this post was submitted on 03 Mar 2025
690 points (99.1% liked)

politics

20581 readers
3951 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

The Democratic National Committee and two other party committees have sued Trump over Executive Order 14215, which claims authority to seize control of the Federal Elections Commission.

The lawsuit argues this violates federal law and threatens free elections.

The order also claims power over other agencies including the SEC, FTC, and NLRB.

Democrats contend this executive overreach contradicts constitutional principles and a century of Supreme Court precedent upholding Congress's authority to insulate certain agencies from presidential control.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] stickly 1 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

So you concede that the courts can't do anything when push comes to shove. It's up to the guy in the tank, the rogue secret service agent, the personal chef with a grudge, etc...

There's a reason why the main push of the first few weeks were purges of executive officials and telling all federal employees to quit. Anyone left has passed the acid test of loyalty to Trump or is meek enough to "just follow orders".

Is it a foolproof plan for Trump? Time will tell where all loyalties lay, but their actions have shown where they think the true threat is.

[–] FlowVoid 1 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (1 children)

Courts can stop some (not all) of what he is doing now. Which I think is what they are doing.

I don't think Trump is going to turn the military loose against Americans, if that's what you imagine as "push comes to shove". That would be suicidal, for Trump. Especially because of his purges. The people in government who actually get things done had no loyalty to the president, and now they have no loyalty to their departmental leadership. Trump just made it far more likely that the people he needs will sit on their hands when he needs them most.

I mean, in one of the current Trump lawsuits the DoJ is literally pleading that their department is so understaffed and disrupted that they will all have to work overtime to meet a judge's demands. The judge basically laughed in their face and said if the DoJ can't get it together then they deserve to lose. Does that sound like a powerful DoJ that we should fear?

[–] stickly 1 points 6 hours ago

I don't doubt that it wouldn't end well, but the plan is to use the threat as far as he can take it. Do you want to be the judge to pull that trigger? Have you seen how many "stern warnings" and "last chances" he gets, how they struggle to issue a gag order? Any delay allows him to further solidify his power and insulate the executive from other branches.

An important note is that they don't care if the government doesn't get things done. If people sit on their hands, they get fired. As he nosedives the USA into economic depression it will be a harder and harder decision to give up your paycheck just to stick it to the orange guy. Being within the orbit of the dictator gives way more stability than any part of the country he tears down.