Let Me Get This Straight About Yesterday's Supreme Court Non-Decision

[gab13by13]

A federal judge ruled that USAID funding must be unfrozen and within hours of that happening the Supreme Court intervened staying that ruling.

The SC scheduled arguments at noon yesterday and then our fascist court gave no time limit to when it would render a decision on releasing USAID funds.

Did I understand this correctly? Any significant delay will surely be the end of USAID. Who knew that our fascist court had a pocket veto to avoid making a public statement? The MSM will not cover this, I have seen basically nothing from the MSM. USAID is bleeding out and the Supreme Court will decide some time in the future if it will call for an ambulance.

[malaise]

1. Get thee to the greatest page for visibility

Rec

[LakeVermilion]

2. The Roberts' court specializes in calendar manipulation...

When Jack Smith wanted to expedite the decision on the president breaking the law, the court denied Smith. Then months later, to TSF's benefit, they decided to allow him to break the law in the national interest.

I'm still waiting for the first assassination. It shouldn't be too far off.

[DENVERPOPS]

46. They are following the Republican game plan

delay, delay, delay until such time that it becomes a non-issue, or clobber it and drown it in a bathtub.....

Just look at what lengths they took with the TON of cases against Trump previously.......and he skated on everything......

[Ninga]

3. I haven't found anything in the msm that clears up

your thesis.
The only thing I can see right now is if there was a an organized daily picketing of the ScoTuS building much like those found when workers strike. If fact picket lines at the Capital and WH as well.

[GreenWave]

4. They are playing the GOP's favorite game'

[Kid Berwyn]

5. Roberts Court are co-conspirators.

Money.

[GoreWon2000]

27. Roberts court stands on the anti-democracy shoulders of the Rehnquist 5

This ruling will tell us all we need to know about where the tRump/Musk coup is headed. The Rehnquist 5 judicial coup in 2000 made the Roberts court possible.

[Kid Berwyn]

31. Exactly. Operation EAGLE EYE

Know your BFEE: Vote Suppressor Supreme, the Turd Bill Rehnquist

https://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=2414083

Nixon foisted him on the court. Prescott Bush foisted Nixon on America.

[GoreWon2000]

38. 2000 was the culmination

of Rehnquist's voter suppression activities but let's also not forget the cleuless former repug AZ. Senate majority leader Sandra Day O'Connor who acted like a highly partisan repug politician instead of an impartial judge. She had no idea what Florida election law was. She wanted to retire and didn't want Al Gore to pick her successor.

[DENVERPOPS]

48. The USSC Republican justices

thinking they are the biggest brains in the country, are in fact so STUPID that they haven't figured out that they will no longer be needed in a Tyranny, the entire judicial branch of government........as they will no longer be needed..........

Same thing goes for all the Republican House members and Senators, in a Tyranny..... the entire legislative branch will also be thrown under the bus, as having outgrown their usefulness.............

[ancianita]

30. EXACTLY.

They along with their bosses will go into the trash bin of human history, whether oligarchs control the writing of human history or not.

[Kid Berwyn]

32. "They come to me." -- Jane Roberts, wife of Chief Justice John Roberts.

’They come to me’: Jane Roberts’ legal recruiting work involved officials whose agencies had cases before the Supreme Court

In newly revealed testimony, the wife of Chief Justice John Roberts said she worked for “U.S. attorneys, cabinet officials, former senators” and more.

By HAILEY FUCHS and JOSH GERSTEIN
Politico, 01/31/2023

Jane Roberts, the wife of Chief Justice John Roberts, acknowledges having represented a wide variety of public officials — including senior Justice Department officials and Cabinet members — as they transitioned to jobs in the private sector, according to testimony in an arbitration hearing to resolve a lawsuit filed by an ex-colleague against her former legal recruiting business.

A partial transcript of that testimony was included in a complaint submitted to the House, Senate and Justice Department filed in December on behalf of the former colleague.

Snip…

Jane Roberts’ placements included at least one firm with a prominent Supreme Court practice, according to the complaint, which also includes sworn testimony from Roberts herself, in which she notes the powerful officials — whose agencies have had frequent cases before her husband — for whom she has worked.

“A significant portion of my practice on the partner side is with senior government lawyers, ranging from U.S. attorneys, cabinet officials, former senators, chairmen of federal commissions, general counsel of federal commissions, and then senior political appointees within the ranks of various agencies, and I -- they come to me looking to transition to the private sector,” Roberts said, according to a transcript of a 2015 arbitration hearing related to her former colleague’s termination.

In her testimony, Roberts also noted the benefit of working with senior government officials: “Successful people have successful friends.”

Continues…

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/01/31/jane-roberts-legal-recruiting-work-agencies-cases-supreme-court-00080515

To borrow a metaphor from Smedley Butler: the GOP is a racket.

[ancianita]

33. Damn. I remember this. It was just so ugly I guess I'd forgotten. Thanks!

[tavernier]

41. Sadly

none of them were fashion designers.
She looks like some kind of giant purple amoeba has swallowed her whole while attempting to snag the dangling bait earrings.

[Grumpy Old Guy]

6. We waited all day yesterday for a decision.

The story was drowned out by the bullshit in the Oval Office.

[BlueKentuckyGirl]

18. No MSM coverage

I saw on Rachel Maddow that the SC was supposed to decide on this by noon yesterday. I saw no coverage so I just assumed I'd gotten the date wrong. Nope. The SC will just sit on this, like they did the decision of immunity for the President, basically negating the decision of the lower court.

[onenote]

52. There was no way this was "supposed" to be decided by noon.

The plaintiffs' opposition wasn't due until noon. I can't believe Rachel would've suggested the court could be expected to rule simultaneously with their receiving the opposition.

[onenote]

51. Not sure why one would expect a decision the same day.

When SCOTUS gives a party time to respond to an emergency request, they typically don't issue a decision right after receiving the request. I would have hoped they might rule today -- but I wasn't expecting or looking for anything yesterday.

[Magoo48]

7. Good then, we'll couch that for now, and comeback around to it.

In other words—fuck off.

[rurallib]

8. Thanks - I have been trying to get some clarity on what happened with that

It has been drowned by the Stinky Pants temper tantrum.

Got to think there was some 'guidance' to SCOTUS from the administration. Delay is a favorite Trump strategy.

[spanone]

9. Roberts is maga and in trmp's pocket.

[BoRaGard]

10. Help, help, help us G.O.P. Billionaire Bros. Heeelllllp!" - Starving Children

"Bugger off, ya noisy beggars. We need more tax breaks for our yachts. Deal with it." -

- G.O.P. Billionaire Bros. inc

[Bluethroughu]

11. The 6 traitors on the Supreme Court have always been all in on the fascist coup.

[turbinetree]

12. Maybe its time the public took to the streets and tell them enough is enough..................this is BS...........

they did the same crap during the traitors Espionage Case.............exactly the same thing...........this just proves that they are just as corrupt while they let people in this country and elsewhere are being harmed.................this JFK legacy is being abolished right before our eyes.................maybe the the Federalist Society has something to say in private with these jerks............Leo is just as dangerous as "all" of them in that party..........

[Martin68]

13. I find the decision constitutionally and legally absurd. A very bad sign.

[LymphocyteLover]

15. yes, it's awful--- they are silently killing USAID

[Joinfortmill]

14. The corruption is DEEP.

[BComplex]

25. THIS is the "deep state" they've been railing against.

The deep corruption possibilities, now expressed, hidden in the bowels of our system of government.

[gab13by13]

16. The thing is it is about more than USAID

1. If the Supreme Court rules in favor of Krasnov that means a president now has the power of the purse and not Congress.
2. It means that if someone doesn't like a lower court judge's decision, just ignore it, and appeal directly to the Supreme Court. The SC is setting a precedence here.

A pro-Krasnov ruling pretty much ends our democracy giving Krasnov power over the courts and legislative branches.

[yellow dahlia]

53. If they do that, which I think they might...

...do they think they are safe afterward? They are the useful idiots, and the witnesses. Usually mob bosses and conspiracies get rid of the witnesses.

[WilliamPlanke]

17. It's McConnell's fault, his legacy began the cancer.

John Roberts and Mitch.

[MayReasonRule]

20. The GOP Has Been An Ongoing Criminal Enterpirse Since Before Nixon Was President

The GOP is wholly fascist.
The GOP is intent on destruction of our representative democracy.

The GOP is an ongoing criminal enterprise.

The GOP ought to be dissolved in it's entirety.

Those that support the same are the same.

It's not just Roberts and McConnell.

It's every fascist fuck in our country.

[joanbarnes]

19. I wondered about this all day yesterday and kept checking for news.

[peggysue2]

21. Roberts is using the Trump tactic

Delay, delay, delay. By the time the unSupreme Court gets around to a decision, the damage will be irreparable.

Which is the Plan to unravel our democracy.

Traitors all.

[newdeal2]

22. Even if they rule against Trump

What enforcement mechanisms exist that aren’t controlled by Musk, Trump, or a complicit Congress?

That’s why they will take the easy route and rule for him. Mark my words.

[rso]

23. SCOTUS

https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/24/24A831/350905/20250228115232365_USAID--SCOTUS%20Opp.pdf

It was a filing, not a hearing.

[bluestarone]

26. Looks to me that THIS SC was only looking for reasons to

STALL!! Wonder why earlier they were requesting a SECURITY force? Hmm!

[gab13by13]

29. The Supreme Court stayed the lower court's decision,

that is the meat of the issue. The district judge was emphatic about the need for a quick release of the federal funds.

Did the SC give a date for the next step? I mean the district judge was pants on fire about how, TIME MATTERS.

WTH Krasnov can just put the funds in his Investment Fund, I'm sure this SC will allow it.

[MLWR]

24. It's pretty clear

that the six "good christians" on the SCOTUS don't care one wit for starving children. On the other hand, they may just be waiting for their customary pay-off.

[SheltieLover]

28. Kick

[eppur_se_muova]

34. Saw both on Rachel's show last night. She announced the SCOTUS ruling as soon as it went public. nt

[republianmushroom]

35. Five of nine of the roberts supreme court are the convicted felons MAGA teabaggers.

[Beartracks]

36. Gutting USAID isn't taking a "chainsaw to bureaucracy," but to the world.

The United States has already ceased being a world leader in a scant 5 weeks. And Russia and China will gladly expand their influence into the void we leave. Trump and Musk have decimated, far too easily, the respect of this nation. And weirdly, Republicans don't give a damn.

===================

[madamesilverspurs]

37. ...

.

[wolfie001]

45. The 2-pinter on that fat-faced clown ex-fratboy

[BarbD]

39. Justice delayed is justice denied.

Same old story. The rule of law is gone. Now what do we do?

[Clouds Passing]

40. Thanks mitch

[Evolve Dammit]

42. "MSM will not cover this." Bottom line. We are in a MSM information free zone. I find Democracy Now! a welcome source.

[onenote]

50. Except the MSM has been covering it.

If you haven't seen anything in the media about Roberts' action, you haven't been looking:
https://www.cnn.com/2025/02/26/politics/supreme-court-foreign-aid-state-usaid/index.htmlhttps://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-administration-supreme-court-foreign-aid-freeze/
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2025/02/26/supreme-court-pauses-judges-order-usaid-foreign-assistance/80596919007/https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/justice-department-judges-cant-comply-deadline-usaid-funds-rcna193837
https://www.reuters.com/legal/trump-administration-says-it-cannot-meet-court-deadline-foreign-aid-payments-2025-02-26/

[NoMoreRepugs]

43. The lawless court is no different than VonSchitzInPants - they are

making it up as they go along.

[wolfie001]

44. 6 jesus-freak ghouls on the SC

We have no Supreme Fair Justice in America now. Just christo-fascism. The sooner we realize that, the sooner we can slowly turn the tide back to reason and sanity. This is gonna take a long time.

[AntiFascist]

47. It should be made crystal clear to the Evangelical Right who helped put the fascist court in power...

that the United States no longer holds any semblance of Christian values.

[onenote]

49. Mostly, but not exactly.

While the Supreme Court gave the plaintiffs until noon 2/28 to submit a written respond to State Dept.'s request that the Dist Court's Temporary Restraining Order (first granted on 2/13) be vacated, that isn't really the same as scheduling "arguments at noon".
FWIW, here is the complete timeline of this case:
Jan. 24, 2025 -- State Dept. orders freeze in USAID funding
Feb. 10, 2025 -- Aids Vaccine Advocacy Coalition, Et al. file a complaint seeking a preliminary injunction against State in US District Ct.
Feb. 12, 2025 -- Aids Vaccine moves for a Temporary Restraining Order against State
Feb. 12, 2025 -- US Dist Ct holds telephonic hearing on TRO
Feb. 13, 2025 -- US Dist Ct grants TRO, in part.
Feb. 18, 2025 -- State provides court with status report regarding its compliance with TRO
Feb 19, 2025 -- Aids Vaccine moves for enforcement of TRO and contempt order against State for non-compliance
Feb 20, 2025 - US Dist Ct grants motion for enforcement, denies motion for contempt
Feb 21, 2025 -- State requests stay of enforcement order
Feb 22, 2025 -- US Dist. Ct denies State's stay request
Feb 24, 2024 -- Aids Vaccine files another motion for enforcement and contempt.
Feb. 25 2025 -- US Dist Ct. holds another hearing and issues another order directing State to comply with TRO by 11:59 pm. but denies motion for contempt.
Feb.25, 2025 -- State files appeal with US Court of Appeals for District of Columbia Circuit.
Feb 26, 2025 -- State asks for Ct. of Appeals for stay of Dist Ct order pending appeal
Feb 26, 2025 -- Ct. of appeals denies State's request for stay and dismisses appeal
Feb. 26, 2025 -- States files application with supreme court asking it to vacate Dist. Ct. 2/25 order and also seeking administrative stay of order pending decision on application to vacate.
Feb. 26, 2025 -- CJ Roberts, the SCOTUS justice assigned emergency matters arising from DC District Ct, grants administrative stay and gives AIDS Vaccine et al until noon on 2/28 to respond.
Feb 28, 2025 -- Aids Vaccine and others file response opposing State's request that Dist Court orders be vacated and asking that administrative stay be lifted.

We are now awaiting action, which might be granted by Roberts himself, or might be addressed by the full court.

While I'm in 100 percent agreement that the TRO should be upheld and that the administrative stay should not have been granted, the fact that it was isn't particularly surprising given the deadline imposed by the district court. And, while it may not seem fair, the fact that the Aids Vaccine did not seek relief from State's freeze order for over two weeks undoubtedly has not helped its case for expedited review.

Will Roberts and/or the court sit on it? I have no idea. They might. Or they might rule in favor State quickly. Or they might rule against State. I'm no longer in the business of predicting Supreme Court results.

Finally, and again FWIW, if you haven't seen anything in the media about Roberts' action, you haven't been looking:
https://www.cnn.com/2025/02/26/politics/supreme-court-foreign-aid-state-usaid/index.htmlhttps://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-administration-supreme-court-foreign-aid-freeze/
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2025/02/26/supreme-court-pauses-judges-order-usaid-foreign-assistance/80596919007/https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/justice-department-judges-cant-comply-deadline-usaid-funds-rcna193837
https://www.reuters.com/legal/trump-administration-says-it-cannot-meet-court-deadline-foreign-aid-payments-2025-02-26/

[Dem4life1234]

54. They better not rule for him on the birthright, that is in the Constitution

If these people do that, this country is done for.

What stops them from tearing up other parts of the Constitution?

If only Hillary won, she would have had two or three justices who aren't corrupted.

[czarjak]

55. Bushes Built This

Lock-steppers lock-step. Every time.

[Ms. Toad]

56. The Supreme Court did not stay the ruling that USAID funding must be unfrozen.

What it stayed was an enforcement order that mandated the funds be released by a specific date and time. The underlying order remains intact - and has not even been appealed by Trump.

So - while bad (since Trump is not complying with the underlying order), it isn't as bad as you are suggesting - since he is still under order to unfreeze the funds.

[Joinfortmill]

57. They suck

[onenote]

58. Supreme Court lifts stay on order requiring disbursement of USAID funds

https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/24a831_3135.pdf

It was a close one -- 5-4, with the usual gang of ultra right wingers (Alito, Gorsuch, Thomas, and Kavanaugh) in dissent. It is not a perfect result, because it requires further action by the district court, but it is a positive development compared to the alternative that some here were predicting.

It should be noted that this was a pretty quick decision, all things considered. First, while criticism was leveled here at Roberts for issuing the administrative stay, it should be noted that if he had denied the stay request, the Trump administration could have re-filed the request with a different justice -- picking a justice who would have almost certainly been one to grant the stay, maybe even grant more than an administrative stay. By granting the administrative stay, Roberts was able to ensure that the full court would address the matter, which they did in an order issued less than 48 hours after the Trump administration filed its responsive pleading.