Law be damned, Trump asserts unilateral control over executive branch, federal service (4 Viewers)

[superchuck500]

Following the Project 2025 playbook, in the last week, Trump and his newly installed loyalists have moved to (1) dismiss federal officials deemed unreliable to do his bidding (including 17 inspectors general) - many of which have protections from arbitrary dismissal, (2) freeze all science and public health activity until he can wrest full control, (3) freeze all federal assistance and grant activity deemed inconsistent with Trump's agenda, and (4) moved to terminate all federal employee telework and DEI programs.

The problem is much of this is controlled by federal law and not subject to sudden and complete change by the president through executive order. Most notably is the Impoundment Control Act of 1974 that simply codifies what is the constitutional allocation of resources where Congress appropriates money to the executive branch for a specific purpose, the executive branch must carry out that statutory purpose. This is indeed a constitutional crisis and even if Congress abdicates to Trump by acquiescing, the courts must still apply the law - or rule it unconstitutional.

And meanwhile the architect of much of this unlawful action is Russell Vought, Trump’s OMB nominee who the Senate appears ready to confirm.

120. The Impoundment Crisis of 2025

The Trump administration's Monday spending freeze is likely to provoke a crisis over the constitutionality of "impoundment"—one that the justices could well have to resolve *very* soon.

www.stevevladeck.com

 

[MT15]

If what you claim is true then the courts will find accordingly.

What you think or I think is irrelevant. It is what the court finds.

I don’t think any breach of the Constitution or our laws is fine. How about you?

You don’t seem to care much about the Constitution, to be honest.

 

[TampaJoe]

You don’t seem to care much about the Constitution, to be honest.

To be honest, I don’t trust what you claim anymore than I trust Trump or Biden.

 

[MT15]

To be honest, I don’t trust what you claim anymore than I trust Trump or Biden.

What am I claiming that you don’t trust? Trump’s EO’s are public record.

You don’t seem to care much that he signed a blatantly unconstitutional EO banning birthright citizenship. That’s just one example.

I’m not “claiming” anything. We are discussing public words and deeds.

 

[TampaJoe]

None of the allegations were new during Biden’s Administration. Trump and Giuliani were lying about Biden during Trump’s term. For years. The FBI took a look because Trump demanded it, and concluded there was no proof that Biden did anything wrong. Are you saying that Bart’s DOJ covered it up?

I think there is a whole lot of inside baseball going on. I think Barr is a decent man. I think there are problems with the FBI and the DOJ that need to be rooted out. They need to get back to law enforcement without fear or favor. Justice is supposed to be blind. It should have nothing to do with the politics of the person sitting in the Oval Office, past or present.

 

[TampaJoe]

What am I claiming that you don’t trust? Trump’s EO’s are public record.

You don’t seem to care much that he signed a blatantly unconstitutional EO banning birthright citizenship. That’s just one example.

I’m not “claiming” anything. We are discussing public words and deeds.

I trust the courts to figure that out. The issue you mention is still in the courts.

 

[MT15]

I trust the courts to figure that out. The issue you mention is still in the courts.

And the Reagan appointed judge who stayed it said this:

“On Thursday, at a federal courthouse in Washington state, U.S. District Judge John C. Coughenour—an 84-year-old Ronald Reagan appointee—delivered a striking rebuke to Trump’s assault on birthright citizenship. Speaking from the bench, Coughenour declared: “It has become ever more apparent that to our president, the rule of law is but an impediment to his policy goals. The rule of law is, according to him, something to navigate around or simply ignore, whether that be for political or personal gain. Nevertheless, in this courtroom, and under my watch, the rule of law is a bright beacon which I intend to follow.” He then issued a nationwide injunction prohibiting the administration from denying birthright citizenship to the children of immigrants for the duration of the litigation.”

You don’t have to be a judge or a lawyer to know that Trump’s EO defies the Constitution.

Here is another example. His ridiculous EO trying to assert that there are only biological men and biological women, and nothing else. This doesn’t have anything to do with the constitution but flies in the face of genetics and known biological facts.

 

[DJ1BigTymer]

It's astounding (well, not really) that there are so many lawsuits that had to be filled due to this administration's effort to circumvent the US Constitution.

Timeline​

Feb. 6: A labor union and the American Foreign Service Association sued Trump for trying to shutter the U.S. Agency for International Development by slashing staff and halting aid, arguing it’s unconstitutional for the president to eliminate a federal agency approved by Congress—and alleging his moves “generated a global humanitarian crisis.”

Feb. 6: Boston-based Judge George O’Toole paused a Thursday deadline for over 2 million federal employees to accept a buyout offer—part of Trump and Musk’s cost-cutting push—as he considers whether to grant a request by federal workers’ unions who sued to block the buyouts, extending the deadline until Monday.

Feb. 6: Judge John Coughenour in Seattle extended his pause on Trump’s day-one executive order rescinding birthright citizenship for the children of undocumented or temporary immigrants, in response to a lawsuit brought by Democratic-led states, writing, “The president cannot change, limit, or qualify this Constitutional right via an executive order.”

Feb. 6: D.C.-based Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly said only two Musk-affiliated staffers can access the Treasury Department’s payment system on a “read only” basis, after workers’ unions sued the Treasury amid reports Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency accessed sensitive records. (One of the employees given access has reportedly since resigned over racist tweets.)

Feb. 5: A second judge —Deborah L. Boardman of Maryland—blocked Trump’s policy rescinding birthright citizenship, in response to a lawsuit brought by nonprofits representing undocumented pregnant women.

Feb. 4: Judge Royce C. Lamberth in D.C. paused Trump’s restrictions on transgender women being incarcerated in women’s prisons and federal prisons providing gender-affirming medical treatment, after multiple inmates sued to block the policy.

Feb. 3: District Judge Loren L. Alikhan broadly blocked the Trump administration’s memo halting almost all federal assistance—even after the White House claimed it had been rescinded—while litigation brought by nonprofit groups that receive government funds moves forward.

Jan. 31: The Trump administration’s memo pausing most federal assistance was partially blocked, as Judge John J. McConnell Jr. ruled the Trump administration cannot withhold funding from the Democratic-led states that sued to block the funding freeze.

Jan. 26: O’Toole prohibited law enforcement from transferring an incarcerated transgender woman to a male prison facility—at least while litigation filed by the inmate moves forward—after Trump stripped transgender Americans of their legal protections, including being incarcerated at prisons aligned with their gender identities.

Jan. 23: Coughenour paused Trump’s order rescinding birthright citizenship, the first major ruling against the second Trump administration.

Jan. 20: The first lawsuit against Trump’s administration was filed minutes after he was sworn into office, as public interest law group National Security Counselors argued DOGE should be classified as a federal advisory board that has “fairly balanced” membership and follows public transparency rules.

Forbes: Here Are All The Major Lawsuits Against Trump And Musk—As USAID Shutdown Sparks Legal Battle

ToplineFederal judges issued multiple rulings Thursday targeting President Donald Trump’s order rescinding birthright citizenship and billionaire Elon Musk’s efforts to trim the federal workforce, the latest in a slew of legal actions as Democrats and others fight Musk and Trump in court.

doggett.house.gov

It's also dumbfounding (again, not really) that Congressional Republicans have ignored their sworn duty to uphold the Constitution and chose the party over country.

It still haven't been a full month and I'm absolutely certain that this administration is just getting started on their assault on our nation's constitution.

 

[MT15]

Here is a blatant violation of the First Amendment. AP has the right to refuse to use the term “Gulf of America”. It’s an international body of water, and their position is that they will continue to use the term that 90% of the world uses. They are an international media outlet. Trump is retaliating against them to attempt to force them to use the term he prefers. He admits it.

 

[coldseat]

I think there is a whole lot of inside baseball going on. I think Barr is a decent man. I think there are problems with the FBI and the DOJ that need to be rooted out. They need to get back to law enforcement without fear or favor. Justice is supposed to be blind. It should have nothing to do with the politics of the person sitting in the Oval Office, past or present.

Is that what you really believe is going on with Eric Adam's case?

You believe so much right wing propaganda and yet somehow believe yourself to be moderate or independent or just right leaning. Always with the fake both sides arguments, as if there's some actual equivalency.

 

[DaveXA]

Is that what you really believe is going on with Eric Adam's case?

You belive so much right wing propoganda and yet somehow believe yourself to be moderate or independent or just right leaning. Always with the fake both sides arguments.as of there's some actual equivalency.

He's just a liar. I don't believe a thing he said about being some sort of independent or moderate unless those words have some other meaning I don't know about.

 

[Optimus Prime]

President Donald Trump announced Tuesday night he had ordered every single “Biden era” U.S. Attorney to be fired “IMMEDIATELY” as he accused his predecessor of politicizing the Department of Justice.

Just after 6 p.m. ET and after his South Florida press conference, Trump said prosecutors will be dismissed so he can usher in a “fair justice system.” Trump wrote:

Over the past four years, the Department of Justice has been politicized like never before. Therefore, I have instructed the termination of ALL remaining “Biden Era” U.S. Attorneys. We must “clean house” IMMEDIATELY, and restore confidence. America’s Golden Age must have a fair Justice System – THAT BEGINS TODAY!

The announcement came just seconds after Trump blasted the House select committee that investigated the Jan. 6 Capitol riot.

Trump wrote, “Biden gave Bennie Thompson and Liz Cheney a Medal for the job they did on the Unselect Committee, but the only thing that I see they did is get information, and then destroy and delete ALL of it, because the whole thing turned out to be a HOAX!”

Trump spent the 2024 campaign accusing former President Joe Biden of weaponizing the justice system against him. Before his election win, Trump was indicted in two federal cases – one relating to the events leading up to Jan. 6 and another over his handling of classified documents after he left the White House.……

Trump Announces He’s Firing Every Single Biden-Era U.S. Attorney: ‘Clean House IMMEDIATELY’

Trump's Tuesday announcement came as his own DOJ navigated mass resignations after a case against New York City Mayor Eric Adams was ordered dropped.

www.mediaite.com

 

[DaveXA]

Welp, this seems like the one that basically looks as if the executive powers are heading straight towards absolute.

1933 Germany anyone?

Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered:

www.whitehouse.gov

 

[DJ1BigTymer]

Welp, this seems like the one that basically looks as if the executive powers are heading straight towards absolute.

1933 Germany anyone?

Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered:

www.whitehouse.gov

This part is particularly interesting:

Sec. 7. Rules of Conduct Guiding Federal Employees’ Interpretation of the Law. The President and the Attorney General, subject to the President’s supervision and control, shall provide authoritative interpretations of law for the executive branch. The President and the Attorney General’s opinions on questions of law are controlling on all employees in the conduct of their official duties. No employee of the executive branch acting in their official capacity may advance an interpretation of the law as the position of the United States that contravenes the President or the Attorney General’s opinion on a matter of law, including but not limited to the issuance of regulations, guidance, and positions advanced in litigation, unless authorized to do so by the President or in writing by the Attorney General.

God smite the King!

 

[Dragon]

This part is particularly interesting:

Sec. 7. Rules of Conduct Guiding Federal Employees’ Interpretation of the Law. The President and the Attorney General, subject to the President’s supervision and control, shall provide authoritative interpretations of law for the executive branch. The President and the Attorney General’s opinions on questions of law are controlling on all employees in the conduct of their official duties. No employee of the executive branch acting in their official capacity may advance an interpretation of the law as the position of the United States that contravenes the President or the Attorney General’s opinion on a matter of law, including but not limited to the issuance of regulations, guidance, and positions advanced in litigation, unless authorized to do so by the President or in writing by the Attorney General.

God smite the King!

Notice it said the president's oppinion - So if Trump "Thinks" something is legal then no one are allowed to tell him differently ?

 

[RobF]

Notice it said the president's oppinion - So if Trump "Thinks" something is legal then no one are allowed to tell him differently ?

Seems to say they're not just not allowed to tell him differently, but not allowed to tell anyone differently in their official capacity. They can't "contravene the President or AG's opinion including but not limited to the issuance of regulations, guidance, and positions advanced in litigation".

My first thought was, "What if the President and AG disagree?" but it would appear to cover that with the AG being "subject to the President's supervision and control".

So that does sounds like if Trump says, "This is legal," even if it's blatantly not, the entire executive branch, according to that, have to go along with it "in the conduct of their official duties".

Which is insane, right? It's the epitome of this thread's title.

I want to hear how insane @superchuck500 thinks this is.

 

[superchuck500]

This part is particularly interesting:

Sec. 7. Rules of Conduct Guiding Federal Employees’ Interpretation of the Law. The President and the Attorney General, subject to the President’s supervision and control, shall provide authoritative interpretations of law for the executive branch. The President and the Attorney General’s opinions on questions of law are controlling on all employees in the conduct of their official duties. No employee of the executive branch acting in their official capacity may advance an interpretation of the law as the position of the United States that contravenes the President or the Attorney General’s opinion on a matter of law, including but not limited to the issuance of regulations, guidance, and positions advanced in litigation, unless authorized to do so by the President or in writing by the Attorney General.

God smite the King!

Notice it said the president's oppinion - So if Trump "Thinks" something is legal then no one are allowed to tell him differently ?

Yes - here's the fundamental problem with that, that's actually a trap in this for Bondi and DOJ: Trump says a lot of bullshirt. He regularly says things that are just simply false and marking a substantial misunderstanding of "matters of law". He just goes off of what he thinks it is or, probably more commonly, what he thinks it should be.

So then the question becomes, does the Attorney General have to now follow what is often nothing more than Trump's extemporaneous thoughts? Does DOJ now have to become the sharpie pen that changed the hurricane's cone of threat just because Trump said something stupid? How can a DOJ lawyer sign pleadings based on what the president says instead of what the law actually is?

Basically what this says is that unless the AG comes out and says that what Trump said is wrong, then it is the legal position of the United States for all federal employees including its lawyers - regardless of the requirement of candor to the court about the law. The AG serves at the pleasure of the president and is generally not keen on having to reverse the legal position of the president . . . which is why generally the "legal position of the United States" is left to the attorney general. And when the president makes a statement of the administration's legal position, it is supposed to come after consult with the AG about what the law is (based on authorities include the caselaw) not simply what the president "feels" the law is or should be.

But Trump obviously doesn't function that way - and this appears to me to set up a position where DOJ has to be very careful.

 

[MT15]

Trump has people in the DOJ tripping over themselves to sell out to him.

 

[zztop]

He's just a liar. I don't believe a thing he said about being some sort of independent or moderate unless those words have some other meaning I don't know about.

A person can be in a cult, and not realize they are in a cult.