this post was submitted on 10 Feb 2025
261 points (99.2% liked)

politics

19954 readers
4700 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 39 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (3 children)

That's a great question! Normally the Executive branch enforces such actions but that's only a convenience. The judge in question can sanction the Trump administration in any number of other ways... Such as ordering courts to freeze (or seize!) their assets.

It would be an interesting situation if the judge froze or seized cabinet members or Trump's personal assets though. It's much more likely the Judicial branch would sort of seize (financial) control over these broken agencies by appointing special administrators. They would be well within their rights to do so!

Congress doesn't like it? They need to pick a winner by impeaching one of them. Except there's a big problem with impeaching a judge for such a ruling: The next judge that comes along might continue with the previous setup or rule exactly the same way.

Then what would Congress do? They could just keep impeaching judges but it's unlikely they would be able to actually do that since they don't have a supermajority in the Senate.

My prediction: That's when the Trump administration actually starts to get the military involved and tries to sack the Senate or just attempts to assassinate a few prominent Democrats.

Except he doesn't have the broad support from the people to actually be able to get away with something like that. It would be civil war. Or more like endless insurgency.

That sort of situation would result in all his billionaire friends losing nearly all of their wealth and drastically increases the likelihood of angry mob/guillotine situations.

Then again, I wouldn't put it past them to not really think that far ahead 🤷

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 days ago

The good news is that if this shit gets appealed to the fascists on the Supreme Court we know there is non a small chance that they will rule in favor of making Trump king.

[–] BrianTheeBiscuiteer 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

How do we sue Congressmen for not doing their fucking jobs?

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 days ago

Every two years we get to pick new ones

[–] HasturInYellow 3 points 2 days ago

The end result you described could be set off by LITERALLY anything happening right now. It's a matchbox sitting in a bed of hot coals. It'll be a miracle if it doesn't go off at this point.