News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
The next step is the DoJ sends the US Marshalls to arrest the President for failure to comply with a federal court order. Let’s hope they follow through.
Congress is not withholding the funds, so they are not committing a crime. That’s part of the reason for the accountability executive order, obscuring responsibility.
The DoJ is an executive agency, under the President, currently run by Pam Bondi and Emil Bove. Anyone in that organization who moves against the President is getting fired, whether or not that is legal.
Importantly, as of a few days ago any agency in the executive branch has to defer to the president and attorney general for interpretation of the laws, so if the president says the court order is illegal then the DoJ doesn't have to do anything.
And just like that, Trump fires the US Marshalls.
Interesting. I suppose it being an executive order does keep it to the executive branch. It's late over here and the brain hurts.
Too bad there isn't a law that requires the legislative brance to exercise powers of checks and balances. Maybe that's something to note for America 2.0.
The federal courts took the first step, ruling the action unconstitutional. We’ll see if the DoJ dispatches the US Marshalls with a warrant for failure to comply. If not, they will be complicit.
The courts can directly order the Marshalls to enforce their rulings. But yes,the Marshalls do roll up under the DOJ. So what happens when the courts give the order is anyone's guess.
Failure would result in a constitutional crisis.
Another one? Toss it on the pile.
There hasn’t been one yet. It’s defined as a situation in which a major political dispute cannot be clearly resolved on the basis of the particular government’s constitution or established practice. All steps must be taken until our system has been proven to fail.
You mean like when a person who organized an insurrection, and was found not eligible for office, still takes office?
I’m not saying he’s innocent, but he wasn’t convicted of having anything to do with it. That’s not a constitutional crisis, it’s a failure of our court system.
He literally is a convicted felon, who escaped jail only because he was running for POTUS.
Those are one and the same.
But not convicted of treason, which is the important part as far as eligibility for President
They literally are not
The DoJ is owned by Trump, so I don't think they'll be doing that.
You’re probably right, but our failing system is still intact. Once a constitutional crisis occurs, our system will be definitively proven to be a failure, and will require revision or replacement.
Is it intact?
Technically, yes. The unconstitutional actions taken by the executive branch have been challenged by the judiciary branch. If the executive branch does not comply, the next step is pressing charges. Failure to do so would be a constitutional crisis.
This is far from the first time that a president overstepped their authority. Trump was checked in his last term over the Muslim ban, for example. Even Lincoln suspended Habeas Corpus without authority.
This would be the first time in US history that the president is not held accountable for failing to comply with a federal court order.
They already have refused to abide by the orders... And then all we got was "Well, we'll check back later, and see if you complied yet".
He didn’t openly reject the order. He is appealing.
https://www.npr.org/2025/02/12/nx-s1-5293132/trump-vance-constitutional-crisis-court-rulings
So, USAID dollars are moving now? Last I checked, no, and the lawyer said "I don't have any answers to your questions"....
Again, I didn’t say anything is working. I said our constitutional government is still intact. Read the link above, or do your own research on constitutional crisis and what it entails. It not simply a failure to follow protocol. It would require us to redefine the foundation of our democracy.