It’s crucial to keep emphasizing that these EOs were lawless. There was never a plausible argument they were constitutional. This administration has nothing but contempt for the constitution and the rule of law.

RE: https://bsky.app/profile/did:plc:36eqtmzysqf7wsslczw4uxcd/post/3lpuhmnqmn22g
Chris Geidner (@chrisgeidner.bsky.social)

BREAKING: Judge John Bates, a George W. Bush appointee, holds that Trump's executive order targeting Jenner & Block is likely unconstitutional — "doubly" — and will be blocked in full. https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.278932/gov.uscourts.dcd.278932.138.0_6.pdf

Bluesky Social
/2 And note how clearly this judge says “the administration is full of shit on their racial discrimination argument and they know they are full of shit.”

@kenwhite.bsky.social The reasoning here should equally apply to the bullshit Republicans have included in the "budget" bill - "requiring judges collect a bond from all parties seeking a temporary restraining order or a preliminary injunction, otherwise the resulting orders will be unenforceable."

It's retaliation for Trump's losses in court and intended to stop people bringing legitimate suits against the federal government.

https://www.democracydocket.com/news-alerts/republicans-trump-court-orders-injunctive-relief-bonds/

The GOP’s Chaotic Bid to Defang the Courts

Read more here.

Democracy Docket

@kenwhite.bsky.social As long as there are no consequences for issuing lawless EOs, and they’re not even paying the costs of defending them in court, they’re just going to keep on issuing them. Especially because half the goal is the chaos created by the order, even if the order is subsequently overturned.

We need a “3 strikes and you’re out” law for abuse of executive orders.

@angusm @kenwhite.bsky.social That would be called "impeachment". Which is off the table until 2027, unfortunately.