Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Fiendish Thingy

(22,091 posts)
21. Not as black and white as it seems
Sun Jan 11, 2026, 10:54 AM
14 hrs ago

From your link:

The Post examined 337 lawsuits in total, finding 165 cases in which judges had ruled against the administration. The Trump White House has been accused of “defying or frustrating court oversight” in 57 cases, or around 35 percent of rulings or orders made against them, the analysis found — an unprecedented amount, according to legal experts speaking to the publication


“Frustrating court oversight” is legalese for playing procedural games as a form of delaying compliance with a court order, which Trump is an expert at as we have seen. That is distinct from openly defying a court order, which has only happened a handful of times.

Note that neither the article at your link, and the WaPo report it references, distinguishes between or defines what the difference is between “frustrating judicial oversight” and open defiance, nor do they give any specific examples of the former.

Despite this administration’s acting with lawless impunity, we must remember this one absolute truth:

Trump is not omnipotent, and the states and the people are not powerless

I think the more interesting, and important, question is: if this administration is truly a wholly unrestrained dictatorship, why do they comply at all?

At the very least Somebody is afraid of going to jail, or more likely, getting disbarred, and so is probably aggressively advocating for compliance with orders that can’t be gamed in court.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Or when a cable news anchor cites polls gab13by13 17 hrs ago #1
"illegal" is more an obstacle to him, appears to me. RoeVWade 17 hrs ago #2
Why the name? bigmonk 17 hrs ago #3
Many of us personally know good people who are named mwmisses4289 17 hrs ago #9
I never refer to him as president. Can't bring myself to put those two words together. Katinfl 16 hrs ago #12
I usually refer to him as t. mwmisses4289 15 hrs ago #18
My husband and I call him the idiot. Katinfl 11 hrs ago #22
People are in total denial and it is impossible to budge them to face reality. Irish_Dem 17 hrs ago #4
Maybe that's it. Normally, I consider myself optimist. I'm optimistic Trump can eventually be crushed with facts and RoeVWade 17 hrs ago #7
You are a balanced optimist who sees hope that Trump can be defeated. Irish_Dem 17 hrs ago #8
Pretty much, yup. Hope to stay that way. RoeVWade 17 hrs ago #10
What you call negativity I would call reality. Irish_Dem 15 hrs ago #16
I thought markie 17 hrs ago #5
I kind of got that. RoeVWade 16 hrs ago #13
There was a discussion here on DU just a few days ago with a poster niyad 16 hrs ago #14
And when a judge rules against the Trump administration Chasstev365 17 hrs ago #6
Given that they consistently have, yes EdmondDantes_ 16 hrs ago #15
Here Chasstev365 15 hrs ago #17
Not as black and white as it seems Fiendish Thingy 14 hrs ago #21
Actually they have complied with rulings restraining their actions most of the time Fiendish Thingy 14 hrs ago #20
I remember being told that Biden couldn't do anything with the "absolute immunity" granted by SCOTUS Orrex 16 hrs ago #11
His administration indeed acts with lawless impunity Fiendish Thingy 14 hrs ago #19
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Every time someone says, ...»Reply #21