r/politics • u/harsh2k5 • 1d ago

Soft Paywall The Trump Administration Just Violated Another Court Order | It gets worse: The order found that the administration was covertly withholding millions in FEMA funds from blue states.

https://newrepublic.com/post/193650/trump-administration-just-violated-another-court-order
35.8k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

1.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

747

u/travio Washington 1d ago

Lock them up! The courts need to use contempt against these people. Put them in jail until they comply.

172

u/Melancholy_Rainbows Montana 1d ago

Unfortunately, criminal contempt is going to be tricky, even if the courts have the balls.

First, it’s enforced by the Federal Marshals, who are under the control of Trump’s DoJ. Although it may be possible to deputize someone else to enforce it, it’s dicey.

Second, criminal contempt can be pardoned by the President.

Civil contempt might work, though, although it obviously wouldn’t be as satisfying.

140

u/gumgajua Canada 1d ago

The more I hear about how your government truly works, the more I'm not so sure the FF's were against the idea of having a king, because Trump sure does seem like it.

122

u/trampolinebears 1d ago

Imagine if your prime minister started doing blatantly illegal things, while retaining the confidence of a majority of MPs. And imagine if the governor general was a supporter of the PM, so they wouldn't try to have them removed. You'd have a dictator.

2

u/Hector_P_Catt 1d ago

At least in Canada, the cops don't directly report to the government. The RCMP would have no problem arresting a PM if they were pulling blatantly illegal stuff.

12

u/Giancolaa1 1d ago

You say that, meanwhile Ford makes blatantly illegal bribes and uses his position to gain wealth through shady deals, I don’t see any real investigations starting again the Premier. I can’t imagine them doing much if they align with what the prime minister is doing. Those who would have an issue would have been forced out by this point and replaced with more loyal goons.

10

u/trampolinebears 1d ago

The RCMP reports to a cabinet minister, I think that counts as directly reporting to the government. The difference is one of government culture, not government organization.

5

u/CircumventingTheBan_ 22h ago

And is in fact identical to the situation with the Marshals. They are under the DOJ, so they report directly to the US Attorney General, who is themself subordinate directly to the President. So still one chair removed as well.

But yes, the main point is that this is not a unique weakness of US democracy. It turns out any form of government only works so long as the people in it want it to. Ever been in a group project that nobody wants to do? How did that go? It's like that.

1

u/Admqui 1d ago

Imagine it? Lord Protector would like a word.

1

u/Thunderbridge 22h ago

The king can remove the governor-general. If they ignore that though, yea, then you've got a crisis that only revolution can solve

66

u/Melancholy_Rainbows Montana 1d ago

I think they assumed that each branch would jealously guard their powers. Humans don’t usually cede power once they have it, but Congressional Republicans seem to be too happy to do just that.

11

u/theVoidWatches Pennsylvania 1d ago

Yup. They also warned against political parties, in part because they knew it would make this kind of coordination possible. Of course, they promptly formed political parties anyway.

2

u/ABHOR_pod 1d ago

In a one party state they'd be the party elites instead of one of 535 legislators.

22

u/tapdancingtoes 1d ago

Jefferson tried to warn us.

8

u/Grubsex 1d ago

He said things about a certain tree that were true.

1

u/HotmailsInYourArea 1d ago

🎶 Are you, are you, coming to the tree? 🎶🔥

1

u/snail-the-sage 1d ago

I'm curious to what you are referring.

5

u/yosemighty_sam 1d ago

Jefferson was and still is one of the biggest voices against too much executive power. As I recall he wanted the chief executive to be more of a chief diplomat, and warned that giving any individual too much power would inevitably lead to tyranny.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l6Ove4_JsCM

2

u/Dwayne_Gertzky 22h ago

Trying to understand Jefferson’s personal politics through my modern political lense always interests me.

3

u/RoboOverlord 1d ago

https://www.monticello.org/research-education/thomas-jefferson-encyclopedia/tree-liberty-quotation/

This, they are referring to this, but they are afraid reddit will ban them for posting it. So here is a scholarly article, with the actual hand written words so you can judge for yourself.

3

u/snail-the-sage 1d ago

The idea was that Congress and the SC would protect their own powers by exercising their control over the other branches of government.

3

u/RBuilds916 1d ago

Basically the checks and balances only work when most of the people are acting honestly. If enough people in congress wanted this to stop, it would be stopped. There has been a trend for quite some time of the president's powers expanding. Combine that with enough people in key positions being complicit and more interested in consolidating power than in any moral principle and you get the mess we are in. A system is only as good as the people operating it.

2

u/SparksAndSpyro 1d ago

None of this would be a problem if voters did their job. They didn’t. It’s kinda pointless to complain about the system when the very thing the system is supposed to serve—the voters—is rotten.

2

u/CircumventingTheBan_ 21h ago

Don't you have a governor general that can dismiss your prime minister? And I seem to remember them proroguing your parliament back in like 2007 or 8 to keep the minority conservative government in power against a coalition of liberals and progressives.

I'm not trying to talk shit, I promise. I just think it's incredibly g dangerous for other nations to feel smugly secure in your democracy while watching ours die. We were that smug last year, too. Things change quick, be vigilant.

0

u/BoltTusk 1d ago

I mean even back in they day, some called George Washington “King George IV”

3

u/virishking 1d ago

For the record, federal marshals aren’t the only ones who can enforce. The courts can deputize their own enforcers.

2

u/Melancholy_Rainbows Montana 1d ago

I, uh, said that. But it isn’t super specific and this administration will definitely argue that they don’t have the right to do it.

3

u/virishking 1d ago

Sorry, I made an incomplete comment. Courts can deputize enforcers for civil contempt, not just criminal.

Also, civil contempt can still result in jailtime, but only as a way to incentivize compliance during a case, not as their own charges. And that’s not going to happen to Trump anyway. Maybe one of his buddies, though.

1

u/coffeetime121 1d ago

Put me in, Coach!

3

u/Aacron 1d ago

I also watch legal eagle occasionally 😂

2

u/elainegeorge 1d ago

They need to play three card monte with this admin

2

u/Thediciplematt 1d ago

Wow. This is the worst news I’ve heard all day

1

u/ZapActions-dower Texas 1d ago

I have a feeling you watched the same Legal Eagle video I did.

1

u/gramathy California 1d ago

The judge CAN hold them in jail indefinitely until they comply, though

1

u/CircumventingTheBan_ 21h ago

No, they can't. They have the legal authority to do so, sure. But legal authority doesn't mean it will or even can happen anymore. Those are words on paper no different than a candy wrapper now.

1

u/hobard 1d ago

Counterintuitively, civil contempt penalties can be more powerful than criminal contempt. In theory, the judge can lock them up indefinitely- until they comply with the order. Sadly they won’t, but the authority is there.

1

u/HauntedCemetery Minnesota 1d ago

Federal contempt of any kind being able to be pardoned by the president is pretty untested, and it will have to be tested by the courts, which would immediately trigger a real constitutional crisis,which is why the courts will never, ever bother.

1

u/claimTheVictory 1d ago

I don't care if it's dicey or tricky or whatever the fuck.

Bring it to the boil.

They need to publicly enforce it, or publicly reveal the real depths of our problems.

Just like when Jeffrey published the chats.

Call their fucking bluff.

1

u/inbruges99 1d ago

No offence, but you guys really fucked up giving so much power to the presidency. Your foundation story is about overthrowing a monarchy but then over the years you’ve invested far more power into the presidency than the King ever had.

1

u/blazze_eternal 1d ago

I think it might be time the Federal Courts controlled a select branch of Federal Marshall for extenuating circumstances like this.

1

u/toriemm 1d ago

That's why the Senate betrayed everyone by confirming his cabinet.

Because the Scotus already told everyone they don't care what he does. As long as it's 'official president business'.

I really hope whatever they got is worth destroying the country over.

1

u/divDevGuy 22h ago

It'd be a shame if those held in contempt were immediately transferred and held at an undisclosed location beyond the immediate jurisdiction of the court due to an administrative error. Or perhaps one of nineteen random states might similarly lose track of them...

I mean, I don't wish ill of anyone, but you know, these types of things just happen. What can you do?