All appellate court decisions are with prejudice. You cannot refile on the same issue, you can either appeal to a higher court or accept the decision. “Piecemeal” appeals where you intentionally leave out additional grounds in hope of getting to go another round are also looked on with extreme disfavor.
In some jurisdictions, even the attempt of lower courts to say “this specific decision is without prejudice” has been constrained by higher courts who claim that the appellate courts have no such power to attach a “without prejudice” modifier at any time.
However, this doesn’t preclude repeatedly litigating Trump’s attempts to do XYZ based on Congress passing a new law or Trump issuing a new EO in response to the prior one being struck down in court, because that is litigating a claim about a different law.
That is good to hear. They will of course appeal to higher courts till the SCOTUS who will hopefully not put military pronouns first on their ledger.
The argument goes something like this: “I refuse to prove that I exist,'” says God, “for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing.”
“But,” says Man, “The Babel fish is a dead giveaway, isn’t it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves you exist, and so therefore, by your own arguments, you don’t. QED.”
“Oh dear,” says God, “I hadn’t thought of that,” and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic.
“Oh, that was easy,” says Man, and for an encore goes on to prove that black is white and gets himself killed on the next zebra crossing.”
― Douglas Adams, The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy
I’ve become something of a Mearsheimerist when it comes to Ukraine, but I suspect I am alone on that island and am not looking to have that debate here.
What galls me is the shocking speed with which we are turning ourselves into an adversary (at best, a total non-ally) of all of Europe. I have no problem telling Europe they need to grow up and start building a more robust military force of their own and that they’re going to have to rely less on the US for their security. But this is outright contempt for a decades-long security and economic partner, and it will have significant adverse consequences for the US, as should be expected.
I truly never thought I’d have to come to that realisation. Even the Magna Carta (and US Constitution) could basically be summarised as “Law is above the King”.
This is a bad dream, or Twilight Zone, Nobody’s head will be popped off like a Jack O’ Lantern.
“In heaven, everything is fine. You’ve got yours. And you’ve got mine”
No, he’s saying DOJ (and other agency) lawyers won’t be the final word on what’s constitutional and what isn’t. Donny Dictator makes that call on behalf of the Executive Branch. This will still obviously get litigated, at which point The Federalist Society, er, Supreme Court will make its final determination on where the Judicial Branch stands on a given controversy.
I am wondering at what point it comes into clearer focus for the conservative justices of the Court that their own recent rulings just might very well have stripped them of their judicial independence.
Also adversaries of Canada, Mexico, Central America, South America, Africa, China, Middle East, etc. I think it is easier to list the countries we are making happy. Let’s see…that would be…uh, Russia, and uh, Russia? Wait, have we pissed off Australia (yet)?
That occurred to me too but then realized they have a lifetime appointment and outstanding retirement benefits. I think the conservatives on the court sold-out long ago and don’t give a shit and the liberal court members are shockingly silent as this all goes down the toilet. They are old and will not suffer any consequences letting Trump run away with the government. They might even prosper.
We could ask the same about congresscritters. They are ceding power away but, again, many of them will profit in the near term. Again, why give a shit if you peddled away democracy as long as you walk away a winner?
Well, we are probably going to get squished in the impending tariff war.
Recently Trump’s tariff hawk Peter Navarro, in an interview with CNN said "Australia is just killing our aluminium market … What they do is they just flood our markets”.
Which is a bit curious because while Australia does export $10bill of aluminium globally, the US destined component is only about 100mil, which is a rounding error in the US aluminium market worth 70bil.
Such attention to detail would be further evidence that the exercise of US trade policy may lack nuance.
However, in the mercantile mind of 45/47 we might be better poised than others as we run a trade deficit with the US. So we need the US to buy our big ticket items of iron ore, coal and LNG etc so we can afford to buy all that military hardware the US thinks we need.
Certainly possible, but if we go with this assumption, we’re saying that the SCOTUS is knowingly, eyes-wide-open, rendering itself moot.
Unitarian Executive > Judicial + Legislative? They’re corrupt as all fuck but they’re not dumb. They know the implications of what they’d be deciding. Their impulse would be to protect their branch and their power to say what the law is under the Constitution, a tradition that goes back to Marbury v Madison (and arguably before then). But would they have the courage? The courage to rule against the very thing their own little legal fraternity and plutocratic ecosystem has been pushing for decades – the very reason they were selected, nominated, and confirmed for this role? Would they have the courage to rule for their own independence against the threat of Proud Boys thuggery (or worse)?
Kennedy made a speech to HHS staff at the Washington, D.C., headquarters Tuesday and announced that he planned to begin investigations into whether anti-depressant medications and the childhood vaccine schedule are responsible for chronic diseases in the United States.
Official United States government policy on health is a cross between Scientology and Antivax.
You’re a sandwich! 