Quotes
Does a single district-court judge who likely lacks jurisdiction have the unchecked power to compel the Government of the United States to pay out (and probably lose forever) 2 billion taxpayer dollars? The answer to that question should be an emphatic "No," but a majority of this Court apparently thinks otherwise. I am stunned."
Justice Samuel Alito, along with Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, in the dissent
Yes, this is just one Supreme Court ruling, but it is some indication that the Supreme Court, at least five justices of the Supreme Court, won't roll over, won't lay down, won't give in to Donald Trump's dictatorial aspirations. Because today the Supreme Court acted as a legitimate co-equal branch of government, a legitimate check on executive branch overreach,
Kirschner said.jpg)
President Trump asks the Court to defend what he breached. His breaches cost the United States unity, reputation, treasure, and blood. Rarely has equity ever seen a party whose hands are so unclean. The Court should deny the stay."
Former Senate legislative assistant Jeremy Bates in an amicus brief for the aid organizationsThe administration’s memorandum is an attempt to scare people away from enforcing their rights through the court system, as Donald Trump and Elon Musk work to dismantle the federal government. People should not be deterred from challenging the administration’s unlawful lawlessness.”
Lisa Gilbert, president of Public Citizen, a consumer advocacy group, said in a statement Thursday
Activist groups file meritless suits for fundraising and political gain, facing no consequences when they lose, while taxpayers bear the costs and delays,
the White House memo claimsRather than wait for agency heads to develop RIF plans and follow applicable procedures, however, Defendants began mass unlawful terminations of their probationary employees,
the lawsuit addsThis anti-democratic takeover is orchestrated by forum-shopping organizations that repeatedly bring meritless suits, used for fundraising and political grandstanding, without any repercussions when they fail,
the memo by the White House reads
Taxpayers are forced not only to cover the costs of their antics when funding and hiring decisions are enjoined, but must needlessly wait for Government policies they voted for,
the memo said
It is the policy of the United States to demand that parties seeking injunctions against the Federal Government must cover the costs and damages incurred if the Government is ultimately found to have been wrongfully enjoined or restrained.”
The memo announcedFederal courts should hold litigants accountable for their misrepresentations and ill-granted injunctions,
the memo also saidIt is a very bold move that violates norms,
said Mark Zaid, a Washington-based lawyer who brought an emergency case against the Justice Department last month to stop the release of FBI agent names who worked on federal criminal investigations of TrumpGiven that the deadline in the challenged order has now passed, and in light of the ongoing preliminary injunction proceedings, the District Court should clarify what obligations the Government must fulfill to ensure compliance with the temporary restraining order, with due regard for the feasibility of any compliance timelines,
the Court said
Unelected district judges have issued sweeping injunctions beyond their authority, inserting themselves into executive policymaking and stalling policies voters supported,
the White House said in its fact sheetAgencies must justify security amounts based on reasoned assessments of harm, ensuring courts deny or dissolve injunctions if plaintiffs fail to pay up, absent good cause,
the White House said in the fact sheet obtained by Fox News Digital