Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
Yes. Good. Do this. Then also deputize them to arrest fuckwads who are in extreme contempt of court, and are rampantly violating court orders.
Like Trump
they can’t, under a provision in the “Big Beautiful Bill”
That would need to be affirmed by the courts to matter.
If the rule of law still matters, here is the process:
Now, the plaintiff can also appeal, and they get an injunction by showing immediate and irreparable harm. But generally, the actions can continue while the appeal is pending.
Do I smell a civil war?
I mean I don’t NOT smell one.
the Trump administration is ~~failing to protect them from~~ intentionally subjecting them to a rising tide of hostility.
Fixed it for them. The original statement was akin to saying that the locust swarm is failing to protect the crops from being eaten.
🙄 Almost there, little article.
The United States Marshalls protect US assets. Judges are treated as such. But! John Roberts already has a security force called the Marshalls of the Supreme Court. Guess who has authority to deputize Marshalls of the Court?
Yes, a judge. They have constitutional authority to enforce judgements. The real question is why haven't they exercised it.
that's because the US Marshals fall under the executive branch and guess who controls that
[...] fears mount that the Trump administration is failing to protect them from a rising tide of hostility.
It's not a failure to protect. They're not failing at their goals right now. Their goals just no longer align with your goals of [checks notes] living. Maybe you shouldn't have handed over your power so freely, you fucking cowards.
I'm reading this as "Do you want the coup now or by the actual army when things have really gone to shit and people really are eating dogs and cats to stay alive?"
Firstly, they have one already, they have US Marshalls, who are responsible for enforcing the orders of the judiciary, though they are organizationally under the AG/DoJ.
Secondly, I do not look forward to the 500k deputized (aka ask them if they have a gun) Texas super-Rangers they send to other states to enforce crazy ass Texas laws like life in prison for an abortion, if the man says you conceived in Texas,, or just wants the kid.
though they are organizationally under the AG/DoJ.
This is exactly the problem the judges are looking to solve.
That's an administrative detail, the judiciary can ask for the Marshalls to be assigned directly to them.
So you're suggesting something
That would involve bringing the US marshals service under the direct control of the head of the judiciary, Chief Justice John Roberts.
Yes, chief Roberts administers the entire judiciary, this would be adding an enforcement arm.
It's not optimal, but that's where we are now.
And that's just what they're considering.
Isn't that what they are doing?
the judiciary can ask
Ask whom?
At present, marshals fall under the remit of Pam Bondi, the US attorney general. Bondi was appointed by the president and is a Trump loyalist.
The article was pretty clear on why having the marshals/DoJ in charge would be a problem.
I'm saying the Marshalls are this body, they should be reassigned directly to the judiciary.
I'm saying the Marshalls are this body, they should be reassigned directly to the judiciary.
Which involves asking the oppressing person/organisation to hand over the capability to resist them.
"Please Mr Mugger, give me your gun, then you can't rob me"
How exactly do you think that request is going to go ?
Posse time?