judicial branch.
Chutkin doesn’t want to be the next Jack Smith. The backfire effect from his emergency appeal continues to echo. But do other lower court judges care? No. No they do not.
Trump has an excellent record at SCOTUS. These lawsuits are t really going to stop anything, but they will succeed at discrediting the courts, Democrat lawyers, Lawfare in general, and there’s a good chance that at least a few of them wind up in the wrong side of a criminal prosecution.
When does judicial intervention cross over to coup? Military tribunal for treason?
I think the only way you prove that is if they’re dumb enough to get caught allowing themselves to be “judge shopped” – emails, texts, etc. showing the judge colluding with Democrats to bring these cases forward. IIRC one of them is super sketchy in terms of the timeline and the judge reviewing hundreds of pages of filings and citations…yet being able to issue a TRO in just a few hours. That’s almost certainly collusion and ought to be investigated.
Team Trump only really needs to catch one judge doing this. But they need to catch the judge red handed which is hard to do.
…”SCOTUS could write an opinion that calls these “rulings” what they are – Lawfare – opening the door for the GOP to remove these judges.”
This.
Yeah, THAT would be sweet!
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/71/475/
Here is a key sentence in their ruling in that case:
“But we are unable to perceive that this circumstance takes the case out of the general principles which forbid judicial interference with the exercise of Executive discretion.”
Also this one:
“But we are fully satisfied that this court has no jurisdiction of a bill to enjoin the President in the performance of his official duties; and that no such bill ought to be received by us.”
That should hold up in all of these lawfare cases.
Don’t be fooled, the GOP Congress still hates PDJT, and DOGE, and US, and wants us dead.
They are just “going along to get along” is all.
This, and there is a growing level of fear too..
There are many measures that say this, real estate values collapsing in DC..
The google searches for attorneys, Swiss Bank Accounts etc..
I mean REAL and serious things are happening now that are showing them that the usual Swamp dynamic is over and we’re after them.
In terms of going along to get along;
Privately show them the evidence. Tell them if they vote to end the corruption and then don’t seek re-election, they’ll be allowed to retire and slink away.
Does it suck that they’d “get away with it”? Yes.
But we’re looking for optimal solutions not perfect ones and quickly removing the cancer without bogging down into a potential ‘civil war’ between the branches is much better for the American people.
The sooner the corruption is cleared, the sooner the economy rebounds and the sooner the American people can stop living paycheck to paycheck and falling into debt.
If we can just get the anchor of government off the economy then much of what was lost can be rebuilt. The cost of letting the GOPe keep their 10s and 100s of millions as they retire (I don’t think the approach works without at least that requirement on the terms) when compared to the boom economy that cleaning out the fraud and abuse will result is probably worth it.
It’s also not like God won’t be judging them eventually.
Maybe there exists a scenario where we can expose all their crimes and get the needed reforms through at the same time. If there is, I’m for it.
But if I have to choose one or the other, I choose rapid relief for the beleaguered American people over quick punishment for the guilty.
Agreed. Since Gopee refuses to impeach, a military tribunal should step in to shut down the treasonous bad actors.
I’m not fooled. I’m one of the few around here who predicted Trump’s nominees would ultimately get approved and am just Kash Patel away from going 3 for 3. It has nothing to do with whether the GOP can be trusted.
It has everything to do with understanding that the GOP has no choice. If they actively fight Trump in this environment, they’re toast. Even Grassley holding up one nomination likely has a short shelf life. He risks losing status over that issue and blowing whatever goodwill he has with MAGA (who will quickly notice that Grassley writes a lot of letters, but otherwise does nothing impactful).
The GOP cannot survive unless the uniparty status quo is preserved. Most people already suspect they play for the other team, but they’ve always been careful not to completely come out and go fully Democrat…UNTIL…Mitch McConnell waddled over and shook the hands of Democrats after he almost tanked Hegseth’s nomination. If his goal was to poke a hole in the USS Status Quo…he succeeded…and that’s one of the main reasons Tulsi and RFK got confirmed.
If you take that, and combine it with the fact that Trump pretty much got his way on judicial appointments in his first term, I can be optimistic that the GOP will support Trump efforts to reform the judiciary. And if that means removing judges and restructuring the judiciary to eliminate rogue Lawfare courts, I think they’ll do it. The judges at risk the most are the ones who might have financial ties to USAID or other Democrat party kickback operations.
The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals – where the birthright citizenship case will be argued – was widely reported as “flipped” in 2020 thanks to Trump and the GOP Senate. That doesn’t mean he will win there, but that appeals court is hardly the slam dunk for Democrat judge-shoppers that it was 20 years ago.
Anyway, I get your point, but I think the core of this non-TRO is that she knows that it could blow back very hard on her and others. And the GOP has few options to resist Trump publicly. Even their 2018 trick of throwing the House of Representatives election will be spotted and countered quickly.
If the supreme court does anything, it will be to say the lower courts should decide. Never saw a bunch who punts all of President Trump’s problem down to the same judges who made them.
Except…in this case the court has previously ruled that these nationwide TROs are not appropriate and has threatened the lower courts with intervention if those TROs continue. The massive scale of the TROs also shows that they are the byproduct of a coordinated effort, and are not organic cases being raised due to people be “harmed” in some way. Sure, they could reject Trump’s appeal. But the courts risk Trump deciding to exercise his Article II power to enforce the laws by launching a criminal investigation into the use of Lawfare to obstruct an ongoing criminal investigation – which is what the data uncovered by DOGE will ultimately lead to.
Chutkan even gives Team Trump some excellent language to use if SCOTUS agrees to hear the appeal.
Radical Judge eyeing the cheese and circling the mouse trap.
What some here have been pushing for: an emergency SCOTUS petition.
The corrupt district judges are now running for the exits.
The hammer of a 6-3 court is coming and she knows it. Some of these TRO’s face a 9-0 result they’re so pathetic
(eg the one ordering Treasury Dept appointed officials to destroy the data)
“The courts can’t act based on media reports. We can’t do that.”
You have to have Expert Levels of inability to have any self awareness to write that after running the 1/6 scam trials…
Citing that she can’t make a ruling based on television reports…wait, what?!
POTUS and his team have all their ducks in all their respective rows with every XO signed. Everyone of them cites law and constitution where needed.
But the LawFare construct doesn’t need no stinkin’ facts!
Those 14 Blue State AGs knew that even before they filed their petition for an immediate TRO. But Lawfare is about all they have left in their Bag of Big Tricks. And the Lawfare Trick doesn’t work as well as it used to.
Funny. Even the crooks don’t want to get splattered when their own shit hits the fan.
MAGA
The 2020 presidential election was fraudulently rigged and the ramifications of this travesty of democracy will have a long-lasting effect
Thinking ahead beyond the front line-level installed activist judges. Nobody and I mean nobody wants to touch on this inconvenient truth. A prime example of pretending not to notice.
That’s fake. That is a quote from Lisa Page.
Its called a MEME
Who installed Ketanji Brown Jackson?
Hint: It wasn’t Dementia Joe.
Who was the 46th pResident of the United States?
Hint: It wasn’t Demential Joe.
lemme know when you figure it out.
Memes shouldn’t need explaining… And I will confess I did not “get it” either.
Im glad you can see it now. I will try to make my meme’s more easy to contemplate in the future.
Now that you understand, do you have any remarks on the fake supreme court justice installed by Obama or are you more concerned about meme etiquette?
‘A prime example of pretending not to notice’
Sorry. I was not being rude I just wanted you to know that there may be others who did not get it. I regards the usurpers, there are times when I really do not have any words left.
Ever since this latest wave of lawfare started I have said several times that this is going to blow up royally. I am not sure we can get rid of the fake justice though – not with the repugnicans currently in the Senate…
Nope
Obama installed them both, fyi…
Tanya Chutkan: Appointed by Barack Obama
Ketanji Brown Jackson : Appointed by Barack Obama
We didn’t have a POTUS. That’s a reality the public needs to understand. What we had were unelected people impersonating and forging the president’s authority.
Mad Max Waters
The lower court judges are wiring the federal judiciary’s credibility with dynamite.
I’m hopeful that a majority of the Supremes have seen enough of this crap and will impose overdue restrictions on the inferior courts and quickly so.
This is what she’s afraid of:
https://hotair.com/ed-morrissey/2025/02/17/here-we-go-lawfare-and-disorder-tro-comes-to-scotus-n3799902
SCOTUS finally got an appeal of a district court’s TRO preventing Trump from firing someone. Person in this case is the Head of the Office of Special Counsel. Amy Berman Jackson is the judge. DC Circuit wouldn’t suspend TRO.
What’s unique about this one is that the office is a purely executive branch agency. Not a question of whether Congress specifically appropriated money for this.
Acting Solicitor General also suggested the Court address all the other TROs barring Trump from taking action in the Executive Branch. I doubt it will do it ( it’s called sua sponte – sort of spontaneously deciding, “Hey, we’ll look at this issue, too, even though it wasn’t raised in the appeal. It’s related, and we might as well decide it now.”).
Question is: Can the President fire someone in the Executive Branch?
In 2020, SCOTUS said that President Trump could fire the head of the CFPB, despite the enabling statute saying he could only be fired for “malfeasance, inefficiency or neglect of duty.” Seila Law LLC v. CFPB.
Even if the Court limits itself to this firing and this TRO, there could be some good general language that the Trump administration could use in the other TRO cases.
Thank you.
What I find amazing is how collectively stupid these people are. What were they doing during the more than two months that separated the election from the inauguration to prepare for this onslaught? If lawfare is all they’ve got, then they are going to be in a world of hurt because it isn’t going to fly.
Ah, but I keep forgetting. It is arrogance as much as stupidity that is in play here.
I don’t think they anticipated the speed of things in this first month. I think they expected that the President wouldn’t want to tackle multiple simultaneous cases and that they cold draw all of this out the entire four years.
I believe that they had already drafted much of these lawsuits during that 2 month+ period, having fully anticipated what was coming from President Trump.
Just another rat jumping off the sinking lawfare ship. Swim, rat! Swim!
” Gimee three steps” by ( Tanya Chutkan ) Lynyrd Skynyrd
And the water fell on the floor.
This would permanently GUT federal district judge lawfare at the national level to overrride POTUS. WHY aren’t they doing this?
“Until very recently, federal judges were so reluctant to raise this Constitutional issue that they almost never issued such injunctions. They issued injunctions only for their own circuits and left it to the Supreme Court to resolve questions about nationwide application.
But nationwide injunctions in contentious cases have become more common recently, and it is likely that the Supreme Court will be forced to address whether inferior-court federal judges do in fact have nationwide authority.
I think it is quite unlikely that the Supreme Court will affirm this. [since oversight of NATIONAL issues is THEIR job – W]
I am not addressing here the question of whether I think Trump and DOGE’s authority to block Treasury payments should prevail. I am predicting that it almost certainly will prevail.” ~ Eric S Raymond
Warfare on Lawfare
Feb 10, 2025
https://www.kunstler.com/p/warfare-on-lawfare
Excerpt:
The DOJ under Pam Bondi can designate the US Solicitor General to petition the Supreme Court (SCOTUS) for certiorari — to expedite the resolution of this constitutional issue as to whether Mr. Trump, as chief executive, and his bona fide appointees, can carry out executive functions. The arguments against that appear to be weak.
It is the President’s duty to see that the laws are faithfully executed, meaning that the departments under him do their jobs correctly, which would give him inherent authority to audit and restructure agencies like USAID. Both judges Nichols and Engelmayer are arrogating executive and legislative functions on policy-making to themselves, triggering a separation-of-powers dispute that the SCOTUS must adjudicate promptly.
What matters most in these cases is that SCOTUS has an opportunity to put up new guardrails against the hijacking of the federal courts for the purpose of lawfare — that is, for political dirty-fighting under color-of-law. The law is slow-moving, arcane, and incomprehensible to most non-lawyer citizens and that is why the Party of Chaos has misused it so liberally.
I would still like to see the impeachment threats by Republican House members carried out … even if there is no impeachment vote in the House.
Collect the evidence for the impeachment and hand it over to the DoJ before the impeachment vote in the House with a referral … rationale …. because the evidence goes beyond that requiring just the “legislative” action of an impeachment to be redressed.
It will happen only if done in the House … Thune is still too much a thrall to McConnell.
On a more humorous note … so Judge Chutkan is once again “randomly” selected to hear another case vs President Trump.
People normally become very rich playing these kind of long shot lottery odds in Vegas or State Lotteries … then again maybe somebody is getting rich.
She’ll tell her bosses that she did her best to impede President Trump.
Judge Chutkan appears to control the spread of Lawfare: “It’s sort of like a prophylactic TRO and that’s not allowed.”
US Government poster from Battleship Texas exhibit: “She may look clean-but….”
Oh oh!!! That can’t be good for the resistance…..
Face it, Our President and his team have them so bumfuzzled they don’t know whether to run or squat and sh*t, and truthfully can’t lay a glove on him, as he and his team score body blows and head shots, that have them reeling….and he’s JUST GETTING STARTED!….It only being 3 weeks since he was sworn in,…tee hee.
…and ain’t it just great…
Perhaps the primary intent was to buy time for bad actors to clean/clear specific data they did not want sunlight to reach. If they have succeeded, no need to continue the TRO.
The primary intent of the TRO’s not to give time to delete evidence … sure it can be a reason but digital evidence of some sort will always be found … it is to eat up days and weeks of time to run out the clock on President Trump’s term before he can put in place a solid foundation that moves past 2028…also as with all lawfare efforts provide the ammo for twisted sound bites to play in the media.
Even this emergency appeal to the roulette wheel … called the Chief Justice Roberts’ Court is going to eat up time. How much time will give us an indication of where Roberts stands.
He can ask for a vote to determine if 4 of 9 justices agree there is even a case.
He can issue a temporary order …. and schedule a full hearing.
Even more telling … he splits the baby as his court does allot in these types of cases … President Trump can fire the Assistant General Counsel … but ALL the other cases have to exhaust all remedies.
The next move(s) by Roberts will tell the tale and give President Trump’s team information to use in their future plans.
The people filing this case to save the Assistant White House Counsel made two mistakes:
1st, as Sundnace stated, they appealed a case that directly involved the Presidents Powers as Chief executive over the hiring of personnel.
2nd, they filed in DC Circuit and along with the 1st error … they placed the Deep States, ACE Card, Chief Justice Roberts, in the direct line of fire.
Roberts is too cowardly to take a stand alone. He’ll refer it to the full court and hide in whatever majority develops.
I hope Elon is reading the info he asked for related to who is funding Eisen.
DOGE found 60 million more Social Security recipients than there are Americans.
Is there a problem, officer?
There’s even one person in the 360-369 year old age bracket.
So, benefits for vampires?
That is still relatively young by the biblical record set by Methuselah. He reportedly lived to be 969 years of age. All of your fellow high school graduates would, sadly, not be attending the class reunion.
Well to be factual, those numbers that DOGE came up with are for those who may be eligible, not actual recipients(currently collecting SS benefits)–nevertheless, the numbers are way out of line.
knows dam well scotus will shoot it down…..
And, the treasonous Chuck Grassley approves of Tanya Chutkans’ action by stalling Trump’s judges who would counter the law fare.
Thank you, Chuck, in revealing your true self, you anti-American as—ole!
She’s buying time while Lawfare tries to come up with some semi plausible legal rational. You can’t have judges in one state imposing their rulings on all states. You’ll have what we have now some tinpot judge in the pocket of the Ds dictating for the entire country or it could be the Rs in future. What about a judge in one state has their ruling contradicted in another state. Do both judges rulings although contradictory apply to all the other states. There has to some unified interpretation of law.
This is a delay tactic. Rather than allow SCOUS to decide the issue (relatively) sooner, keep the issue in the lower courts for as long as possible.
There is already another case now before the SCOTUS, so her delay won’t amount to anything once they take up and rule on that case.
After all the shenanigans with the case that was before her with
Trump she has to look like she is being is being fair….
The nerve of this sick f**k to jerk around the court system like this. Calling a hearing on Prez day, to say she won’t rule for another 24 hours.WTF?
After that, it’ll be another delay tactic.
Reckless TDS on full display.
Should cost her her job.
Which NGO’s is she getting paid from? Maybe she would prefer not to have the spotlight shown on her right about now
THIS is the news I’ve been waiting for. Quite possibly the end of Lawfare as we know it.
Innate cunning. She is reading the room.
The DOJ needs to indict the LawFare Judges for making
unconstitutional efforts to shut down President Trump’s
agenda. These LawFare Judges need to be indicted for
Insurrection and Treason.
So, . . . been buried today in my own legal briefing rush & only now taking a breather to regroup so I can explain this better: Below is basically play-by-play of the argument. Judge expressed great concern that there was nothing “imminent” necessitating TRO. Blue States 1/
2/ in my view utterly failed to show what was imminent that could not be fixed later, which is what a TRO is for. Cutting grants can be cured. Firing folks can be undone. Judge also seemed concerned that access to info wasn’t the issue–but the cuts & firings.
3/ Based on totality of hearing, I except Judge to deny TRO & hold for PI hearing. The other alternative is what I posed today @FDRLST which provides more insight into issue. On that one final note: Judge didn’t buy that Musk wasn’t given authority to terminate/cut.
4/4 But as gov’t pointed out, there’s a paper trail for cuts/firings and it isn’t Musk making decision. That will play out more at PI stage especially if Court gives discovery as States ask.
she screwed herself.when trump brought his case to court against jack smith being appointed special prosecutor trumps lawyers sited the appointments clause that he needed to be senate approved and confirmed and chutken ruled against trump.now these states are using the appointments clause saying musk wasn;t senate confirmed.so she has no choice but to rule in trumps favor or she will look like the idiot she is.
also musk and his team are working for a federally funded dept BUT they do NOT cut any funding OR fire anyone.those are left to the dept directors.they are just identifying fraud and waste.
Dear SCOTUS: I did not elect an inferior-court activist judge to be my President.
My President does not have to “ask their permission” to act as Article 2 specifies.
I’m guessing Judge Chutkan sees the handwriting on the wall. Her multiple former rulings against President Trump and her multiple prison sentences for J6 defendants are all for naught and such a string of consecutive defeats doesn’t look good on the resume of any judge.
Were she to issue a TRO today, giving credibility to the shaky allegations of the Dem attorneys general, only to have it promptly slapped down by SCOTUS would rub salt in the wounds she’s already inflicted on herself.
Safer for her to hold her cards close to her chest and see what SCOTUS rules.
The winds of change are coming and I suspect activist Judges like Chutkan, Bates and Katsas have all lungfuls of it.
They don’t want to be on the list of those culpable of impeding the President’s Article II powers!
It’s amazing how much I have read over the years combining Lawfare and Judge Chutkan. It almost seems that the left judge shops, but since that is illegal, they must all be coincidence
“…unusual hearing on a federal holiday…” I’ve heard of judges using similar or same tactics before, but in this case it didn’t work, i.e., they(judges, especially at the federal level, issue oddball dates, etc. expecting the defendant/litigant not to show, therefore being guilty by default); Chutkan/democrats are accustomed to having their way, but “their way” was denied by superior gamesmanship.
can you spell i…m…p..e..a..c..h..m..e..n..t
Well, I can spell i-n-d-i-c-t-m-e-n-t.
The good news is that President Trump has made the filing with SCOTUS. Good news too was the 2024 SCOTUS ruling about Executive Authority…
Let’s GO People!!
Let’s IMPEACH these Lawfare “Justices”.
🚨 #BREAKING: US District Judge Chutkan has REJECTED an effort to block Elon Musk and DOGE from accessing government systems, and facilitating mass firings across the government
Another MASSIVE win for the Trump administration!
Judge Chutkan says the Democrat states have FAILED to provide adequate evidence to block DOGE’s efforts, adding “I’m not seeing it so far.”
Keep in mind, Chutkan is a VERY anti-Trump judge, so the fact she can’t even see the legal path to block Musk & DOGE should be very telling.
When the walls
come tumblin down
Ole Chutkan doesn’t want to lose her job. She enjoys the power she has ruining people’s lives. She is well aware President Trump can throw her off the bench quicker than she can blink.
IMHO President DJT should fire her and send her back to her Hunter Biden political hack law firm. She is a horrendous “judge” just like Amy Jackson!! Get rid of them!!
That’s Amy Bolshevik Jackson!
3rd World Jamaican Judge Chutkun gets Presidential Immunity 100% WRONG along with three Bimbo Appeals Court Judges in Washington DC last summer.
All four Bimbo Judges got the Constitutional issue of Presidential Immunity 100% wrong and they are supposed to be the best legal minds in the country. Why are these women still employed as judges in federal court?
They should be judges in traffic court or county code enforcement! It gets even better because it’s the same two Appeals Court judges that just denied President Trump’s appeal of Amy Bolshevik Jackson’s decision on firing the head of the Office of Special Counsel!
Did they rule for trump or for fair application of the law?
Prophylactic and Chutkan, two words one never wants to hear in the same sentence.
The Judge bit the poisoned apple chewed up in her mouth and must now decide to swallow it or spit it out.
As usual, lawfare does not know how to control momentum. They always overreach too fast.
Having followed the Trump Lawfare case in front of Judge Chutkan, I find her decisions interesting. Under normal ‘lawfare’ circumstances, I assume she would have gone ahead with the TRO, however considering last night’s Supreme Court application, it appears Chutkan is proceeding (or actually, not proceeding) with extreme caution. I suspect that the ‘inferior’ court judges that have jumped on the TRO bandwagon, will not fare well publicly, after SCOTUS gets involved.