The provision would bar courts from enforcing contempt citations for violations of injunctions or temporary restraining orders unless a bond has been paid.
YUP. Guaranteed they will. They’ve warned these assclowns to stop fucking with the judiciary, and they’re now signalling they’ll be proactively ruling on things like this.
Idk Thomas has been saying some shit recently that makes it seem like he might be getting tired of Trump’s shit.
Would be hilarious if Trump and Co try to defang the Supreme Court and they just decide to strike down Executive Orders as broadly unconstitutional for anything beyond directing basic executive branch actions, because they are not laws.
Oh my bad, meant to say Roberts. Get the fuckers confused nowadays. Defending the fact that the Judiciary is an equal branch of government and the concept of basic checks and balances.
Genuinely serious. Jackson is Trump’s favorite President for a reason: he exposed that under a determined enough man with enough popular support behind him, neither Congress nor the SCOTUS can actually do anything about a President acting in contravention of a court order. If the SCOTUS says “this bill is unconstitutional”, will it stop anyone from actually acting like it’s in force?
I don’t know why people think rules still apply. They might say something but they came out 9-0 against him and he still claims a unanimous victory and the courts, media and American public all just shrug.
Can’t the Supreme court strike this down?
Haha. Can they? Who knows. Will they? Probably not.
YUP. Guaranteed they will. They’ve warned these assclowns to stop fucking with the judiciary, and they’re now signalling they’ll be proactively ruling on things like this.
Thomas and Alito would vote to uphold it.
Idk Thomas has been saying some shit recently that makes it seem like he might be getting tired of Trump’s shit.
Would be hilarious if Trump and Co try to defang the Supreme Court and they just decide to strike down Executive Orders as broadly unconstitutional for anything beyond directing basic executive branch actions, because they are not laws.
Uh-oh. The check must have bounced.
Truly interested. Can you give me a little flavor of what was said by “justice” Thomas
Oh my bad, meant to say Roberts. Get the fuckers confused nowadays. Defending the fact that the Judiciary is an equal branch of government and the concept of basic checks and balances.
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/05/07/us/politics/supreme-court-roberts-judicial-independence.html
It’s safe to assume that Thomas and Alito will just go along with any unconstitutional, fascist BS that Trump’s incels will dream up
Thomas and Robert’s names are easy to confuse. Just remember to ask your self “Which one is the Tom?” and you’ll get it.
ROTFL
Just keeps proving that you should never trust anyone with two first names.
Not even Adam Scott?
This one might be 9-0. Can’t get a free bus or private jet flights if you’re not important.
You can’t just assert that. They’ll vote whatever way they’ve been paid to vote.
So… They’ll vote to uphold it?
The issue is more: will it matter at all?
Genuinely serious. Jackson is Trump’s favorite President for a reason: he exposed that under a determined enough man with enough popular support behind him, neither Congress nor the SCOTUS can actually do anything about a President acting in contravention of a court order. If the SCOTUS says “this bill is unconstitutional”, will it stop anyone from actually acting like it’s in force?
Can SCOTUS strike down a bill that says their rulings don’t have to be followed?
This is what passes as an interesting Paradox to MAGA Nazis.
I don’t know why people think rules still apply. They might say something but they came out 9-0 against him and he still claims a unanimous victory and the courts, media and American public all just shrug.