this post was submitted on 10 Feb 2025
664 points (99.6% liked)

politics

19976 readers
3759 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 in Rhode Island ordered the Trump administration to unfreeze federal funding, accusing it of violating a previous court ruling.

The lawsuit, filed by 22 states and D.C., argues the freeze is unconstitutional and causing harm. Trump, JD Vance, and Elon Musk have suggested defying court orders.

The administration appealed the ruling, while legal experts warn officials like the Treasury Secretary could face contempt charges if they ignore it.

The case tests executive power limits and judicial authority.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Hahahaha,

Remember when SCOTUS gave ambiguous power of a king to the president?

Looks like there is gonna be more power struggle than previously implied.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 2 days ago (2 children)
[–] pyre 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

no no, asking nicely will surely work.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I'm sure he will learn his lesson this time.

[–] Homescool 1 points 1 day ago

Who has the authority to do that?

[–] atempuser23 23 points 2 days ago

Way too far down the list but you need to arrest the actual civil servants implementing this. Trump is immune but the people actually violating the law aren’t.

Trump can pardon them but that comes with an admission of guilt and the inability to hold their jobs.

[–] mvirts 14 points 2 days ago

Contempt, that's literally what it is

[–] Nightwingdragon 99 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Ok, the last time he violated a judge's orders, the charges were much more serious and he was facing potential jail time, both from the criminal trial he was a part of and the gag order imposed on him.

He all-but told the judge to go fuck himself on a daily basis right outside the courtroom, violated the gag order ten fucking times, and received exactly no punishment. And that was when he was a criminal defendant.

He's now President of the United States, has all three branches of government in his back pocket, and was basically anointed as a king by the Supreme Court, who declared he's all but immune from prosecution.

And this judge thinks he's going to obey his orders this time? He told you guys to fuck off on the daily when he was a civilian, and y'all did exactly nothing about it. Now he's POTUS. The fuck is he planning on doing about it now when he violates his orders again? Send out more orders? Trump could literally tell this guy to go fuck himself and his orders with a chainsaw live on television and there's fuck-all he can do about it.

[–] Serinus 17 points 2 days ago (2 children)

So you want the judge to give him a pass?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

I want the judge to put in writing actual consequences that will be followed through on when Trump refuses to comply.

[–] stevegiblets 17 points 2 days ago (1 children)

the hottest take i think I have ever seen. well done.

[–] Serinus 39 points 2 days ago (1 children)

"and this judge thinks"

You can't just bitch any time someone tries to do something. Does this judge think he's going to single handedly rein in this fascist administration? No, probably not. Should he try anyway? Absolutely.

We don't need more Robert Muellers.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 139 points 3 days ago (4 children)

I’m sure he’ll listen this time judge.

[–] [email protected] 62 points 3 days ago (5 children)

I'm actually really hoping he doesn't. It's better we get this over with sooner than later. Piss the courts and the legislature off before he has gathered enough of a foothold

[–] dustyb0tt0mz 4 points 2 days ago

i'm actually with you on this one. i'm tired of the dread. let's get this fucking shit show over with. i need to know if humanity prevails or not. if not, that's fine. we were an inferior species that deserves whatever we get. it's just a shame what ecological destruction our downfall is going to wreak. the plants and animals didn't deserve it.

i just can't go on knowing that what we're living in right now will continue. if it does, we are truly in hell and i must have done something very wrong a long time ago.

[–] AngryRobot 11 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Speed run the end of democracy! LFG!

[–] [email protected] 23 points 2 days ago (3 children)

The democracy part was already over when he ignored Congress, this is just accelerating the time period from no longer being a republic to the deciding moments of what will become.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 19 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (3 children)

It is literally in their playbook, ignore court orders. Dark Gothic MAGA is terrifying

[–] errer 15 points 3 days ago (1 children)

This video is prophetic and I highly encourage everyone to watch it. It sounds like a conspiracy theory except we see virtually all of it happening in front of our own eyes right now.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 107 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (6 children)

Curious if there will be a "straw that broke the camels back" moment with america and this president or is everything he ever does just going to be taken by the public. Im sure the french would have a guillotine out by now

[–] Soup 91 points 3 days ago (4 children)

I just wanna know where all the “I need guns to fight back against tyranny” people are. They’re reeeeal quiet.

[–] [email protected] 41 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Responsible gun owners don’t crow about their weapons.

[–] Soup 38 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Sure, but there are PLENTY of irresponsible ones screaming that nonsense every time a school shooting happens. It’s not like they’re rare specimens.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Guess who the irresponsible ones voted for.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 16 points 2 days ago

They won't do shit, to them that's not tyranny because their team won.

[–] ComicalMayhem 19 points 3 days ago

a not insignificant portion of those people support the current administration. tyranny to them is Dems in control of government.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 33 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (2 children)

Fascism is not exactly sustainable. If not the people or the military, he is bound to piss off someone close to him enough to betray him eventually.

The issue is how many lives will be lost in the process.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 3 days ago (3 children)

I'm very curious to what will be the "moment"

[–] [email protected] 16 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Yeah. This is definitely what I would call "the cool zone".

In the moments between bouts of existential dread, I am at the edge of my seat!

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 days ago

This is the camel not the straw.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 25 points 2 days ago

Or what? This clown gonna convict the other clown of a felony?

[–] [email protected] 26 points 2 days ago (2 children)

"mom tells infant to 'cut it out' more at 6"

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 days ago

More like "Mother tells adult son to stop robbing the homeless person"

[–] werefreeatlast 5 points 2 days ago

Trump is only 1cm...according to Stormy. When is that?

[–] ChonkyOwlbear 70 points 3 days ago (3 children)

It will be really interesting for the supreme court to decide if a president can be held in contempt of court.

[–] disguy_ovahea 58 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

It doesn’t even need to go that far. The next step after failure to comply with a court order would be dispatching the US Marshalls. They report to the DoJ, so I’d say that’s pretty unlikely.

Scholars and pundits are saying that act of inhibiting their own accountability will be the official end of the US government as it was designed, and the official beginning of an authoritarian regime.

[–] BrianTheeBiscuiteer 14 points 3 days ago (1 children)

That "official acts" rule is gonna do a lot of heavy lifting.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 39 points 3 days ago

So the circus continues. Another day, another contempt-of-decency performance from the executive branch’s greatest hits. McConnell’s ruling isn’t just a legal smackdown—it’s a neon sign flashing “constitutional arson in progress.”

Funny how “irreparable harm” gets shrugged off like a minor paperwork error. The admin’s playbook? Gaslight, obstruct, project until the courts buckle under sheer audacity. Democracy’s not just teetering—it’s doing backflips off a cliff while they bet on which branch breaks first.

[–] dustyb0tt0mz 6 points 2 days ago

where is the fucking non paywall link to this bullshit?

[–] [email protected] 39 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (6 children)

I think the judge is mistaken. This is an official act. That means it’s not constrained by things like rulings. In fact, law just isn’t applicable. They really should put more effort into staying up-to-date. /s

[–] toiletobserver 14 points 3 days ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 16 points 3 days ago (4 children)

One would hope that’s not necessary!

[–] [email protected] 19 points 3 days ago

And yet here we are

[–] [email protected] 14 points 3 days ago (1 children)

The internet has taught me that there is no such thing as sarcasm that everyone can detect.

[–] Opisek 1 points 1 day ago

People on the autism spectrum tend to have a hard time understanding sarcasm. I see tone indicators as an accessibility aid and I love to see people using them.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Sanctus 21 points 3 days ago

Ya'll have primed him to ignore your shit because nothing serious has ever happened to him from the courts. You fucking baffoons. Lay in your bed.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Or else....??

Another strongly worded letter?

[–] AdamEatsAss 18 points 3 days ago (3 children)

I guess in a perfect world, impeachment and removal from office. If that fails then military coup? I don't see either of those things happening.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›