this post was submitted on 02 May 2026
173 points (99.4% liked)

politics

29654 readers
1970 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
 

When a federal judge shot down a Trump administration policy of holding immigrants without bond last December, it seemed like a serious blow to the president’s mass deportation effort. Instead, a top Justice Department official insisted the ruling wasn’t binding, and the administration continued denying detainees around the country a chance for release. By February, the district court judge, Sunshine Sykes, was fed up. Sykes, a nominee of President Biden, accused Trump officials in a ruling that month of seeking “to erode any semblance of separation of powers,” adding that they could “only do so in a world where the Constitution does not exist.” Hardly isolated, the case illustrates a broader pattern of defiance of lower court decisions in President Trump’s second term. The failure of Trump officials to follow court orders has been highlighted most notably in individual immigration cases. But a review of hundreds of pages of court records by the Associated Press also shows an extraordinary record of violations in lawsuits over policy changes and other moves. In the administration’s first 15 months in office, district court judges ruled it was violating an order in at least 31 lawsuits over a wide range of issues, including mass layoffs, deportations, spending cuts and immigration practices, the AP’s review of court records found. That’s about 1 out of every 8 lawsuits in which courts have at least temporarily blocked the administration’s actions.

top 10 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] FreshParsnip@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 day ago

UNPRECEDENTED

[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 day ago

Unprecedented display of executive lawlessness.

[–] BigMacHole@thelemmy.club 49 points 4 days ago

If ONLY there was SOMETHING these Judges could DO to Ensure the Trump Administration FOLLOWS the Law! UNRELATED but MAKE SURE you Show up to Court OTHERWISE your GOING TO JAIL you POOR!

[–] Asafum@lemmy.world 42 points 4 days ago

Not a dictator though. Biden was a dictator for.... (Checks notes) Student loan forgiveness...

Right...

[–] SparroHawc@piefed.world 20 points 4 days ago (1 children)

What? The thing we were all saying was going to happen is happening???

If the rules aren't enforced, they aren't rules.

[–] stylusmobilus@aussie.zone 9 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

Not everyone unfortunately. There were plenty of those saying Trump or his administration wouldn’t get away with these things. They dished out a lot of derisive and condescending shit.

Those who knew otherwise were often told they didn’t understand how the legal system worked, by pragmatist shitlibs who couldn’t or didn’t want to admit it was all crashing down.

But yeah, fuckin oath some people were saying it’d happen.

[–] santa@sh.itjust.works 20 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

The Law & Order party…. (Followed by television beat of…) dum dum /s

Such a joke! Man, the GQP wouldn’t be able to recognize itself in a mirror.

[–] circuitfarmer@lemmy.world 12 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

Though it has been a long time coming. Consider the rift between the ideologies of Eisenhower and Reagan. Trump is simply the embodiment of the business-first, people-last, spend-but-don't-talk-about-it ethos -- maybe most directly tied to Barry Goldwater.

[–] einlander@lemmy.world 13 points 4 days ago

Is anything he does unprecedented anymore?

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 11 points 4 days ago

executive

criminal