2billion dollars in Foreign Aid ordered to be immediately paid by the Federal District Court is not vaccated by the Supreme Court. Therefore, the Administration is now legally obligated to comply and spend the 2 billion as directed by Congress.

Now, the overlaying issue is not resolved. The Fed District Court has not fully adjudicated the case. What the S. Ct., majority did was refuse the Administration’s application to vacate the Fed District Court’s order that these payments be paid pending adjudication. Thus, the Fed District Court was within its judicial authority to issue the order.

The S. Ct., May at a later date rule that as a matter of law the President could do this. However, the majority has ruled, held that as a matter of law the Federal District Court was within its discretion to grant the order and applied the correct law in analyzing whether to grant the order.


So much for the Courts and Congress cannot direct what the Executive does within its delegated authority.

Imagine that....Supremes say congress owns the power of the purse. Just like the constitution says.

quote:

Originally posted by 300shooter:
Imagine that....Supremes say congress owns the power of the purse. Just like the constitution says.

Not according to a bankrupt South African diddling a MAGA ARSHOLE’ arse!

This money has already been spent as the work, services these funds were to pay for had been provided for.

It is really basic contract law.

The Executive must remit consideration, payment for services rendered and induced.

You see Trump made a career not paying his contractors. As President, the courts have said, “You will pay the nations contractors.”


Amazing folks think Trump’s behavior, policy here is appropriate. They would not permit a DEM presidency such leniency.

The power of the purse issue remains unaddressed, open.

Of course. Justice Alito is fine letting the President do whatever the President wants. Checks and balances, the due designation of rules provided by the Constitution be damned.

If that's the case , contracts already written and such, how did the Biden admin stop keystone?

The MAGA A5SEHOLE is getting what he deserves!

For his IGNORANCE!

He is enjoying being diddled by a bankrupt South African!

quote:

Originally posted by JTEX:
If that's the case , contracts already written and such, how did the Biden admin stop keystone?

keystone is dead. i doubt with the lovely attacks from your country that oil will flow from there ... and btw you do not need us at all ...

Any work done on it was paid.

That is if any work done on it was pursuant to a U.S. contract.

You realize the majority did not issue an opinion. What you have linked to only shows the dissent. The loosing argument.

The Fed Court was within its discretion to issue the tro. The Fed Court applied the correct law when analyzing whether ti grant the tro.

That issue is closed, law of the case, tales judicta.

The answer to the issue framed by Justice Alito on your little link is, Yes, the judge does have the authority to issue this tro. Full stop.

Whether the plaintiffs will ultimately prevail remains open. That is not required to issue a tro. Again, this issue narrowly presented as it relates to this2 billion is simply contract law. Whether the President has to pay consideration to contraries for services rendered whom were induced to provide said services based on that consideration. We should all hope the answer to that is yes.

We should all hope that a Chief Executive does not have the unilateral authority to ignore the appropriations made by Congress. That is an issue for another day. We know how Justice Alito would answer that question.

I posted a link about the topic. I made no comment.

By posting it, we are free to infer you endorse it.

Let us ask, do you agree with the sentiment of what you posted?

Do you endorse what you posted?

Of the answer is no, then why post it?

No answer as usual.

Barrett seems to be emerging as an independent thinker. While clearly being a conservative, she also seems to be disinclined to contort herself into a pretzel judicially notwithstanding the law to simply support the conservative view. Frankly that's exactly what you want in a jurist whether they are left or right leaning.

I am not convinced on her being conservative.

There was no pretzel in Alito’s opinion. He minced no words.

Roberts is the pretzel.

Alito and Thomas are the right wing shills on the court, just like Sotomayor and Kagan are on the left. None of that foursome seems to be capable of being judicially honest most of the time. Both groups are happy to perform like Cirque du Soleil contortionists to reach an ideology driven decision. I will withhold judgment on Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Jackson until we see more of their opinions. Roberts and Barrett seem to set the model for the conduct you expect from a jurist.

quote:

Originally posted by JTEX:
If that's the case , contracts already written and such, how did the Biden admin stop keystone?

Bingo
Dems

Who in this country likes to throw taxpayers money out of the window towards foreign aid?
100% of citizens should be against foreign aid with very very few exceptions

quote:

Originally posted by M.Shy:

quote:

Originally posted by JTEX:
If that's the case , contracts already written and such, how did the Biden admin stop keystone?

Bingo
Dems

This is not a bingo. Reason has been given.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
Alito and Thomas are the right wing shills on the court, just like Sotomayor and Kagan are on the left. None of that foursome seems to be capable of being judicially honest most of the time. Both groups are happy to perform like Cirque du Soleil contortionists to reach an ideology driven decision. I will withhold judgment on Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Jackson until we see more of their opinions. Roberts and Barrett seem to set the model for the conduct you expect from a jurist.

You know how you know that because they routinely ignore decades of controlling caselaw. They are judicial activist.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
There was no pretzel in Alito’s opinion. He minced no words.

He is just wrong based on controlling caselaw.

You are not intelligent enough to know you just answered all my questions you refuse to answer.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
I am not convinced on her being conservative.

HAHAHA!

Are YOU a "conservative"?

By backing some deranged selfish coward like Trump?

Dr. Easter like Justice Alito is a fake conservative and not near as intelligent as he thinks he is.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
I am not convinced on her being conservative.

HAHAHA!

Are YOU a "conservative"?

By backing some deranged selfish coward like Trump?

trump is everything but conservative lol

MJ,
Go back 0bamacare ruling and tell me how John Roberts was not the ultimate pretzel.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
Dr. Easter like Justice Alito is a fake conservative and not near as intelligent as he thinks he is.

The Little Lord of Louisville like, Mike Jines, is a liberal. Well, Mike is a neoliberal…to keep it straight — been on his journey since about 2014-15. Conservatism is a concept that eludes the Lord or Louisville.

quote:

Originally posted by medved:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
I am not convinced on her being conservative.

HAHAHA!

Are YOU a "conservative"?

By backing some deranged selfish coward like Trump?

trump is everything but conservative lol

Conservative means that you are in favor of slow and careful incremental changes to society.

Reactionary means that you want to go back to (your definition) of the past.

Radical is when you don't give a shit about bad news or unintended consequences to get to your utopia.

Treason is when you start playing for the opposing team against the team mates in the middle of the game.

Insanity is to rave against dog eaters in Ohio.

Conservatism sometimes must also reset the clock when “slow and careful incremental change to society” was bypassed for a decade or two.

You will notice Justice Alito cites very little law. That is because his posts is not supported in the law. He is just engaging in his personal opinion again. That is not legal analysis.

Let us reset the clock then to 1836-2008 when a state could say you could not own a handgun.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
Dr. Easter like Justice Alito is a fake conservative and not near as intelligent as he thinks he is.

The Little Lord of Louisville like, Mike Jines, is a liberal. Well, Mike is a neoliberal…to keep it straight — been on his journey since about 2014-15. Conservatism is a concept that eludes the Lord or Louisville.

When I need an equine surgeon then your opinion will matter.

. . . if Lane was half as smart as he thinks he is, he would be twice as smart as he actually is.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
There was no pretzel in Alito’s opinion. He minced no words.

I wonder if he talked to his seditionist-supporting wife before he wrote his opinion? Is that flag still flying upside down at his house?

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
You will notice Justice Alito cites very little law. That is because his posts is not supported in the law. He is just engaging in his personal opinion again. That is not legal analysis.

Let us reset the clock then to 1836-2008 when a state could say you could not own a handgun.

And, it is a ridiculous legal analysis....many momentous SCOTUS decisions arose from the decision of a single US District Court judge somewhere down the line in the appellate process. It's how the system works. His recitations to the contrary are silly.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
. . . if Lane was half as smart as he thinks he is, he would be twice as smart as he actually is.

Look in the mirror!

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
You will notice Justice Alito cites very little law. That is because his posts is not supported in the law. He is just engaging in his personal opinion again. That is not legal analysis.

Let us reset the clock then to 1836-2008 when a state could say you could not own a handgun.

And, it is a ridiculous legal analysis....many momentous SCOTUS decisions arose from the decision of a single US District Court judge somewhere down the line in the appellate process. It's how the system works. His
recitations to the contrary are silly.

Notice Dr. Easter does not want the original interpretation of the 2nd Amendment applied to turn the clock back. He only says that for rights he does not like. That is hypocrisy and not how to apply a legal principle.

Hence, he is not as intelligent as he thinks.

We have a new drinking game.

I have noticed that when Dr. Easter is confronted w complex questions that require u grasp of contesting principles be they religion, law, or politics. He throws his hand up and screams pretzel.

So, now when Dr. Easter does not know how to rebut wo a mere assertion take a drink when he says pretzel.


Notice, Dr. Easter posted Justice Alito’s non supported dribble (a link supporting it). When challenged, he responded I did not endorse. He is then asked direct questions concerning his support, view on the matter. He refuses to answer. That is typical for him. We have been waiting over a year for him to respond to some questions of theology he said he needed time on.

He then in two post confirm he is endorsing the link he posted. Hence, he is not as intelligent as he thinks he is. Now, when it comes to equine surgery. Yes, he is. That means zero to these discussions.

Thus, he was lying when he said I am just posting and not confirming.

He is also an intellectual coward. He routinely refuses to answer his opposition here. I answer, and I answer the question asked.

I could suggest s matching game for every one of Joshua's typos, but i am scared of alcohol poisoning

There are none above, but go ahead.

I pour one too.

Notice how too is used above.