This bit right here is completely outrageous to me. It is absolutely preposterous for a judge to redirect federal spending against what congress appropriated it for.
Why even have a separation of powers? Hell, the judge may as well order Congress to end the shutdown on his precise terms. What would be the difference? He is already taking over the power of the purse with this order.
Why even have a separation of powers? Hell, the judge may as well order Congress to end the shutdown on his precise terms. What would be the difference? He is already taking over the power of the purse with this order.
https://x.com/MorosKostas/status/1986940996899262542
I don't even think it was right for the judge to order the spending of the very limited contingency funds, as judges should not get to decide how money designated for an emergency gets spent.
However, at least that point was arguable. The further step he took was baseless and constitution-torching.
However, at least that point was arguable. The further step he took was baseless and constitution-torching.
I hope the Supreme Court intervenes on this. I wish @AGPamBondi and team the best of luck.
Shutdowns are a high-stakes political game. If you are going to keep the government shutdown, it can't be the case that you get to run to courts and have your priorities ordered to be funded.
Congress has not appropriated more money for SNAP. The program basically doesn't exist until they do. Federal judges should not get to order it back into existence.
As the left likes to say, NO KINGS!
Shutdowns are a high-stakes political game. If you are going to keep the government shutdown, it can't be the case that you get to run to courts and have your priorities ordered to be funded.
Congress has not appropriated more money for SNAP. The program basically doesn't exist until they do. Federal judges should not get to order it back into existence.
As the left likes to say, NO KINGS!
A gun rights restoration program doesn't exist yet (it will soon thanks to the Trump admin), but imagine it's 2029 or 2033 and one now exists.
Republicans disagree with the new Dem President, and shutdown the government. Processing of rights restoration applications pauses.
Republicans run to the courts, and a conservative district judge orders President Newsom (God help us) to redirect medicaid spending in order to pay for rights restoration.
That's what we're dealing with here. Maybe a bad example because rights restoration will be very cheap in the grand scheme, but you get what I mean.
Republicans disagree with the new Dem President, and shutdown the government. Processing of rights restoration applications pauses.
Republicans run to the courts, and a conservative district judge orders President Newsom (God help us) to redirect medicaid spending in order to pay for rights restoration.
That's what we're dealing with here. Maybe a bad example because rights restoration will be very cheap in the grand scheme, but you get what I mean.
Finally, it's funny how quickly this was filed because it proves the petition was already written. Everyone involved knows the First Circuit is a rubberstamp for Dems.
Update, stayed until 48 hours after the First Circuit's ruling on the pending motion to stay.
Of course, we all know how the First Circuit will rule. It's practically a foregone conclusion (but may they prove me wrong!). So really, this seems like SCOTUS saying "let us enjoy our weekend then come bother us again about this after."
Still, it's good that a blatantly unconstitutional order is stayed, for now.
Of course, we all know how the First Circuit will rule. It's practically a foregone conclusion (but may they prove me wrong!). So really, this seems like SCOTUS saying "let us enjoy our weekend then come bother us again about this after."
Still, it's good that a blatantly unconstitutional order is stayed, for now.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
