Living under Trump 2 aka Musk!!!
This is from the Washington Post....
"President Trump on Tuesday signed an executive order declaring that only the attorney general or the president, instead of federal regulators or bureaucrats, can speak for the U.S. when interpreting the meaning of laws carried out by the executive branch."
Last edited by Brave on Tue Feb 18, 2025 7:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Aka: Braveonawarpath
-
hail2skins
- Posts: 30
- Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2025 12:31 pm
- Reactions score: 12
-
The Evil Genius
- Posts: 201
- Joined: Tue Feb 11, 2025 4:03 pm
- Reactions score: 122
- Location: Gallifery
Judge Declines to Block Musk Team’s Foray Into Federal Agencies
A federal judge in Washington gave President Trump a victory for now when she declined on Tuesday to bar Elon Musk and his associates from ordering mass firings or having access to data at seven federal agencies.
The judge, Tanya S. Chutkan of the Federal District Court, wrote that a coalition of 14 state attorneys general could not provide specific examples of how Mr. Musk’s team’s efforts would cause imminent or irreparable harm to the states or their residents.
“The court is aware that DOGE’s unpredictable actions have resulted in considerable uncertainty and confusion for plaintiffs and many of their agencies and residents,” Judge Chutkan wrote, referring to the so-called Department of Government Efficiency, which is tasked with carrying out Mr. Musk’s vision. But the mere possibility that “defendants may take actions that irreparably harm plaintiffs” was not enough to grant emergency relief, she said.
Judge Chutkan nonetheless appeared to suggest that the lawsuit had a strong chance of succeeding with the benefit of additional evidence, which could be introduced later as litigation continues.
“Plaintiffs legitimately call into question what appears to be the unchecked authority of an unelected individual and an entity that was not created by Congress and over which it has no oversight,” she wrote.
The ruling by Judge Chutkan reflected the atmosphere of confusion surrounding the purpose and goals of Mr. Musk’s team, which judges in a number of court cases have repeatedly and unsuccessfully asked government lawyers to clarify.
It also reflected what Judge Chutkan described as the considerable uncertainty about what future cuts and layoffs could result from Mr. Musk’s effort to shrink the federal work force, which has resulted in the termination of hundreds of federal contracts and thousands of workers in recent weeks.
“The court can’t act based on media reports,” she said in a hearing on Monday. “We can’t do that.”
The coalition of 14 states had argued in the case that Mr. Musk was essentially informing his process on the fly, steering decisions about how to reshape federal agencies based on the data his team was actively extracting.
“The way in which DOGE and Mr. Musk have identified how to make cuts is through use and analysis of the agency data,” Anjana Samant, a deputy counsel at the New Mexico Department of Justice, said on Monday. “I don’t see how defendants can dispute that.”
The states had sought a temporary restraining order to prevent Elon Musk or anyone on his efficiency team from combing through data at seven agencies: the Office of Personnel Management and the Education, Labor, Health and Human Services, Energy, Transportation and Commerce Departments. It also sought to prevent Mr. Musk’s operatives from “terminating, furloughing, or otherwise placing on involuntary leave” any employees who work at those agencies.
The Department of Government Efficiency, which is not a department but a small team housed within the executive office of the president, regularly spotlights obscure grants and contracts on its website as examples of runaway spending that President Trump has given a greenlight to slash. But in the process, it has also pushed billions of dollars in cuts without explanation, and spurred personnel changes, including the firing or suspension of thousands of workers.
The coalition of states suing described the effect of those cuts in a motion as “a classic pocketbook injury,” given the federal funding states could lose as Mr. Musk’s team continues to make changes.
In the hearing on Monday, Judge Chutkan appeared to doubt whether it was possible to determine how that impact could be measured, absent clearer evidence about what the Musk team is doing.
She pressed Ms. Samant to identify cases of “imminent harm,” asking for specific examples of critical programs that the Musk team may have already targeted like a “wrecking ball,” which would justify such a sweeping emergency injunction.
Click on the link for the full article
A federal judge in Washington gave President Trump a victory for now when she declined on Tuesday to bar Elon Musk and his associates from ordering mass firings or having access to data at seven federal agencies.
The judge, Tanya S. Chutkan of the Federal District Court, wrote that a coalition of 14 state attorneys general could not provide specific examples of how Mr. Musk’s team’s efforts would cause imminent or irreparable harm to the states or their residents.
“The court is aware that DOGE’s unpredictable actions have resulted in considerable uncertainty and confusion for plaintiffs and many of their agencies and residents,” Judge Chutkan wrote, referring to the so-called Department of Government Efficiency, which is tasked with carrying out Mr. Musk’s vision. But the mere possibility that “defendants may take actions that irreparably harm plaintiffs” was not enough to grant emergency relief, she said.
Judge Chutkan nonetheless appeared to suggest that the lawsuit had a strong chance of succeeding with the benefit of additional evidence, which could be introduced later as litigation continues.
“Plaintiffs legitimately call into question what appears to be the unchecked authority of an unelected individual and an entity that was not created by Congress and over which it has no oversight,” she wrote.
The ruling by Judge Chutkan reflected the atmosphere of confusion surrounding the purpose and goals of Mr. Musk’s team, which judges in a number of court cases have repeatedly and unsuccessfully asked government lawyers to clarify.
It also reflected what Judge Chutkan described as the considerable uncertainty about what future cuts and layoffs could result from Mr. Musk’s effort to shrink the federal work force, which has resulted in the termination of hundreds of federal contracts and thousands of workers in recent weeks.
“The court can’t act based on media reports,” she said in a hearing on Monday. “We can’t do that.”
The coalition of 14 states had argued in the case that Mr. Musk was essentially informing his process on the fly, steering decisions about how to reshape federal agencies based on the data his team was actively extracting.
“The way in which DOGE and Mr. Musk have identified how to make cuts is through use and analysis of the agency data,” Anjana Samant, a deputy counsel at the New Mexico Department of Justice, said on Monday. “I don’t see how defendants can dispute that.”
The states had sought a temporary restraining order to prevent Elon Musk or anyone on his efficiency team from combing through data at seven agencies: the Office of Personnel Management and the Education, Labor, Health and Human Services, Energy, Transportation and Commerce Departments. It also sought to prevent Mr. Musk’s operatives from “terminating, furloughing, or otherwise placing on involuntary leave” any employees who work at those agencies.
The Department of Government Efficiency, which is not a department but a small team housed within the executive office of the president, regularly spotlights obscure grants and contracts on its website as examples of runaway spending that President Trump has given a greenlight to slash. But in the process, it has also pushed billions of dollars in cuts without explanation, and spurred personnel changes, including the firing or suspension of thousands of workers.
The coalition of states suing described the effect of those cuts in a motion as “a classic pocketbook injury,” given the federal funding states could lose as Mr. Musk’s team continues to make changes.
In the hearing on Monday, Judge Chutkan appeared to doubt whether it was possible to determine how that impact could be measured, absent clearer evidence about what the Musk team is doing.
She pressed Ms. Samant to identify cases of “imminent harm,” asking for specific examples of critical programs that the Musk team may have already targeted like a “wrecking ball,” which would justify such a sweeping emergency injunction.
Click on the link for the full article
Because it's not about merit or qualifications, it's about blind deference to Trump:
'Clean house!' Trump says he's ordered firings of all U.S. attorneys hired by Biden
President Donald Trump said he's ordered the firing of all remaining U.S. attorneys hired by Joe Biden's administration.
In a Truth Social post, Trump ranted, "We must 'clean house' IMMEDIATELY, and restore confidence. America’s Golden Age must have a fair Justice System - THAT BEGINS TODAY."
Trump said he sent the directive to the Justice Department, implying that anyone hired by the previous administration during the past four years helped create a Justice Department "politicized like never before."
The move follows earlier dismissals that began Feb. 12, when the Trump administration started firing Biden-appointed U.S. attorneys across the country, according to Bloomberg.
As many as 22 remaining Biden-appointed U.S. attorneys had their government-issued devices deactivated Friday without being told were fired or given an explanation, the outlet reported.
Click on the link for the full article
Firing a bunch of lawyers without cause is asking for a class action lawsuit. I imagine that will be coming shortly.
'Clean house!' Trump says he's ordered firings of all U.S. attorneys hired by Biden
President Donald Trump said he's ordered the firing of all remaining U.S. attorneys hired by Joe Biden's administration.
In a Truth Social post, Trump ranted, "We must 'clean house' IMMEDIATELY, and restore confidence. America’s Golden Age must have a fair Justice System - THAT BEGINS TODAY."
Trump said he sent the directive to the Justice Department, implying that anyone hired by the previous administration during the past four years helped create a Justice Department "politicized like never before."
The move follows earlier dismissals that began Feb. 12, when the Trump administration started firing Biden-appointed U.S. attorneys across the country, according to Bloomberg.
As many as 22 remaining Biden-appointed U.S. attorneys had their government-issued devices deactivated Friday without being told were fired or given an explanation, the outlet reported.
Click on the link for the full article
Firing a bunch of lawyers without cause is asking for a class action lawsuit. I imagine that will be coming shortly.
Meanwhile...
https://bsky.app/profile/kyledcheney.bs ... D=ref_fark
JUST IN: A federal judge has ordered the reinstatement of Cathy Harris atop the Merit Systems Protection Board, ruling that Trump's decision to fire her exceeded his authority.
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap ... .9.0_1.pdf
https://bsky.app/profile/kyledcheney.bs ... D=ref_fark
JUST IN: A federal judge has ordered the reinstatement of Cathy Harris atop the Merit Systems Protection Board, ruling that Trump's decision to fire her exceeded his authority.
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap ... .9.0_1.pdf
@Jumbo you're on to something, man.
It's going to be ugly, but this is kinda what it would look like if these spending cuts weren't in our terms, like dollar collapsed or something and we literally couldn't do certain things anymore.
I'm still optimistic he'll leave the end of his term, but I hope the Dems don't campaign on trying to turn everything back on the way it was. This feels similar to what Argentina did...it's working for them.
Turing around and doing a max tax cut so we are still doing trillion deficits...could negate whatever we get right...could be a chance to improve our credit rating and bring down some of the interest we are spending every year if we don't do that new tax break.
Some of that stuff they say they cut for helping countries overseas I was fine with getting rid of, honestly. Getting rid of USAID and coming after Medicare are examples of goulish approach to what otherwise would be necessary to get our books straight.
*sigh...if only this actually was about getting our books straight...
It's going to be ugly, but this is kinda what it would look like if these spending cuts weren't in our terms, like dollar collapsed or something and we literally couldn't do certain things anymore.
I'm still optimistic he'll leave the end of his term, but I hope the Dems don't campaign on trying to turn everything back on the way it was. This feels similar to what Argentina did...it's working for them.
Turing around and doing a max tax cut so we are still doing trillion deficits...could negate whatever we get right...could be a chance to improve our credit rating and bring down some of the interest we are spending every year if we don't do that new tax break.
Some of that stuff they say they cut for helping countries overseas I was fine with getting rid of, honestly. Getting rid of USAID and coming after Medicare are examples of goulish approach to what otherwise would be necessary to get our books straight.
*sigh...if only this actually was about getting our books straight...
I found this tracker while combing through Reddit. It organizes every executive order in a manner that is pretty informative.
https://www.project2025.observer/
https://www.project2025.observer/