442
Judge blocks Trump from firing head of US agency that investigates corruption
(www.theguardian.com)
He's gonna try to get the judge fired next.
this post was submitted on 14 Feb 2025
442 points (99.8% liked)
News
35724 readers
3022 users here now
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.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
The domino effect, in the end America is left with no judges because they all got fired for supporting each other
Almost. The Trump appointees will remain.
Multiple judges who have blocked Trump actions are Trump appointees.
Those judges aren't on the Supreme Court (where this will eventually end up). Its the same as a Republican doing a performative protest vote against GOP legislation that goes through anyway. They get to save some face, but at the end of the day no harm no foul.
After the Supreme Court sides with Trump, shit will get real nasty.
I really hope blue states are making contingency plans.
It seems like no one in the US is taking this serioseriously... Canada is literally making war preparations.
Canada is not making war preparations.
I'm cautiously optimistic they they won't... Not because I have delusions about them growing some integrity suddenly, but because it means giving up all of their power. Their job would literally be to legally justify Trump's actions post hock if they give up their authority
They've spent years stacking the courts to legislate from the bench, they've pushed their own power to the limits. They're (mostly) not doing it for Trump, they're doing it for power and their backers. Plus there's still some neo liberals on the court who will put the process above all else
There's still the question of what happens if the executive branch just continues to ignore them, but i imagine their common backers want some kind of rudder on the Trump/Elon missile
People like judge Jackson are what the US need right now.
Seems like a lot of good judges have been stepping up, his EOs have been getting blocked left and right, save for a couple judges who's officially lost it and handed him a couple wins lol
Okay Dellinger, you better fucking do something about all this corruption then.
What exactly would you have him do?
I dunno but one would hope he'd take advantage of this decision as effectively as he can, given that his office fights corruption and is threatened by said corruption. It'd be nice for something to matter.
Execute Trump, Musk, Vance, and every other politician aligned with them for treason.
And how would he achieve that?
Big bullet
Just one? Are we talking Bullet Bill here?
Just like how Indiana Jones shot three Nazis with one bullet? They just have to stand in line
That's the kind of efficiency we need
Inefficiency, neglect of duty or malfeasance in office, sounds like someone else we all know.
The White House argues the law is unconstitutional, challenging limits on presidential power over independent agencies.
These people clearly don't understand what "independent" means.