disguy_ovahea @ disguy_ovahea @lemmy.world

Posts

54

Comments

4,943

Joined

1 yr. ago

To El Salvador? Zero, according to this final appeal attempt. They’re still deporting people to other nations.

Had people not abandoned Democrats at the polls in November, Congress could’ve already stopped this. Their action is much faster than the judiciary.

Be my guest. I’m non-violent, and our system has yet to fail. That doesn’t mean it can’t, but I’m not accepting defeat until then.

He said that, and now his administration is facing a contempt of court hearing on the 23rd. The presiding judge preemptively stated that he will appoint an attorney to enforce his order if the DoJ refuses to do so.

Trump bluffs. He’s a bullshitter. Harvard called him on it and now he’s saying the letter was sent in error. He can’t talk his way out of this.

Fair enough. You are technically correct. That’s not a roadblock, it’s just an additional step.

You don’t understand the urgency behind active checks and balances to maintain a government’s function and a criminal prosecution case of a former president.

This can’t be swept under the rug or pushed out on a calendar like the former.

The Justices are siding with the Constitution of the United States, and upholding a previous ruling by a federal court.

Aren’t you supposed to be the party of law and order? Kinda turning into more of a lynch mob these days, wouldn’t you say?

Then the parties involved will be charged with contempt of court. Courts are slow. There are many steps to this process. If you want this done quickly, convince the loyalist Republicans in Congress to vote against his executive order. Defeatism is actionless criticism.

It’s in that same article. A judge may deputize someone to enforce a court order. That’s assuming the DoJ refuses, then the judge issues a writ that is ignored.

Rule 4.1 specifies how certain types of “process” — the legal term for orders that command someone to appear in court — are to be served on the party to which they are directed. The rule begins in section (a) by instructing that, as a general matter, process “must be served by a United States marshal or deputy marshal or by a person specially appointed for that purpose.”

He admitted in 2019 to having been in a gang as a 16-year-old that would result in persecution if he were returned to El Salvador, hence the judge’s ruling on blocked deportation. He testified that he came here to leave that life behind.

This is literally the opposite of what they just ruled. They supported the injunction 7-2. The district court would be charging them with contempt, not SCOTUS.

And it’s the only Tesla designed by Elon Musk. The fraud bought his way to fame.

That’s not all they inflated.

https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/tesla-speeds-up-odometers-avoid-warranty-repairs-us-lawsuit-claims-2025-04-17/

I read it at 5am. My mistake. Edited for accuracy. Thanks for the correction.

I read it at 5am. My mistake. Edited for accuracy. Thanks for the correction.

I read it at 5am. My mistake. Edited for accuracy. Thanks for the correction.

That’s not correct. Courts can appoint attorneys for enforcement, or issue a writ directly to law enforcement. In more extreme cases, they can deputize a citizen for enforcement. Boasberg has already preemptively stated that he would do so if the DoJ refuses to enforce a court order.

https://www.democracydocket.com/opinion/if-the-marshals-go-rogue-courts-have-other-ways-to-enforce-their-orders/

They got SCOTUS working at 1am on a Saturday. This is reassuring news.

It’s a legal disclaimer so they don’t get sued by Nintendo.

It says, “Nintendo is a registered trademark of Nintendo of America.”

Only one man in those pictures is a convicted felon, and it’s not the one in prison.

Great. Thank you for again proving that baseless criticism is all you can provide a conversation.