this post was submitted on 18 Mar 2025
715 points (99.6% liked)

politics

22015 readers
3872 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
 

Summary

A federal judge criticized a Trump administration Justice Department lawyer who claimed they didn't have to follow the judge's oral order blocking deportations to El Salvador because it wasn't in writing.

Judge Boasberg questioned why the administration ignored his directive to return immigrants to the US. The DOJ lawyer repeatedly refused to provide information about the deportations, citing "national security concerns."

Frustrated, Boasberg ordered sworn declarations explaining what happened, quipping that he would issue a written order "since apparently my verbal orders don't seem to carry much weight."

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 5 points 15 hours ago

US is fucked. Nobody in US cares anymore, because if they did they'd be out on the streets by the millions.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

Did he suffer any serious consequences, No, then why the fuck wouldn't he disregard it and will continue to do so in the future. Why are people in power in this country either evil and inept or simply inept against the evil ones

[–] [email protected] 1 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

Lay out the alternative for us.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (1 children)

Following through with the judicial processes laid out in the constitution

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Are they doing that thought?, I see news about the constitution being subverted everyday but I don't see any concrete actions being taken to punish those doing so, and stop it from happening, this country is headed towards a dictatorship and politics are writing strongly worded letters and holding protest placards up as if that does anything

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 hours ago

The next step up from ignoring federal judges goes one of two ways. US marshals arrest the president or it plays out like Hans litten.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 16 hours ago

A strongly worded email is the best they could do?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 16 hours ago

Chicken shit judge

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

'You felt you could disregard it?'

Narrator: He did.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago

Are we still pretending this matters anymore?

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Oh snap he GRILLED him!?!? Damn! Trump is going down!!! #RESIST

\s

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Correct me if I'm wrong but what could the judge even do to these DoJ staff? Throw them in jail for a few days? Trump would just pardon them, wouldn't he?

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Public/private reprimand is the first step I think. The judge could also probably suspend their license, or possibly influence their getting disbarred if the lawyer fucks up enough. Probably couldn't throw them in jail unless they were accused of a crime, but that would only be pardonable if it was a federal crime.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I’m sure they’ll cry “partisanship”, but put them in jail if relevant. I imagine at least some will be dissuaded by charges and prison even if they can count on a pardon. At least some will be kept out of politics after our four years of hell, even if they can count on a pardon. Even in the very worst case scenario where they get away with everything, legitimate charges will help cement the legacy as the most corrupt president ever.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 16 hours ago

I’m sure they’ll cry “partisanship

They already are.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Frustrated, Boasberg ordered sworn declarations explaining what happened, quipping that he would issue a written order "since apparently my verbal orders don't seem to carry much weight."

Written orders probably won't carry any weight either since he probably can't read even if he attempted to.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 day ago

I'm waiting for people to connect the dots around my town. People's rights begin with legislation and end with judicial decision. Being that the bill of rights is being overridden by the executive branch right now, judges have said so and the executive branch is saying they don't care, it is fairly obvious the bill of rights no longer matters. So pick any amendment you like from the bill or rights, free speech, free press... Right the bear arms. Yup, gone. The conservatives nullified the right to bear arms and is cheering for it. By the time they think they should speak out about it, well they'll maybe realize they already cheered for the loss of their freedom of speech. Oops

load more comments
view more: next ›