This is why we love you Erin, getting us the information right out of the gate, and of course we're winning this argument because Trump is doing the bidding of stupid people. Thank God for time being on our side. I stand firm as pro-trans, the administration might appeal this I guess, but at some point we'd have to say, we've had enough abuse, and we need a revolution, if it comes to that, to give dignity to transgender people.
This is fantastic this is what happens when you keep pushing back. It’s an important step forward and more schools, media, law firms, universities, colleges, organizations, and everyone else must continue to stand up to trump the bully. I’m not a lawyer what I do not understand is why all judges decisions are always preliminary have they not heard the arguments ?
They haven't heard them formally - these aren't verdicts on the cases themselves, but injunctions to prevent Trump et al from implementing their threats until the full hearing. That might seem like a tenuous and temporary victory, but often the language used in issuing the injunction gives strong indications about how that judge is likely to rule at the end of the hearing proper.
That's getting beyond my depth; I'm neither USian nor a lawyer. But I *think* how it works is that while the temporary injunction can be appealed, that doesn't constitute an appeal of the case itself.
It's the difference between Trump and his minions being able to implement their bullshit immediately, and them having to wait and/or jump through more legal hoops before they can implement it (if they can even then). Worst case, it's a temporary reprieve - but the case proper could come up before the appeal works its way through the system (in which case the appeal is, I believe, dropped, being no longer relevant), so if the verdict is 'nope, you can't do that,' it'd mean that implementation can't happen at all, even for a short period.
Of course, the verdict on the case itself can also be appealed. But, would you argue, 'what good is a verdict in our favor in lower courts, if Trump et all can appeal it all the way up to the Supremes until he gets the result he wants?'
Exactly. A preliminary injunction is the court saying to the parties "The plaintiff has presented a sufficient argument that it can't be dismissed outright, so until we can have a formal hearing, we're going to freeze things in place" - in this case such a freeze meaning "no cutoff of funding."
Oh, and just FYI although there's really no reason you should care, the technical term for "dropped as no longer relevant" is "declared moot," meaning there is no longer a dispute to resolve.
Thank You to Oregon Judge Aiken and to the 16 states that held firm against the illegal attack on schools teaching the simple truth and refusing to deny the existence of very real and important students among them. At a certain age in human development, we believe that objects, and indeed, people, go away when we close our eyes. We grow out of this belief, if we develop normally. Any order denying the existence of yourself, or people around you speaks to the lack of normal development of the one who made the law. Yes, Virginia, Trans-people exist.
This is great, but Trump is normalizing the idea that he is beyond the reach of federal courts. We have to put a stop to this. No Kings was a good start, but we need to take it further than just an occasional rally.
Um, no. Filing an appeal does not entitle you to ignore existing orders. They are valid and supposed to be obeyed until they are suspended, overturned, or vacated.
Unless you're referring to a particular case (remembering that the topic here is "has he ignored a court order"), I'm nor sure what you mean. Enjoining enforcement pending appeal would be done either by the court issuing an injunction (to give time to appeal) or by the court to which the appeal went. Filing an appeal does not automatically suspend enforcement.
In any event, that's not relevant in this case because as far as I can discover, Judge Aiken has not yet issued her preliminary injunction so there is nothing for anyone to appeal.
A federal judge ordered him to ground any planes carrying migrants and turn around planned that were already in the air. He did not, and that's how hundreds of people ended up in El Salvador.
Just a few sources. Notably, I think, most of the defiance relates to immigration issues, as the Orange Overlord and his coterie of Tonton Macoute wannabes strives to make remigration national policy.
The people engineering, funding, and carrying out the propaganda campaign and enacting the laws and policies against transgender people must face 42 U.S.C. § 1983, 18 U.S.C. § 241, & 18 U.S.C. § 242 prosecution.
If we can see that done, they may well not be back as a political force, ever.
This is why we love you Erin, getting us the information right out of the gate, and of course we're winning this argument because Trump is doing the bidding of stupid people. Thank God for time being on our side. I stand firm as pro-trans, the administration might appeal this I guess, but at some point we'd have to say, we've had enough abuse, and we need a revolution, if it comes to that, to give dignity to transgender people.
This is fantastic this is what happens when you keep pushing back. It’s an important step forward and more schools, media, law firms, universities, colleges, organizations, and everyone else must continue to stand up to trump the bully. I’m not a lawyer what I do not understand is why all judges decisions are always preliminary have they not heard the arguments ?
They haven't heard them formally - these aren't verdicts on the cases themselves, but injunctions to prevent Trump et al from implementing their threats until the full hearing. That might seem like a tenuous and temporary victory, but often the language used in issuing the injunction gives strong indications about how that judge is likely to rule at the end of the hearing proper.
Thanks , but doesn’t that allow for appeal before they hear the case
That's getting beyond my depth; I'm neither USian nor a lawyer. But I *think* how it works is that while the temporary injunction can be appealed, that doesn't constitute an appeal of the case itself.
But if the appeal is taken up and the ruling is overturned then what good is the preliminary injunction?
It's the difference between Trump and his minions being able to implement their bullshit immediately, and them having to wait and/or jump through more legal hoops before they can implement it (if they can even then). Worst case, it's a temporary reprieve - but the case proper could come up before the appeal works its way through the system (in which case the appeal is, I believe, dropped, being no longer relevant), so if the verdict is 'nope, you can't do that,' it'd mean that implementation can't happen at all, even for a short period.
Of course, the verdict on the case itself can also be appealed. But, would you argue, 'what good is a verdict in our favor in lower courts, if Trump et all can appeal it all the way up to the Supremes until he gets the result he wants?'
Exactly. A preliminary injunction is the court saying to the parties "The plaintiff has presented a sufficient argument that it can't be dismissed outright, so until we can have a formal hearing, we're going to freeze things in place" - in this case such a freeze meaning "no cutoff of funding."
Oh, and just FYI although there's really no reason you should care, the technical term for "dropped as no longer relevant" is "declared moot," meaning there is no longer a dispute to resolve.
Thank You to Oregon Judge Aiken and to the 16 states that held firm against the illegal attack on schools teaching the simple truth and refusing to deny the existence of very real and important students among them. At a certain age in human development, we believe that objects, and indeed, people, go away when we close our eyes. We grow out of this belief, if we develop normally. Any order denying the existence of yourself, or people around you speaks to the lack of normal development of the one who made the law. Yes, Virginia, Trans-people exist.
This is great, but Trump is normalizing the idea that he is beyond the reach of federal courts. We have to put a stop to this. No Kings was a good start, but we need to take it further than just an occasional rally.
"This is great, but Trump is normalizing the idea that he is beyond the reach of federal courts."
He hasn't directly ignored a court order yet . . .
Sure he has
No, he's appealed to the SCOTUS. Legally a big difference.
Um, no. Filing an appeal does not entitle you to ignore existing orders. They are valid and supposed to be obeyed until they are suspended, overturned, or vacated.
I had thought I had read enforcement was enjoined pending the disposition of the appeal.
Unless you're referring to a particular case (remembering that the topic here is "has he ignored a court order"), I'm nor sure what you mean. Enjoining enforcement pending appeal would be done either by the court issuing an injunction (to give time to appeal) or by the court to which the appeal went. Filing an appeal does not automatically suspend enforcement.
In any event, that's not relevant in this case because as far as I can discover, Judge Aiken has not yet issued her preliminary injunction so there is nothing for anyone to appeal.
A federal judge ordered him to ground any planes carrying migrants and turn around planned that were already in the air. He did not, and that's how hundreds of people ended up in El Salvador.
But didn't SCOTUS say that was an unenforceable order?
No, and they did not rule on anything before the planes took off.
Just a few sources. Notably, I think, most of the defiance relates to immigration issues, as the Orange Overlord and his coterie of Tonton Macoute wannabes strives to make remigration national policy.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-federal-court-ruling-ignore-b2792939.html
https://www.rawstory.com/trump-fema-judge-ignores/
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2025/05/donald-trump-ignores-defies-supreme-court/
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5256539-trump-administration-challenging-judiciary/
And more good news, which I hope escalates!
The people engineering, funding, and carrying out the propaganda campaign and enacting the laws and policies against transgender people must face 42 U.S.C. § 1983, 18 U.S.C. § 241, & 18 U.S.C. § 242 prosecution.
If we can see that done, they may well not be back as a political force, ever.
Work!!
Yay! But will he pay attention?
I was hoping Vermont would be on this list, but sadly it is not.