Harriet has swagger. Constitutional champion of Wyoming. The court has no business in matters of monetary spending or not. That's the Boss and the House with the Senate giving their go/no go.
Court would determine if executive was acting outside legislated scope of powers though. Let's not act like they have zero role here.
Trump is only in unusual waters here because he's not spending money. SC will rule that he has that discretion unless the legislation explicitly mandates spending the money in full in a specific way.
They have zero role in this case. Trump isnt violating constitutional directives or constraints. The Supreme court however is. The only way to negate that is tonignore them.
Harriet has swagger. Constitutional champion of Wyoming. The court has no business in matters of monetary spending or not. That's the Boss and the House with the Senate giving their go/no go.
Court would determine if executive was acting outside legislated scope of powers though. Let's not act like they have zero role here.
Trump is only in unusual waters here because he's not spending money. SC will rule that he has that discretion unless the legislation explicitly mandates spending the money in full in a specific way.
They have zero role in this case. Trump isnt violating constitutional directives or constraints. The Supreme court however is. The only way to negate that is tonignore them.
Yet "judges" do it all the time, and Trump has every right to tell them to go fuck themselves.
Only an install would disagree. lol
Maybe the Supreme Court needs a refresher.
A good start:
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2025/02/regarding_the_president_s_power_to_manage_the_government_the_supreme_court_has_spoken.html