Or you'll do what?
He's going to ignore it, so you might as well just jump ahead to the enforcement step. There's going to be an enforcement step, right?
this post was submitted on 02 Nov 2025
201 points (99.5% liked)
politics
30314 readers
2556 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
There’s going to be an enforcement step, right?
The judge will vigorously wag their finger at the Trump administration and admonish them with a politely written letter.
Maybe they'll even threaten to count to three or hold their breath.
He will, but will his goons? I would not want to be responsible for killing thousands of people (or more, as time goes on), fuck no, thank you kindly.
Well, using the administration's covid response as a benchmark, his goons don't seem to care overly much about how much harm they cause.
He has spent his life battling countless wars of attrition in courtrooms, and has largely forced his petty wishes upon the world.
I suspect his covid response was because he simply didn't want to be told what to do, and then he later used it as a tool.
The GOP is still badly lying about this. Even if last week they actually believed they couldn't spend that cash (ha!) the judges already said they must. So, the judges solved their problem, and now they can spend it. Right? Right?
If they simply start payments, problem solved. Or they could ignore the court orders and file appeals, which they would only do if the goal is to starve people. Only lunatics and mass murderers would want to do that... And that is the real story, but the Times won't describe it honestly.
It remained unclear how the Trump administration might proceed — or, potentially, if it might appeal the ruling.
Oh FUCK OFF New York Times. They're just going to ignore the court order and maybe eventually appeal it. Like they've been doing for 9 god damned months now. Take this weak attempts at impartiality and shove them up your printing press.