Judge rules DOGE's USAID dismantling likely violates the Constitution
https://apnews.com/article/usaid-federal-judge-trump-administration-bdc919a5 d98 e
Judge rules DOGE's USAID dismantling likely violates the Constitution
That establishes legal precidence that can be used in future cases
against DOGE.
Oooops-a-dooopses.
Oooops-a-dooopses.
How does a judge of any kind rule that something "likely" happens? That's like saying "possibly" or "probably".
yeah, judges either rule that something IS, or IS NOT. so if his information is not bullshit it'll go to the supreme court.
basically democrats are just going to sandbag and go after trump to the
end of his term. just like last time. should hang them all
ikeJudge rules DOGE's USAID dismantling likely violates the Constitution
That establishes legal precidence that can be used in future cases against DOGE.
Oooops-a-dooopses.
How does a judge of any kind rule that something "likely" happens? That's
saying "possibly" or "probably".
end of his term. just like last time. should hang them all
There shouldn't be any hanging, of any kind. Republicans went after Biden and company just as much during his term, too, even though it didn't get nearly as much media presence.
Regards,
I think it is like a preliminary ruling. They do that in cases where there is some sort of injunction requested... in this case, to have USAID functions restroted... and then they would later go on and hear the case in full.
How does a judge of any kind rule that something "likely" happens? That's
like saying "possibly" or "probably".
I think it is like a preliminary ruling. They do that in cases where there is some sort of injunction requested... in this case, to have USAID functions restroted... and then they would later go on and hear the case in full.
The judge seemed pretty confident that Musk has proven, by his own words, that he is in full control of DOGE and not just a special advisor as has been claimed.
What most of our politicians do is essentialy treason. we'd be better off without them and I think they should be tried for their crimes.
Regarding republicans going after biden, i have not seen anybody go after someone like they've gone after trump. Democrats actually neglected important duties to go after trump, and this is verifiable by public records. They didn't do their jobs(ie show up to work and vote on
agendas, follow meeting agendas or even meet for rulings) so they could go after trump on several occasions.
Hey MRO!
On Thursday, 20.03.25 16:18:04, you wrote:
What most of our politicians do is essentialy treason. we'd be better off without them and I think they should be tried for their crimes.
I agree with this. But hanging is a thing of the past.
Hmm, I don't think I've ever heard of judges using "likely" or "maybe". Are > sure this is a reliable source?This is actually very common. Depedning on the type of case and the charges, the term is "preponderence of the evidence", and the "burden of proof" is not "beyond a reasonable doubt". If the burden needs to be beyond doubt, then the only two answers are yes/no. Otherwise (in about 80% of all cases), the burdenis lower and the ruling only needs to be it "likely happened".
This is actually very common. Depedning on the type of case and the charges, the term is "preponderence of the evidence", and the "burden of proof" is not "beyond a reasonable doubt". If the burden needs to be beyond doubt, then the only two answers are yes/no. Otherwise (in about 80% of all cases), the burdenis lower and the ruling only needs to be it "likely happened".
Re: Judge halts USAID cuts
By: Accession to Dumas Walker on Thu Mar 20 2025 06:07 pm
Hmm, I don't think I've ever heard of judges using "likely" or "maybe". AreThis is actually very common. Depedning on the type of case and the charges, the term is "preponderence of the evidence", and the "burden of proof" is not "beyond a reasonable doubt". If the burden needs to be beyond doubt, then the only two answers are yes/no. Otherwise (in about 80% of all cases), the burdenis lower and the ruling only needs to be it "likely happened".
sure this is a reliable source?
Hmm, I don't think I've ever heard of judges using "likely" or "maybe" > > This is actually very common. Depedning on the type of case and the charg > it's just a waste of time and it ties up shit in court until it's thrown out > not pursued. it's sandbagging.
Re: Judge halts USAID cuts
By: MRO to Jimmy on Fri Mar 21 2025 09:57 pm
Hmm, I don't think I've ever heard of judges using "likely" or "maybe"
the charg > it's just a waste of time and it ties up shit in court until it's thrown out > not pursued. it's sandbagging.This is actually very common. Depedning on the type of case and
It is how it is supposed to work. It is not a "waste of time", unless you don'tunderstand the system and misinterpret what is happening. Which I assume is thecase, based on your other comment, "the judge should be
have occured".
Judge: It is likely to have occured.
MRO: You are sandbagging and must be romeved!!
Tell me you have no clue without telling me you have no clue.
assume is thecase, based on your other comment, "the judge should be impeached for it". For
what? For doing his/her job the way it is supposed to be done, according to
Rule: judge must determine if evidence "suggests the accusation is likely to have occured".
Judge: It is likely to have occured.
MRO: You are sandbagging and must be romeved!!
Re: Judge halts USAID cuts
By: Jimmy to MRO on Sun Mar 23 2025 08:10 am
Rule: judge must determine if evidence "suggests the accusation is likely to have occured".
Judge: It is likely to have occured.
MRO: You are sandbagging and must be romeved!!
Maybe there is a language barrier at work here, but as far as I thought, accepting a case as solid enough for further research was not "ruling".
--
Rule: judge must determine if evidence "suggests the accusation is likely t
have occured".
Judge: It is likely to have occured.
MRO: You are sandbagging and must be romeved!!
Maybe there is a language barrier at work here, but as far as I thought, accepting a case as solid enough for further research was not "ruling".
Sysop: | Lmorchard |
---|---|
Location: | Portland, OR |
Users: | 67 |
Nodes: | 16 (0 / 16) |
Uptime: | 190:54:28 |
Calls: | 449 |
Calls today: | 1 |
Files: | 1 |
Messages: | 26,872 |