update - judges strike down DEI mandate for contractors who work with govt and block dismantling CFPB

mandrill

monkey
Aug 23, 2001
79,341
99,689
113
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -A federal judge on Wednesday allowed for now the takeover of the U.S. Institute of Peace by tech billionaire Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency, after the institute accused Musk's team of occupying the building by force.

The emergency ruling came after DOGE staffers gained access on Monday with the help of police officers to USIP, an independent, nonprofit organization funded by the U.S. Congress and whose Washington headquarters sits across the street from the U.S. State Department.



U.S. President Donald Trump gestures stands at the presidential box at the Kennedy Center, in Washington, D.C., U.S., March 17, 2025. REUTERS/Carlos Barria© Thomson Reuters
The move by Musk's team is the latest and potentially most aggressive example of DOGE taking over a building as part of the Trump administration's push to slash the size of government by reducing the 2.3 million-strong federal workforce and lowering costs.

U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell strongly criticized the way Musk's team behaved but said she was not going to order a temporary halt to DOGE's actions. USIP had asked the judge to stop DOGE "from completing the unlawful dismantling of the Institute."



USIP's lawsuit was "messy," she said, since it was filed on behalf of only five board members and not the entire USIP board, and the ousted president was not a plaintiff.

Still, Howell said she was disturbed by the way DOGE had entered USIP with armed police, which she described as "terrorizing."

"I have to say I am offended on behalf of the American citizens," she said, adding that USIP staff had been treated "abominably."

Howell said she would have another hearing on the lawsuit but did not say when.

After a standoff on Monday in which a handful of USIP staff initially locked all the doors to the building, DOGE employees, with the help of local police, expelled the institute's president, several staffers and an attorney from the building.

USIP's chief security officer said in an affidavit that he had called for police help after blocking DOGE staffers' access to the building. When the police arrived, however, they told him they were there to expel USIP staffers.View on Watch


USIP in its lawsuit called DOGE's entry into the building "literal trespass and takeover by force."

DOGE personnel had "plundered the offices in an effort to access and gain control of the institute's infrastructure, including sensitive computer systems," the lawsuit said.

DOGE, USIP and its lawyers did not respond to requests for comment after the ruling.

The White House said in a statement that Howell's order "affirms the President’s clear authority to appoint and remove board members."

The USIP lawsuit said the takeover violated federal law because USIP is not a government entity. The institute was founded by Congress in 1984 with a mandate to protect U.S. interests by helping to prevent violent conflicts and broker peace deals abroad.

According to a congressional budget forecast, USIP is expected to receive $55 million in funding from Congress this year. It also receives private donations.



On March 14, Trump fired most of USIP's board, a move the lawsuit claimed was unlawful because no reason was given for their removal.

Three members of the board were left in place, including U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and Trump's Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. They removed USIP's president and installed a Trump loyalist, part of the team that moved into the building on Monday.

Trump, in an executive order last month, incorrectly declared the organization to be a “government entity,” the lawsuit said. The president said the institute was “unnecessary” in his order.

Judge declines to bar DOGE from US Institute of Peace after standoff
 
  • Like
Reactions: Valcazar

mandrill

monkey
Aug 23, 2001
79,341
99,689
113
(Reuters) -A federal judge on Thursday blocked Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency from accessing Social Security records as part of its hunt under President Donald Trump for fraud and waste, calling the effort a "fishing expedition."

U.S. District Judge Ellen Lipton Hollander of Maryland said in her ruling the Social Security Administration likely violated privacy laws by giving DOGE "unbridled access to the personal and private data of millions of Americans."


"The DOGE Team is essentially engaged in a fishing expedition at SSA, in search of a fraud epidemic, based on little more than suspicion. It has launched a search for the proverbial needle in the haystack, without any concrete knowledge that the needle is actually in the haystack," Hollander said.

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

US judge blocks Elon Musk's DOGE from accessing Social Security records
 

mitchell76

Well-known member
Aug 10, 2010
26,223
11,908
113
Judge Boas was appointed by GW Bush, btw.
I've kind of changed my attitude on "this whole judge thing." I'm just happy that Trump will be the president for 4 more yrs, and Trump will get his DOJ, to appeal these judges rulings in court!!
 
  • Haha
Reactions: squeezer

kherg007

Well-known member
May 3, 2014
9,662
8,254
113
I've kind of changed my attitude on "this whole judge thing." I'm just happy that Trump will be the president for 4 more yrs, and Trump will get his DOJ, to appeal these judges rulings in court!!
Well mitch as long as we agree on the rule of law, not men (or women), then we agree on the starting point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mitchell76

mandrill

monkey
Aug 23, 2001
79,341
99,689
113
White House rescinds executive order targeting prominent law firm
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump on Thursday rescinded an executive order targeting a prominent international law firm after it pledged to review its hiring practices and to provide tens of millions of dollars in free legal services to support certain White House initiatives.



The move follows a meeting between Trump and Brad Karp, the chairman of the law firm Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Garrison & Wharton, over the White House order issued last week.

The order, the latest in a series of similar actions targeting law firms whose lawyers have provided legal work that Trump disagrees with, threatened to suspend active security clearances of attorneys at Paul, Weiss and to terminate any federal contracts the firm has. It singled out the work of Mark Pomerantz, who previously worked at the firm and who oversaw an investigation by the Manhattan District Attorney's office into Trump's finances before Trump became president.

To avoid those consequences, the White House said Paul, Weiss had agreed to “take on a wide range of pro bono matters that represent the full spectrum of political viewpoints of our society,” to disavow the use of diversity, equity and inclusion considerations in its hiring and promotion decisions and to dedicate the equivalent of $40 million in free legal services to support Trump administration policies on issues including assistance for veterans and countering anti-Semitism.



In a statement issued by the White House, Karp said: “We are gratified that the President has agreed to withdraw the Executive Order concerning Paul, Weiss. We look forward to an engaged and constructive relationship with the President and his Administration.”

The firm becomes the latest corporate target to make concessions to the president to avoid his ire.

Meta and ABC made settlement payments to Trump’s future presidential library to end lawsuits filed by Trump. Other tech and financial firms have publicly rolled back DEI programs in line with Trump’s policy interests.

Earlier executive orders have targeted the law firms of Perkins Coie, which last week sued in federal court in Washington, and Covington & Burling.
 

mandrill

monkey
Aug 23, 2001
79,341
99,689
113
Donald Trump's contention that he can legally fire anyone employed by the federal government despite a 90-year Supreme Court ruling could be validated by the current conservative majority on the court which would be "disastrous" according to one court watcher.

According to a report from NPR, a collection of lawsuits appear to be headed to the nation's highest court that will allow then to reconsider the landmark Humphrey's Executor v. United States ruling that denied President Franklin D. Roosevelt the power to "fire members of independent boards or commission" unless it was for "cause, such as inefficiency, malfeasance or neglect of duty."



As NPR's Andrea Hsu is reporting, "the court's current conservative supermajority has been chipping away at that precedent, so the Trump administration could prevail if this gets to the Supreme Court."



The report notes that Trump's acting Solicitor General Sarah Harris has already been paving the way for just such a claim in a letter to Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) where she asserted, "To the extent that Humphrey's Executor requires otherwise, the Department intends to urge the Supreme Court to overrule that [CFPB] decision, which prevents the President from adequately supervising principal officers in the Executive Branch who execute the laws on the President's behalf."




According to Jared Davidson, counsel for legal advocacy group Protect Democracy, "These agencies need to be able to operate with a level of independence so that they can do the work for the American people and not be puppet masters," before adding "It would be absolutely disastrous for the American people if the court decides to give the president carte blanche to ignore the clear mandate of Congress and turn these independent agencies into essentially groups of political cronies."


'Absolutely disastrous': 90-year-old Supreme Court ruling limiting Trump's power at risk
 
  • Like
Reactions: Valcazar

kherg007

Well-known member
May 3, 2014
9,662
8,254
113
Kari Lake Outraged That Republicans Are Suddenly Accepting Election Results
PHOENIX (The Borowitz Report)—After her failed bid for the US Senate made her a two-time loser, an irate Kari Lake complained on Monday that it was “totally unfair” that the Republican Party had suddenly decided to accept election results.

“I thought we were going to have frivolous lawsuits and baseless claims of voter fraud like we always do,” she said. “I no longer recognize my Republican Party.”

“Where are all the election deniers when you need them?” asked Lake, who now calls herself “an election denier denier.”

“Where’s the QAnon Shaman?” she demanded. “Where’s Ginni Thomas? I haven’t seen one frickin’ Proud Boy marching for me. You people all suck!”

LOL.
NOTE: This comes from "the Borowitz report", a satirical fake newspaper type along the lines of the Onion.
 
Last edited:

mandrill

monkey
Aug 23, 2001
79,341
99,689
113
A US federal judge has reprimanded government lawyers as he questioned President Donald Trump's invocation of a wartime law to deport hundreds of Venezuelan migrants.
Judge James Boasberg repeatedly clashed with justice department attorney Drew Ensign during a court hearing in Washington DC, saying he was not used to such "intemperate, disrespectful language" in government filings.
Trump last Saturday deported 238 Venezuelan alleged gang members to a mega-prison in El Salvador after invoking the 1798 Alien Enemies Act, last used during World War Two.
Speaking in the Oval Office earlier on Friday, the Republican president insisted his administration was getting "bad people out of our country", and renewed his attacks on Judge Boasberg, describing him as a "radical left lunatic".


The Trump administration maintains the men were "carefully vetted" and verified as gang members before being flown to El Salvador.
Some of their family members, however, have disputed that allegation, and US officials have acknowledged "many" of the men have no US criminal record. Venezuela's interior ministry has also disputed that the men had links to the Tren de Aragua gang.
At Friday's hearing, Judge Boasberg said he agreed that the US president had "wide latitude" to enforce immigration law.
But he expressed reservations that the deported migrants had no legal remedy to contest whether they were gang members or not.
"The policy ramifications of this are incredibly troublesome and problematic and concerning," Judge Boasberg said.
Last Saturday, he issued a verbal order to the government to turn around the deportation flights, but the White House said it was too late as the planes were already in international airspace.
The timing of the flights was a contentious issue in court on Friday.
"Did you not understand that when I said do that immediately, I meant it?" Judge Boasberg told Mr Ensign.
He said the Trump administration would be held accountable if they breached his court order.
"The government's not being terribly co-operative at this point, but I will get to the bottom of whether they violated my word," he said.
The judge could hold specific Trump officials in contempt of court for defying his ruling, although the president himself has broad immunity from any legal repercussions for official acts while in office.
The case has raised constitutional questions given that US government agencies are generally expected to comply with a federal judge's ruling.
At another hearing on Thursday, Judge Boasberg dismissed a government court filing on the migrant deportation flights as "woefully insufficient".
Trump and members of his administration have been criticising the judge. The US president has called for him to be impeached, and accused him of trying to usurp the presidency.
Earlier this week Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts issued a rare admonishment, without naming Trump, saying that impeachment was "not an appropriate response".
The government has appealed against Judge Boasberg's temporary restraining order. A hearing is due at the city's court of appeals on Monday.

1742600252426.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: Valcazar

Valcazar

Just a bundle of fucking sunshine
Mar 27, 2014
34,916
66,615
113
  • Like
Reactions: squeezer

squeezer

Well-known member
Jan 8, 2010
22,414
17,534
113
We've seen a lot of this aimed at various institutions and they are mostly being picked off one by one.
It's not good at all.
It's a shotgun approach and it's everywhere. Folks are being overwhelmed. I suspect that eventually what is happening to Mush and Tesla with fire bombings and protests will start happening in the US against the Repugs and Trump. Trump will order Hegseth his army bitch to stop the unrest and Russia will be celebrating with vodka and borscht.
 

Valcazar

Just a bundle of fucking sunshine
Mar 27, 2014
34,916
66,615
113
Donald Trump's contention that he can legally fire anyone employed by the federal government despite a 90-year Supreme Court ruling could be validated by the current conservative majority on the court which would be "disastrous" according to one court watcher.
This is one of those things I think the current court will strike down.
Which is not good.
 
  • Sad
Reactions: mandrill

mandrill

monkey
Aug 23, 2001
79,341
99,689
113
We've seen a lot of this aimed at various institutions and they are mostly being picked off one by one.
It's not good at all.
A large DC litigation firm could nuke the DoJ, if Trump lawfared it. The sheer resources at 1 of those big firms could blow the DoJ out of the water.

I suspect this is "pay-to-play" by the law firm to get a lot of government work from this administration.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Valcazar

mandrill

monkey
Aug 23, 2001
79,341
99,689
113
This is one of those things I think the current court will strike down.
Which is not good.
We'll see. Trump could be so radioactive by the time this gets to the USSC that only the very corrupt, right wing judges - i.e. Thomas - will facilitate Trump's crazy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Valcazar
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts