this post was submitted on 16 Apr 2025
466 points (98.9% liked)

politics

23060 readers
3276 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Cross-posted from "A Federal Judge Is on the Brink of Criminally Prosecuting Trump Officials for Contempt" by @[email protected] in [email protected]


In a thundering opinion on Wednesday, U.S. District Judge James Boasberg announced that he had found probable cause to hold the Trump administration in criminal contempt for defiance of his orders. It is “obvious,” Boasberg wrote, that government officials “deliberately flouted” his commands by deporting Venezuelan migrants to a Salvadoran prison on March 15 under President Donald Trump’s invocation of the Alien Enemies Act of 1798. And now they must answer for their unlawful conduct. “The Constitution,” he declared, “does not tolerate willful disobedience of judicial orders—especially by officials of a coordinate branch who have sworn an oath to uphold it.”

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 19 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Come back when Donald wears shackles and an orange jump suit.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 days ago

No, that washes off, probably.

[–] [email protected] 159 points 5 days ago (3 children)

Fucking do It already. Everyone involved from the ground up.

[–] [email protected] 96 points 5 days ago (3 children)

Sounds like that's where it's heading:

If the government refuses this offer, Boasberg held, it must swiftly identify the officials who violated his orders so they may be criminally prosecuted, facing fines and potential jail time. Critically, Boasberg notes that if the Department of Justice doesn’t appoint a prosecutor to take the case, he will do so on his own.

[–] [email protected] 100 points 5 days ago (1 children)

We need to protect that judge.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 days ago

There's a very good chance he'll accidentally fall out of a 10th storey window

[–] [email protected] 45 points 5 days ago (3 children)

swiftly identify the officials who violated his orders

I think this is likely to be the hangup. Everything with this administration is so chaotic and ad-hoc that it might be hard to pin it on a single person or group. If they don't have beyond-reasonable-doubt certainty that the person they're holding in contempt is responsible, it'll probably just get overturned, weakening the bigger Trump v Courts battle.

[–] [email protected] 40 points 5 days ago (2 children)

-"Who was responsible for XYZ?"

- "I don't recall."

[–] [email protected] 41 points 5 days ago (2 children)

Ok, then I am holding YOU in contempt!

[–] [email protected] 17 points 5 days ago

This is the way.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 days ago

Soooo, citizens can be shipped off to El Salvador eh?

[–] [email protected] 10 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Pretty much this is what I'm worried about. Hopefully the government record keeping laws are robust enough that they can eke out a real answer about responsibility by threatening additional charges over failure to document those.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 5 days ago (2 children)

assuming they weren't sent via self-destructing Signal messages, which itself is a violation of records law

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 18 points 5 days ago (2 children)

Sounds like a RICO case then.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 12 points 5 days ago (1 children)

You're probably not wrong, but hopefully there's at least a paper trail the judge can work his way up.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 days ago

If any paper trail exists, the government will deny it exists, while concurrently setting fire to it and any other evidence they might have left.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 5 days ago (2 children)

Annnnnd then Trump Pardons them

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 23 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

This is as fast a just court can go. If you want it done more quickly, we’ll need Republicans in Congress to find their spines.

They only have until the 23rd to substantiate their defense before Boasberg charges them. He also states that if Trump’s DoJ refuses to comply, he will appoint an attorney to do so.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 5 days ago (13 children)
load more comments (13 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Can't prosecute Trump because he's immune. Blanket pardons for his subordinates who break the law on his behalf.

Yeah, this is a nothingburger. If Congress won't impeach and remove, it essentially means Trump is a king.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 3 days ago

Stop edging us

[–] [email protected] 30 points 4 days ago (1 children)

The police will NOT side with the judiciary.

They love a strongman.

Someone just like them.

[–] [email protected] 76 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Tell me when the judge actually does it though

[–] [email protected] 16 points 5 days ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 5 days ago
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 36 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Sure he is. Trump will just pardon him. The US president has officially gotten too much power.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (2 children)

Notes: presidential pardon is available for all offenses against the United States. All offenses against the US are tried by a jury. Contempt of court is not tried by a jury. Thus, is pardon available for contempt of court?

I don't know. When it's time, the SC will tell.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 days ago

I have a feeling Trump may have his own opinion on who gets to decide.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

What was the guys name that owned the Supreme Court?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago

If you mean Trump, then they have ruled against him on occasions.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 days ago

No, no the judge is not. The system won't punish any of them

[–] [email protected] 22 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I'll believe it when I see it

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 days ago

Even then, who's going to comply? Who's going to roll up in there and take people out in cuffs?

Just another in a long list of judgements written on toiletpaper

[–] [email protected] 17 points 5 days ago (5 children)

So what? Do it. Nothing will come of it. Congress sure as hell won't impeach and remove. Certainly no one will be put in any type of custody.

Sure. Do it for the record. Unfortunately it's meaningless for the foreseeable future.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 5 days ago

Oh Congress will absolutely impeach and remove...

The judge... :(

[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (3 children)

So what: we have to protect this judge and act as deputies to enact his rulings or else the system collapses in favor of monarch Trump and 4chancellor Musk

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

If members of his administration are convicted of crimes for following his orders, their replacements may not be as willing to overstep the law.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 5 days ago (16 children)

Go on then, go on, what's the goddamned holdup?

load more comments (16 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›