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
Pick Your
Battles
Get Ur Rest
Look for Joy
We have
A Big Fight
Ahead
You still
have time to
to send some
money DU`s
way. Support
the summer
fund drive!

I have
DU friends
everywhere.



Rebellions
are built
on HOPE




DU
keeps
HOPE
alive


Thank you

EarlG

Check out
all the stickies
on Grovelbot's
Big Board!

BumRushDaShow

(158,623 posts)
Sat Aug 9, 2025, 04:10 PM Aug 9

Trump Administration Suffers Double Legal Blow Within Hours

Source: Newsweek

Published Aug 09, 2025 at 9:43 AM EDT

The Trump administration suffered two legal defeats within hours on Friday. A judge in California ordered the release of a Syrian national it has been seeking to deport while a federal Rhode Island judge blocked the imposition of new conditions on domestic violence programs as part of the president's campaign against "gender ideology."

Details of both cases were shared on X by Kyle Cheney, senior legal affairs reporter for Politico. Newsweek contacted the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Justice for comment on Saturday outside of regular office hours via email and press inquiry form respectively.

Why It Matters

With Republicans controlling both chambers of Congress as well as the White House the courts have emerged as one of the main impediments to Trump administration policy.

The administration has suffered a number of prominent legal defeats including courts striking down punitive measures introduced by Trump against law firms involved in proceedings against him, blocking a bid to strip thousands of Haitian migrants of legal protection and removing sanctions aimed at International Criminal Court employees.

Read more: https://www.newsweek.com/trump-administration-suffers-double-legal-blow-within-hours-2111192



Link to California RULING (PDF) - https://t.co/jE9zNILMGa

Link to Rhode Island RULING (PDF viewer) - https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/26046065-ricadv-v-bondi/

Link to Rhode Island RULING (PDF) - https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/26046065/ricadv-v-bondi.pdf
20 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Trump Administration Suffers Double Legal Blow Within Hours (Original Post) BumRushDaShow Aug 9 OP
...the courts have emerged as one of the main impediments... republianmushroom Aug 9 #1
However... Mz Pip Aug 9 #2
That was with only the (typical) 3-judge panel BumRushDaShow Aug 9 #3
Okay, so, serious question. OldBaldy1701E Aug 9 #4
I think for the most part they have (after many fits and starts) BumRushDaShow Aug 9 #6
Yes, it is true that social repercussions can have an effect. OldBaldy1701E Aug 9 #7
There is SOME compliance BumRushDaShow Aug 9 #8
Not enough compliance by far, but vanessa_ca Aug 9 #9
Yeah, but he has surrounded himself with cronies who don't care about said court. OldBaldy1701E Aug 10 #12
It's time to start playing by the new rules he set up. 3825-87867 Aug 9 #5
I have watched popsdenver Aug 9 #10
Biden spent time pushing Schumer to do the judicial confirmations BumRushDaShow Aug 10 #11
Thanks for such an informative post! -eom vanessa_ca Aug 10 #13
Most welcome! BumRushDaShow Aug 10 #14
I've bookmarked it :) vanessa_ca Aug 10 #15
Thank you popsdenver Aug 10 #16
No problem!! BumRushDaShow Aug 10 #17
Thank you for this info packed post! ShazzieB Aug 10 #18
Most welcome and what is telling BumRushDaShow Aug 10 #19
Very interesting! ShazzieB Aug 10 #20

republianmushroom

(21,096 posts)
1. ...the courts have emerged as one of the main impediments...
Sat Aug 9, 2025, 05:10 PM
Aug 9

In essence the trump administration is violating the laws our country.

Mz Pip

(28,198 posts)
2. However...
Sat Aug 9, 2025, 05:41 PM
Aug 9

It appears is administration can’t be held in contempt for not following the rulings. Didn’t an Appeals court panel strike down a recent contempt ruling?

BumRushDaShow

(158,623 posts)
3. That was with only the (typical) 3-judge panel
Sat Aug 9, 2025, 05:48 PM
Aug 9

It's possible there might be a different outcome if there was an en banc ruling (if that gets requested).

OldBaldy1701E

(8,762 posts)
4. Okay, so, serious question.
Sat Aug 9, 2025, 06:19 PM
Aug 9
The administration has suffered a number of prominent legal defeats including courts striking down punitive measures introduced by Trump against law firms involved in proceedings against him, blocking a bid to strip thousands of Haitian migrants of legal protection and removing sanctions aimed at International Criminal Court employees.


Of those things, how many of them have they actually obeyed? As in, they are not continuing the practice that the court says they cannot continue?

See, I keep reading reports of these judgements coming down and then I read that they just keep on doing their shiat anyway.

Such as...

(per Google A.I.)



So, suffering 'legal blows' doesn't seem to matter to them.

So, now what?

BumRushDaShow

(158,623 posts)
6. I think for the most part they have (after many fits and starts)
Sat Aug 9, 2025, 07:04 PM
Aug 9

BUT remember that some of these rulings were limited to specific jurisdictions applying only to those individuals/organizations and/or states covered by the court where the case was filed and/or would apply specifically to those who filed (even if not domiciled in a state covered by that court), since the SCOTUS basically threw out the ability to do "nationwide injunctions". This is why cases are being resubmitted as "class action" to cover a broader group.

One of the biggest egg-in-face-repercussions though was Kilmar Abrego Garcia due to their original intention to "make an example" out of him for "fear" purposes. This included their bold and boastful insistence that he was "never coming back" to the U.S. and other crap.

And then when that flopped, you have the fact that they were forced to generate fabricated charges to try to save face and even add an insistence that they would deport him as soon as he was released on bond before trial. So when that didn't happen (thanks to his lawyers and very "public" interventions by members of Congress), they not only had (expensive) eggs on their faces, but ended up with some tariff tomatoes thrown at them for good measure. And between that and Epstein, Bondi suddenly disappeared claiming a "corneal tear".

With this loon crowd, the more impactful "repercussions" actually come from the sheer "embarrassment" of being publicly outed, rebuked, and mocked versus any actual "consequences" (including financial) that normal people would receive. The most recent example was of course the recent "South Park" mocking of Noem. She has been knocked back on her heels and has basically been unable to retort other than quip that it "was lazy" and then has tepidly tried to take advantage of the mocking but that is failing.

This is because everything they do is to play to the media because they are nothing but hollow fakes and pathetic former media personalities trying to get their big break.

OldBaldy1701E

(8,762 posts)
7. Yes, it is true that social repercussions can have an effect.
Sat Aug 9, 2025, 07:22 PM
Aug 9

However, social repercussions are not always the most effective at sustained effect. Just look at the average attention span these days.

I am asking if they have obeyed any of these judicial directives for longer than ten minutes?

The fact that no one has the backbone to actually hold that orange gibbon, or his inner circle, accountable is another story, but have they wiped their ass with every judgement, or have they actually obeyed any directives as stated by the court?

Because I am betting the answer is 'No, they always do something to continue their crap, regardless of what a judge told them'.

But, I don't know, which is why I am asking.

BumRushDaShow

(158,623 posts)
8. There is SOME compliance
Sat Aug 9, 2025, 07:38 PM
Aug 9
ICE Arrests Plunge in Humiliating Blow to Stephen Miller

And the fact that they are still going through the effort to run to their daddy John Roberts means that they have a tiny thread of at least appearing to adhere to some court orders. If they were going to completely ignore the orders, they wouldn't bother.

I think some of the earlier cases where they dramatically violated the orders, were done as "tests" to see how far they could go. In those cases, I expect their business supporters were excoriating them behind the scenes (and perhaps even threatening to pull $$$ plugs) so they backed down.

Ironically, they have been responding to "the court of public opinion" (which is why the TACO moniker - and that isn't just for tariffs).

vanessa_ca

(564 posts)
9. Not enough compliance by far, but
Sat Aug 9, 2025, 11:29 PM
Aug 9

but thank you for a bright note. "the court of public opinion" seems to matter to his fragile ego a lot.

OldBaldy1701E

(8,762 posts)
12. Yeah, but he has surrounded himself with cronies who don't care about said court.
Sun Aug 10, 2025, 07:48 AM
Aug 10

He may react to such social pressure, but the others are insulated from it and could care less.

Have you seen Stephen Miller out complaining about his public perception?

Have you heard of Karoline Leavitt hiding from the public?

These people are the ones that are creating the policies that the orange gibbon is enacting. He doesn't have the brains to run a popsicle stand. They are the ones feeding this evil to him.

He is a shallow child who can only find strength with being a bastard and a bully. But, his core people are the ones to worry about because they don't care what we or anyone else thinks. And, they have an agenda. One that will end this nation as we know it.

At least, they sure don't seem to care about any of it, other than their slime being fostered onto the entire country, if not the world.

3825-87867

(1,532 posts)
5. It's time to start playing by the new rules he set up.
Sat Aug 9, 2025, 07:01 PM
Aug 9

Screw the Constitution right now and anyone who thinks we can "talk" to these people. The time for going High is over, Michele. It's time to break rules ourselves. Then when we persevere, we treat them EXACTLY the same as they are treating us.
Nuremberg 2! Only worse for them!

popsdenver

(266 posts)
10. I have watched
Sat Aug 9, 2025, 11:56 PM
Aug 9

the Republicans have been stacking the appellate courts for decades. They have kicked it into warp speed these past terms that they were in office.
The seem to show no care about lower courts, because they will appeal it to the appellate courts, and if that fails, they have corruptly loaded the U.S. Supreme Court..........................

BumRushDaShow

(158,623 posts)
11. Biden spent time pushing Schumer to do the judicial confirmations
Sun Aug 10, 2025, 05:46 AM
Aug 10

including a number of Appellate judges.

From the Biden administration archive -

December 20, 2024
FACT SHEET: President Biden Secures Confirmation of 235th Federal Judge


Today, President Biden’s 235th life-tenured federal judicial nominee was confirmed. This marks the largest number of confirmations in a single term since the Carter administration. These highly qualified men and women—all committed to the rule of law and the Constitution—will serve the federal Judiciary for decades to come.

Dating back to his time leading the Senate Judiciary Committee, President Biden has made the confirmation of federal judges a top priority. During his four years in office, President Biden has transformed the federal bench and appointed over a quarter of all active judges, and helped to ensure that the Judiciary looks like the communities it serves.

The 235 confirmations include:

  • One to the United States Supreme Court
  • 45 to the nation’s courts of appeals
  • 187 to the nation’s district courts
  • Two to the United States Court of International Trade


  • (snip)


    And THEN you have the interesting and heartening circumstance where a number of judges at both district and appellate level, including GOP-appointed ones, decided not to either move to "senior" status or retire due to the danger of this current administration and packing the courts with RW loons -

    Conservative Judges Are Refusing To Retire, Denying Trump The Chance To Further Besmirch The Courts

    Also from what I posted a few years ago - https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=17413401

    As compiled by Ballotpedia - https://ballotpedia.org/Current_federal_judges_by_appointing_president_and_circuit (from 2022, although this is a dynamic link)


    Appointments by President (status as of 2022 with Obama update & Clinton/Carter tally)

    Following are the number of Article III federal judges serving in the federal judiciary as of November 27, 2022, organized by the president who appointed them.

    Appointed by Democrat presidents:

  • Joe Biden: 81
  • Barack Obama: 276
  • Bill Clinton: 48
  • Jimmy Carter: 0


  • Appointed by Republican presidents:

  • Donald Trump: 229
  • George W. Bush: 131
  • George H.W. Bush: 11
  • Ronald Reagan: 12
  • Gerald Ford: 0


  • As of today (August 10, 2025) - https://ballotpedia.org/Current_federal_judges_by_appointing_president_and_circuit

    Following are the number of Article III federal judges serving in the federal judiciary as of August 10, 2025, organized by the president who appointed them.

    Appointed by Democrat presidents:

  • Joe Biden: 236
  • Barack Obama: 239
  • Bill Clinton: 30
  • Jimmy Carter: 0


  • Appointed by Republican presidents:

  • Donald Trump: 230
  • George W. Bush: 109
  • George H.W. Bush: 10
  • Ronald Reagan: 10
  • Gerald Ford: 0


  • AND compiled from the same link above for Appellate Courts -

    Democrats HOLD THE MAJORITY in 7 (+ the International Court of Trade)
    Republicans HOLD THE MAJORITY in 5
    Democrats & Republicans have EQUAL CONTROL of 1


    Appellate (circuit) courts

    United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
    Democratic appointed: 5
    Republican appointed: 0


    United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
    Democratic appointed: 7
    Republican appointed: 6


    United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
    Democratic appointed: 6
    Republican appointed: 6


    United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
    Democratic appointed: 8
    Republican appointed: 7


    United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
    Democratic appointed: 5
    Republican appointed: 12


    United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
    Democratic appointed: 6
    Republican appointed: 9


    United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
    Democratic appointed: 5
    Republican appointed: 6


    United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
    Democratic appointed: 1
    Republican appointed: 10


    United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
    Democratic appointed: 16
    Republican appointed: 13


    United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
    Democratic appointed: 7
    Republican appointed: 5


    United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
    Democratic appointed: 5
    Republican appointed: 7


    United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
    Democratic appointed: 7
    Republican appointed: 4


    United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
    Democratic appointed: 8
    Republican appointed: 4


    United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims

    United States Court of International Trade
    Democratic appointed: 6
    Republican appointed: 2


    United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces

    BumRushDaShow

    (158,623 posts)
    14. Most welcome!
    Sun Aug 10, 2025, 01:27 PM
    Aug 10


    (I needed to compile an update myself since I was curious where things stood since 2022! )

    ShazzieB

    (21,420 posts)
    18. Thank you for this info packed post!
    Sun Aug 10, 2025, 03:49 PM
    Aug 10

    I keep hearing how Schlump has packed the federal courts with MAGA nut jobs, but never any actual numbers or sources until now. These numbers make it clear that while he did appoint a lot of judges, things are not skewed in his favor as severely as some might assume.

    I also recall many news stories about judges he appointed ruling against him, which tells me that we should not assume that every judge he appointed is a Trump sycophant or a complete loon. Based on that and the nunbers in this post, I would say that while the federal court situation is not what we would prefer, it is not nearly as dire as some may think!

    BumRushDaShow

    (158,623 posts)
    19. Most welcome and what is telling
    Sun Aug 10, 2025, 04:00 PM
    Aug 10

    is that some current GOP-appointed judges who are near or at retirement or were considering it, have made it known that they would not retire or go into "senior status" right away due to the dire situation.

    45 came into his 2nd term with way fewer judicial vacancies than Biden or Obama or even 45 himseelf (in his first term).

    The next president is poised to inherit the fewest judicial vacancies in generations

    Oct. 5, 2024, 5:00 AM EDT
    By Daniel Barnes, Chloe Atkins and Sahil Kapur

    WASHINGTON — The next president is on track to enter office with the fewest number of vacant federal judgeships to fill in more than three decades, the culmination of both parties diverging sharply on what types of judges they want to appoint and putting a high priority on confirming their preferred judges while in charge.

    The election is just over a month away and early voters have already started casting ballots for either Republican Donald Trump or Democrat Kamala Harris. However, of the myriad of issues that have dominated this election cycle and motivated voters, appointing judges hasn’t received the same level of attention as in years past.

    In 2016, a vacant Supreme Court seat placed the issue of judicial appointments front and center. In 2020, the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and the last-minute confirmation of Justice Amy Coney Barrett again highlighted the role the president has in shaping the federal judiciary. But without the spotlight of a Supreme Court vacancy, the focus in the final weeks of the 2024 election has been aimed at the economy and other issues.

    It’s not just the Supreme Court that lacks vacancies. Out of the 870 Article IIl judgeships authorized by Congress, only 43 seats, or 4.9 percent, are currently vacant. In late September, the Senate confirmed Joe Biden’s 213th judicial nominee before leaving town.

    (snip)

    ShazzieB

    (21,420 posts)
    20. Very interesting!
    Sun Aug 10, 2025, 04:31 PM
    Aug 10

    I'm having fun picturing the sudden upsurge in retirements that would have probably occurred if Kamala had won...and no doubt will occur when (not if, please, God!) the Democrats take the White House back in 2028.

    Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Trump Administration Suff...