Federal judges on the loose again

Smitty192 · 2025-07-07T18:38:52-0400

How the fuck is this even possible?

BREAKING: Obama Judge Blocks Trump's Big Beautiful Bill Provision Barring Funding For Planned Parenthood | The Gateway Pundit | by Cristina Laila

A federal judge on Monday temporarily blocked a provision in President Trump’s Big Beautiful Bill that barred Medicaid funding for Planned Parenthood.

www.thegatewaypundit.com

mi650 · 2025-07-07T18:48:31-0400

Throw a bunch of shit against the wall and hope some of it sticks.

Alphatreedog · 2025-07-07T18:50:45-0400

Y'all just gotta vote harder .

jbuck88 · 2025-07-07T19:12:16-0400

So passed the house, senate and president desk? Everyone said the same thing?

Mike278th · 2025-07-07T20:12:19-0400

Until Congress decides to defend and jealously guard the power granted to them, and NOT the judicial branch, this stuff will keep happening. They have the power to impeach

nso123 · 2025-07-07T20:16:04-0400

The only way I can see a judge getting involved is if they say the law is unconstitutional, then it would have to work its way to the Supreme Court if one side digs in.

Franko · 2025-07-08T00:22:39-0400

Federal judges play political games because nothing short of being impeached by the Senate can result in them losing their jobs; which is nearly impossible due to how our political system works. I think a lot of the bullshit we are dealing with could be dealt with by allowing the Supreme Court to discipline lower court judges.

flogxal · 2025-07-08T00:36:27-0400

What would that discipline be? Angry words on twitter/x?

SCOTUS isn't exactly snow white virginal these days, entire fed judiciary is unreliable compared to 25+ yrs ago.

It sucks -- but that is how things are right now. Things you may have learned in k-12 about the role of fed courts and SCOTUS, they are just about non-applicable these days. Same with Congress and same with the Exec branch. The whole circus is heavily compromised, but it is very hard to notice as much if your info sources are domestic. Domestic "news" and opinion sources these days are spending their time creating Team Red vs Team Blue boxing matches, and covering up how bad things are otherwise.

Franko · 2025-07-08T00:44:23-0400

flogxal said:
What would that discipline be? Angry words on twitter/x?

SCOTUS isn't exactly snow white virginal these days, entire fed judiciary is unreliable compared to 25+ yrs ago.

It sucks -- but that is how things are right now. Things you may have learned in k-12 about the role of fed courts and SCOTUS, they are just about non-applicable these days. Same with Congress and same with the Exec branch. The whole circus is heavily compromised, but it is very hard to notice as much if your info sources are domestic. Domestic "news" and opinion sources these days are spending their time creating Team Red vs Team Blue boxing matches, and covering up how bad things are otherwise.

Discipline requires the Supreme Court be able to remove any problem lower court judge. Anything less isn't going to work.

Right now the Judicial branch can't really regulate itself and the Legislative can't either because impeachment isn't politically feasible. That needs to change and in my mind allowing the Judicial branch to police itself is preferable to granting the Legislative more power over a rival branch of government.

flogxal · 2025-07-08T01:19:46-0400

How is a Congress motivated toward an impeachment process if the same forces/interests are running all three branches of govt?

What is the solution when the govt is captured by interests and people who represent numerically or per capita no more than 5-7% of the legal citizenry?

Talking about SCOTUS being able to remove lower judges, well I don't think that would play out as you imagine. Not as of 2025 and looking forward, that is.

It is annoying, frustrating, sad, difficult but things are very captured right now and vote smarter/vote harder is not any kind of solution, nor are things that might work if the system otherwise were healthy and functional.

I suggest going basic/granular and looking at your local city council or whatever. What do you know about each person? Their business background? Their family/community background? Their education? What they do for recreation? Do you know if they receive big lump donations from anyone? If so, who are those big donors and what do they expect for their $$?

D̷e̷v̷i̷l̷D̷o̷c̷A̷Z̷ · 2025-07-08T01:43:03-0400

Homos gonna homo, trannies gonna tranny.

Gunfighter14e2 · 2025-07-08T05:52:22-0400

Smitty192 said:
How the fuck is this even possible?

BREAKING: Obama Judge Blocks Trump's Big Beautiful Bill Provision Barring Funding For Planned Parenthood | The Gateway Pundit | by Cristina Laila

A federal judge on Monday temporarily blocked a provision in President Trump’s Big Beautiful Bill that barred Medicaid funding for Planned Parenthood.

www.thegatewaypundit.com

When you have a hand full of people trying to subvert the will of the people, the solution is very simple,... well as long as the both sides are not in on it, that is.

Basic user · 2025-07-08T07:40:33-0400

Smitty192 said:
How the fuck is this even possible?

BREAKING: Obama Judge Blocks Trump's Big Beautiful Bill Provision Barring Funding For Planned Parenthood | The Gateway Pundit | by Cristina Laila

A federal judge on Monday temporarily blocked a provision in President Trump’s Big Beautiful Bill that barred Medicaid funding for Planned Parenthood.

www.thegatewaypundit.com

Well today, anything's possible. Though, it's just a judge. I have yet to see any Governor or President arrested for not listening to a court's ruling.

NoDopes · 2025-07-08T08:53:22-0400

Didn't the SC just rule judges can't issue nation wide injunctions?

NoDopes · 2025-07-08T08:55:53-0400

Mike278th said:
Until Congress decides to defend and jealously guard the power granted to them, and NOT the judicial branch, this stuff will keep happening.

Until the American citizens use the power protected from infringement for them this stuff will continue.

flogxal · 2025-07-08T10:56:00-0400

NoDopes said:
Didn't the SC just rule judges can't issue nation wide injunctions?

As a matter of process/procedure, a Federal District Court judge's rulings have effect within that District on State law matters, and on Federal law matters, the judge can rule on what he thinks the Federal law means across the country.

This means that on Federal law rulings by a Dist Ct judge, you can have different rulings/views/opinions. Both within a District, and then within the Circuit (of Appeals judges) the District sits in. You can have conflicting Federal law rulings among the Districts. And they can take years to resolve.

SCOTUS can certainly say that a Dist Ct judge's injunction (an equity power vested in Fed Dist Ct judges) has only the scope of that District. Functionally, a Dist Ct judge has no authority, power, process to oversee violations of the injunction in another District.

NoDopes · 2025-07-08T12:29:31-0400

So, where in the Constitution does it say the federal government is responsible for providing healthcare? Is this another bastardization of the general welfare statement?

D̷e̷v̷i̷l̷D̷o̷c̷A̷Z̷ · 2025-07-08T14:49:46-0400

NoDopes said:
Didn't the SC just rule judges can't issue nation wide injunctions?

The same people who were ignored when they said “text, history and tradition” would allow me to 2a all up and down this bitch full auto, suppressed w a 12.5” barrel?

Gunfighter14e2 · 2025-07-08T14:54:19-0400

NoDopes said:
So, where in the Constitution does it say the federal government is responsible for providing healthcare? Is this another bastardization of the general welfare statement?

Man don't just stop w/healthcare,... where does it say they have the right to legally steal from me, to provide anything to the lazy?

flogxal · 2025-07-08T15:09:36-0400

NoDopes said:
So, where in the Constitution does it say the federal government is responsible for providing healthcare? Is this another bastardization of the general welfare statement?

Law students spend an entire year on such questions in Constitutional Law, and some of them still can't understand things.

The Constitution is not a recipe book. It is not a list of things that must be in govt and does not talk about the sneaky ways people try to get the govt to behave or be operating unConstitutionally.

It's just a framework. If the nation were a house, the Constitution would be its foundation and if stick-built, its framed structure but nowhere near its finished structure.

Redmanss · 2025-07-08T15:31:37-0400

Gunfighter14e2 said:
Man don't just stop w/healthcare,... where does it say they have the right to legally steal from me, to provide anything to the lazy?

Sixteenth Amendment is where the politicians fully ratified the fleecing of their constituents’ wallets into the Constitution. Everything else like socialist security and mediscare are just “taxes” held constitutional through the 16th.

lash · 2025-07-08T15:45:12-0400

Boston.
“US District Judge Indira Talwani, an Obama appointee, issued a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) and set a preliminary injunction hearing for July 21.”

Elsewhere:
“U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani, in Boston, issued a ruling on April 14, 2025, temporarily halting the Biden administration's planned termination of the humanitarian parole program for Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans, and Venezuelans (CHNV). This decision prevents the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) from revoking the parole status of these individuals, impacting approximately 532,000 people,”

National Science Foundation (NSF) Indirect Costs:
She sided with universities in blocking the NSF's 15% cap on indirect costs.

She’s been really busy for her chosen political backers.

flogxal · 2025-07-08T17:54:14-0400

You can quickly see how the fed judiciary is aligned, or not, with how much deference this Boston MA based judge (District of Massachusetts) receives in other injunction applications or lawsuits around the country.

Technically speaking this injunction cannot extend beyond the judge's District. Normally, any other Districts in the country, they have to have a separate application for injunction, and they would probably cite this Mass judge's injunction as their persuasive evidence of need. But there is no obligation for another District Court's judge to follow this -- unless they are other judges in the District of Massachusetts. And even there, another Dist judge in MA might disagree and deny the injunction.

Federal judges on the loose again

Stand-up Philosopher

Undergrad Rifle Shooter

Tier Potato

Full Member

Private

High Speed Steel Stinger

Major Hide Member

Struggle Bus Driver

Major Hide Member

Struggle Bus Driver

Banned x2 🤪

Hunter/trapper of Remora's

Private

Two Star General

Two Star General

Struggle Bus Driver

Two Star General

Banned x2 🤪

Hunter/trapper of Remora's

Struggle Bus Driver

8541

Swamp Rat

Struggle Bus Driver

Similar threads