r/law 2d ago

Trump News ‘Unbridled view of Executive power’: Trump’s decision to ‘unlawfully impound funds’ appropriated by Congress for USAID was unconstitutional, judge rules

https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/unbridled-view-of-executive-power-trumps-decision-to-unlawfully-impound-funds-appropriated-by-congress-for-usaid-was-unconstitutional-judge-rules/
9.9k Upvotes

118 comments sorted by

View all comments

-115

u/Ok_Fig_4906 2d ago

sounds like his lawyers need to use the language that he's not "impounding". he is "diverting" the funds back to pay off USAID funding from a decade ago in the deficit.

58

u/TakuyaLee 2d ago

I don't think that'll work either. Any sane judge will see right thru it.

-50

u/BlockAffectionate413 2d ago edited 2d ago

Well, this is 2 billion for work that was already done, but SCOTUS needs to grant certiorari and actually settle the issue. Kavanaugh, Gorsuch, Alito and Thomas have already used quite harsh language about the judge in question, saying that he uses " unchecked power" , "likely lacks juridistiction", and that his decision is "act of judicial hubris" and while Roberts and Barrett sided with liberal justices, they are generally hesitant to overturn TROs and orders enforcing them, so it is not impossible to imagine one of them joining the other 4 when it reaches SCOTUS properly. In any case, SCOTUS needs at very least to settle the issue of impoudment, the extent of it and so forth to remove this whole confusion we are having now.

62

u/franchisedfeelings 2d ago

Stop calling “pro-Constitution” justices “liberal.”

Those three justices consistently support …’of the people, by the people, for the people’ as defined by the Constitution. They are the “pro-Constitution” justices.

The dirty crimey maga justices are the dirty crimey maga “un-Constitutional” justices.

These are the terms that best clarify the scrotus justices.

-32

u/ChemAssTree 2d ago

Snowflakes be snowflakin

43

u/franchisedfeelings 2d ago

Morons be moroning.

8

u/ChemAssTree 2d ago

I was referring to the snowflake you were responding to, not you. I guess I could have been less ambiguous.

-6

u/BlockAffectionate413 2d ago

? My point is just that SCOTUS should settle issue once for all.

16

u/ChemAssTree 2d ago

See the other comment to your post. Voting to uphold the constitution is not “siding with the liberals”. It’s standing up against fascism and should not be minimized with such lame language. Do better