this post was submitted on 13 Mar 2025
156 points (100.0% liked)

politics

21724 readers
247 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 7 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world 15 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

This will be ignored for one or both of the following:

  • John Roberts has already signalled his support for the Unitary Executive Theory, which would basically give Trump the power to do exactly what he's doing. Trump will likely immediately appeal this to the Supreme Court, where they will either rule in favor of Trump via the UET, or will simply stall the case for months without issuing a ruling, leaving the affected workers in legal limbo. Those workers still have families to feed and can't wait months for a ruling that is unlikely to even go their way. Most of them will simply move on to other jobs in the interim, rendering the whole thing moot in practice as the end result will be the same: A whole bunch of federal workers losing their jobs.

  • Trump will simply ignore the ruling, probably demanding that the judge be impeached and launching a smear campaign against him as well. With no actual enforcement mechanism, the judge's only real response to Trump essentially telling him to go fuck himself is to issue another order "demanding" compliance, which has all the force of law of saying "pretty please". Trump will basically challenge the judge and essentially say "What are you going to do about it?" and that's the last we'll hear about it as the judge isn't going to openly admit that he has no way to force compliance or impose consequences for non-compliance, especially given SCOTUS' previous rulings on Presidential immunity.

Look at it this way. Think of how many other judges have already ordered Trump to reinstate workers. Now look at how many of those workers have actually been reinstated. Look at how many other workers he keeps illegally firing despite those orders. That should tell you all you need to know regarding where this is going to go.

[–] RainbowHedgehog@lemm.ee 11 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The UET is BS. If it was a thing, then Biden should have been able to cancel all student loans.

[–] MegaUltraChicken@lemmy.world 17 points 2 days ago (1 children)

"it has to be our executive" -SCOTUS

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

The "originalists" (pause for LOL) found the IOKIYAR clause in the Constitution, apparently. :)

[–] SteveCC@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago

Your crystal ball is likely correct but thankfully this judge is following proper law and procedure anyway.

[–] Pistcow@lemm.ee 6 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Nah -Trump, House of Representatives, Senate, Supreme Court Republicans

[–] Sibshops@lemm.ee 4 points 2 days ago

This will be quickly overruled by the supreme court.