WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court agreed Monday to hear the Trump administration’s appeal of a lower court ruling that it improperly diverted money to build portions of the border wall with Mexico.
“It’s also not clear whether the administration has spent all of the $2.5 billion it moved to the wall project,” and the administration has assured the supreme court that this has nothing to do with the large briefcases Overflowing with cash the trump boys were seen tugging out of the white house doors. The 5 conservative justices were unanimous that they see and hear absolutely nothing.
In today’s episode of “How low can they go?” we find out if a Supreme Court, ostensibly a nonpartisan guardian of the Constitution, is willing to abrogate the Legislature’s power of the purse for blatantly partisan reasons!
A wall that only works at high tide?
I propose the construction of a moat along the entire length of the Texas-Mexico border.
ETA: We can fill it with alligators too.
We can give it a cool Mexican sounding name like Rio Grande…
It will be cheaper than a wall and we can fill it with laser sharks.
That’s a (Rio) Grande idea!
First thing I get from this article is that the SCOTUS is showing their political partisanship right on their black gowns sleeve. Why bring this up two weeks before the election if not to bolster the Rump’s wet dream? The arguments won’t be heard for months after the election.
O/T
Where’s wall dough?
I just can’t understand why the Democrat Party has objections to such a beautiful structure.
Boof Kavanaugh…
Just another prick for the wall…
In Mexico it is called the Rio Bravo del Norte. Let’s give it the proper name.
It’s going to get interesting on January 20 when the new Solicitor General asks permission to file new briefs, reversing the government’s position, in every Trump case still pending.
Trump ended the shutdown after Congress gave him approximately $1.4 billion in border wall funding,
Two alternate ideas with this ‘seed money’:
The goal here isn’t to influence the election. No one who is undecided cares that much about this issue.
Breyer is correct and the money is spent or, if not, will be before final judgement.
No, now that Trump has gotten what he wanted through extra-constitutional means, the goal is to ensure that Democrats can’t do the same.
He or she won’t need to. The vocabulary word for the day will be “moot.” Use it in a sentence!
We fought a war over that particular moat. We get the naming rights.
I don’t know what SCOTUS actually costs to operate, but it seems like it would be cheaper and more efficient to just rule on things when Trump asks them to do so. They could just say “yes, he can do anything he wants, but this policy only lasts as long as POTUS is a Republican.” Why are they pretending?
If Trump wins, the money transfer will be upheld and will be able to continue based on a declared “emergency,” regardless of whether the event is such.
If Biden wins, having already allowed Trump to move and spend the money for the wall, the court will rule against any more transfers for declared emergencies such as Climate Change or the like.
It’s really simple.