Welcome Guest
Sign In | Register

RE: under this reasoning any federal circuit judge

Posted on: March 18, 2025 at 14:18:45 CT
sks MU
Posts:
654
Member For:
9.2 months
Level:
User
M.O.B. Votes:
0
You really don't get it, do you? Circuit courts have jurisdiction over certain things in certain areas. Someone has to have standing to bring something before a court, and the court has to have jurisdiction. It is pretty easy to get something throuwn out on either of those grounds, and Trump (and any other president) certainly has enough legal resources/expertise to do so. THey would also easily get a stay on that decision from a higher court in a manner of days if the circuit court didnt have jurisdiction or the plaintiff didnt have standing. MAGAs just whine because they don't think Trump should have to follow the rules. As you said, just idiotic.
Report Message

Please explain why this message is being reported.

REPLY

Handle:
Password:
Subject:

MESSAGE THREAD

Roberts is going to let the nonsense continue - Bosalphus KC - 3/18 11:48:24
     here's the actual order - for the lazy - FootballRefugee MU - 3/18 15:10:34
     yes, here's detail about the current precedent - FootballRefugee MU - 3/18 15:09:12
     Roberts should be impeached. He's the most feckless justice. - Logan STL - 3/18 14:40:33
     Israel should impeach him (nm) - Columbian Gold MU - 3/18 13:07:56
          seems like an odd solution - Bosalphus KC - 3/18 13:10:29
     Why do you hate America?(nm) - Danny Whizzbang USA - 3/18 12:20:46
     Trump just needs to state that the district court - NPDTiger MU - 3/18 12:10:56
          That would be a wonderful idea - meatiger MU - 3/18 12:13:00
               Does everyone have Article II, Section I authority? The - BH O'bonga MU - 3/18 14:47:50
               Easy solution - BigDave MU - 3/18 13:08:48
                    So why would this case ever go to this court? - meatiger MU - 3/18 13:20:22
                         on your part, yes - FootballRefugee MU - 3/18 13:21:52
                              so the Supreme Court should just take all cases first? - meatiger MU - 3/18 13:28:12
                                   First of all - BigDave MU - 3/18 13:35:25
                                        RE: First of all - meatiger MU - 3/18 13:39:07
                                             You're not reading what I'm saying - BigDave MU - 3/18 15:17:27
                                   RE: so the Supreme Court should just take all cases first? - FootballRefugee MU - 3/18 13:32:20
                    agreed, it isn't hard - FootballRefugee MU - 3/18 13:13:58
                    Bingo(nm) - NPDTiger MU - 3/18 13:12:01
               Ignore the TRO's, the case on the merits will - NPDTiger MU - 3/18 12:17:54
                    and meanwhile those animals remain in the country as a - tigertix MU - 3/18 12:20:36
                         If they broke laws - meatiger MU - 3/18 12:23:29
                              No it's not that simple - NPDTiger MU - 3/18 12:26:30
                                   It is if it violates a law that Congress passed. - Rabbit Test MU - 3/18 12:36:42
                                        it doesn't violate the law - FootballRefugee MU - 3/18 12:45:56
                                             Apparently it does - Rabbit Test MU - 3/18 12:49:07
                                                  lol another one(nm) - NPDTiger MU - 3/18 13:02:10
                                                  There's no other reason why a judge - Bosalphus KC - 3/18 12:50:11
                                                       judges are perfect and only act legally - FootballRefugee MU - 3/18 12:51:06
                                                  incorrect - FootballRefugee MU - 3/18 12:49:45
                                   RE: No it's not that simple - sks MU - 3/18 12:34:13
                                        under this reasoning any federal circuit judge - NPDTiger MU - 3/18 13:04:19
                                             RE: under this reasoning any federal circuit judge - sks MU - 3/18 14:18:45
                                                  No this judge is saying he has equitable - NPDTiger MU - 3/18 14:44:17
                                        and this clearly isn't - FootballRefugee MU - 3/18 12:46:29
     RE: Roberts is going to let the nonsense continue - sks MU - 3/18 12:05:53
          This is LTP stuff(nm) - Wildcat KSU - 3/18 14:59:00
          ignoring illegal rulings by lower judges is a problem? - FootballRefugee MU - 3/18 12:36:05
               RE: ignoring illegal rulings by lower judges is a problem? - sks MU - 3/18 13:13:43
                    You could not be more wrong - BigDave MU - 3/18 13:18:15
               How can a ruling be illegal? (nm) - haeffb MU - 3/18 13:02:42
                    Let me give you an example - BigDave MU - 3/18 13:15:08
                         I suppose - haeffb MU - 3/18 13:42:40
                              Illegal, improper, whatever you want to call it - BigDave MU - 3/18 15:26:56
                                   That’s what I’m asking - haeffb MU - 3/18 15:32:09
                                        or in plain English - FootballRefugee MU - 3/18 15:53:22
                              so you're making up your own legal language - FootballRefugee MU - 3/18 14:54:13
                    are you kidding? - FootballRefugee MU - 3/18 13:04:30
                         I’d consider it incorrectly decided - haeffb MU - 3/18 13:07:29
                              lmfao (nm) - 90Tiger STL - 3/18 14:38:42
                              no that doesn't make it legal - FootballRefugee MU - 3/18 13:19:07
                                   Is Dobbs a legal ruling? - haeffb MU - 3/18 14:01:06
                                        according to RBG - FootballRefugee MU - 3/18 14:44:51
                                             Any ruling overturned is illegal. - haeffb MU - 3/18 15:26:59
                                                  in your case, it's hopeless - FootballRefugee MU - 3/18 15:53:46
                                                       Preach on, brother (nm) - haeffb MU - 3/18 15:58:11
          Trump didn't set this precedent (nm) - Bosalphus KC - 3/18 12:33:30
          I think you are getting Trump confused with Dementia Joe - DHighlander NWMSU - 3/18 12:10:53
               RE: I think you are getting Trump confused with Dementia Joe - sks MU - 3/18 12:22:43
                    Nobody's going to pretend he wasn't here and pretend - Wildcat KSU - 3/18 15:04:40
                    oh now you're above it all - FootballRefugee MU - 3/18 12:36:39
     Roberts is correct. Impeachment is not for political - Spanky KU - 3/18 12:02:14
          Of course it is - Bosalphus KC - 3/18 12:33:49
               that's a good point - just as appointment is - FootballRefugee MU - 3/18 12:48:02
          yeah Trumpy is overusing the bully pulpit a bit - FootballRefugee MU - 3/18 12:05:34
               The plaintiffs have no standing which is a basic requirement - tigertix MU - 3/18 12:13:04
                    Except by law they do have legal standing.... - Rabbit Test MU - 3/18 12:38:25
                         except they don't - FootballRefugee MU - 3/18 12:47:11
                              What is "standing"? And why do they not meet that - Spanky KU - 3/18 13:12:24
                                   Russians don't have standing in Ukrainian courts either - FootballRefugee MU - 3/18 13:18:09
                                        Nice dodge... We are talking about US law and standing - Spanky KU - 3/18 13:50:24
                                             not a dodge at all - FootballRefugee MU - 3/18 14:41:13
                                                  Why do you fear answering the straightforward questions? - Spanky KU - 3/18 14:55:01
                                                       I don't - FootballRefugee MU - 3/18 14:58:30
                                                            You are failing here, young man. The topic is "standing" - Spanky KU - 3/18 15:11:35
                                                                 read it and weep - FootballRefugee MU - 3/18 15:12:53
                                                                      Educate yourself. Please - Spanky KU - 3/18 15:16:28
                                                                           follow your own advice - FootballRefugee MU - 3/18 15:17:22
                                                                                What was the decision in Ludecke v. Watkins? - Spanky KU - 3/18 15:23:35
                                                                                     that removals are non-justiciable - FootballRefugee MU - 3/18 15:50:53
                                                                                          The WARTIME removals are non-justiciable - Spanky KU - 3/18 15:54:01
                              Apparently they do - Rabbit Test MU - 3/18 12:50:32
                                   incorrect - FootballRefugee MU - 3/18 12:51:44
                    Why don't they have standing? - Spanky KU - 3/18 12:16:16
                         Because they are a terrorist group and POTUS is exercising - tigertix MU - 3/18 12:23:18
                              That doesn't mean they don't have standing(nm) - Spanky KU - 3/18 12:30:33
                                   actually it could - FootballRefugee MU - 3/18 12:33:59
                                        That just means Trump could prevail in that litigation. - Spanky KU - 3/18 12:36:32
                                             Here - FootballRefugee MU - 3/18 14:51:50
                                                  That is dumb. Ludecke v. Watkins inapplicable - Spanky KU - 3/18 15:15:09
                                                       incorrect - FootballRefugee MU - 3/18 15:16:32
                                                            The case you cite was about a declared war and nothing - Spanky KU - 3/18 15:41:16
                                             disagree - FootballRefugee MU - 3/18 12:45:05
                                                  That doesn't mean they don't have standing to challenge(nm) - Spanky KU - 3/18 12:53:00
                                                       disagree - FootballRefugee MU - 3/18 12:57:08
                                                            They may be wrong and fail, but they have standing - Spanky KU - 3/18 13:07:16
                                                                 what concrete and particularized - FootballRefugee MU - 3/18 13:12:46
                                                                      Deportation (nm) - Spanky KU - 3/18 13:53:38
                                                                           not if they are invading - FootballRefugee MU - 3/18 14:41:47
                                                                                JFC.... - Spanky KU - 3/18 15:27:17
                                                                                     don't project - FootballRefugee MU - 3/18 15:48:17
                                                                                          Not projecting - Spanky KU - 3/18 18:09:57
     Just heard that, get ready for him and ACB to rule agianst - tigertix MU - 3/18 11:58:54




©2025 Fanboards L.L.C. — Our Privacy Policy   About Tigerboard