PEW Poll Shows majority of Americans think Trump should Obey court orders--America Remains sharply divided over Trump Policies at the 100 day Mark

[EvilEyeFleegle]

I am heartened that the majority of Americans support the rule of law....even if they disagree

Trump’s Job Rating Drops, Key Policies Draw Majority Disapproval as He Nears 100 Days

Trump's approval rating stands at 40%, and Americans mostly disapprove of his tariffs and government cuts.

www.pewresearch.org

With many of the administration’s actions facing legal challenges in federal courts, there is widespread – largely bipartisan – sentiment that the administration would have to end an action if a federal court deemed it illegal.

• 78% say the Trump administration should have to follow a federal court’s ruling, rising to 88% if the Supreme Court were to issue the ruling.
• 91% of Democrats and 65% of Republicans say the administration would need to stop an action if a federal court ruled it illegal, rising to 95% of Democrats and 82% of Republicans for a Supreme Court ruling.

However, the latest national survey by Pew Research Center, conducted April 7-13 among 3,589 adults, finds much wider partisan differences in evaluations of Trump’s overall job performance and some key policies.

Seven-in-ten or more Republicans and Republican-leaning independents approve of:

• Trump’s job performance (75%)
• The administration’s cuts to government (78%)
• Increased tariffs (70%)
• Ending diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) policies in the federal government (78%)

By comparison, even wider majorities of Democrats and Democratic leaners disapprove of:

• Trump’s job performance (93%)
• The administration’s cuts to government (89%)
• Increased tariffs (90%)
• Ending DEI policies in the federal government (86%)

 

[shockedcanadian]

Yes he should. He should also fight them and exercise his Executive Powers as any normal president, this means federal law to deport those who entered your country illegally and applying tariffs, especially to communist countries.

 

[Rawley]

I am heartened that the majority of Americans support the rule of law....even if they disagree

Trump’s Job Rating Drops, Key Policies Draw Majority Disapproval as He Nears 100 Days

Trump's approval rating stands at 40%, and Americans mostly disapprove of his tariffs and government cuts.

www.pewresearch.org

With many of the administration’s actions facing legal challenges in federal courts, there is widespread – largely bipartisan – sentiment that the administration would have to end an action if a federal court deemed it illegal.

• 78% say the Trump administration should have to follow a federal court’s ruling, rising to 88% if the Supreme Court were to issue the ruling.
• 91% of Democrats and 65% of Republicans say the administration would need to stop an action if a federal court ruled it illegal, rising to 95% of Democrats and 82% of Republicans for a Supreme Court ruling.

However, the latest national survey by Pew Research Center, conducted April 7-13 among 3,589 adults, finds much wider partisan differences in evaluations of Trump’s overall job performance and some key policies.

Seven-in-ten or more Republicans and Republican-leaning independents approve of:

• Trump’s job performance (75%)
• The administration’s cuts to government (78%)
• Increased tariffs (70%)
• Ending diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) policies in the federal government (78%)

By comparison, even wider majorities of Democrats and Democratic leaners disapprove of:

• Trump’s job performance (93%)
• The administration’s cuts to government (89%)
• Increased tariffs (90%)
• Ending DEI policies in the federal government (86%)

Well, it's good thing he's doing this, right?

 

[berg80]

A Smoking Gun Document​

A newly unsealed court filing has revealed previously unknown details about the Trump administration’s operation to remove Venezuelan nationals under the Alien Enemies Act and threatens to undermine key elements of its legal defense.

The filing is a declaration by ICE official Carlos D. Cisneros in an Alien Enemies Act case in federal court in the Southern District of Texas. The implications of what Cisneros has revealed could reverberate in AEA cases around the country, including at the Supreme Court.

1. Timing: The headline news was Cisneros’ revelation that detainees are being given “no less than 12 hours” to decide whether to contest their imminent removal under the AEA and another 24 hours to file a habeas case. This is supposed to satisfy the notice requirement the Supreme Court imposed earlier this month in AEA cases, but it is unlikely any court is going to find the 12/24-hour combo sufficient. By way of comparison, U.S. District Judge Charlotte Sweeney of Colorado earlier this week imposed a 21-day notice requirement and other procedural safeguards on the government in an Alien Enemies Act ruling.

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/morni...key-parts-of-trumps-alien-enemies-act-defense

Chris Geidner analyzes of how the Cisneros declaration reveals the regime is telling the SC one thing and apparently doing another.
ICE contradicts DOJ filing at SCOTUS that a pending habeas case blocks AEA removal

All of which begs the question........what's the strategy behind the open defiance of court orders? I'm beginning to wonder if trump wants protests to break down in to violent interactions with police so he can declare martial law.

After Flynn called for martial law, Trump wanted to put him in charge​

After Flynn called for martial law, Trump wanted to put him in charge: NYTimes

Rachel Maddow shares reporting from the New York Times that even after disgraced former Trump NSA Michael Flynn called for using the U.S. military to re-run the 2020 election, Donald Trump wanted to put him in charge at the White House or the FBI.

www.msnbc.com

 

[Mac1958]

A Smoking Gun Document​

A newly unsealed court filing has revealed previously unknown details about the Trump administration’s operation to remove Venezuelan nationals under the Alien Enemies Act and threatens to undermine key elements of its legal defense.

The filing is a declaration by ICE official Carlos D. Cisneros in an Alien Enemies Act case in federal court in the Southern District of Texas. The implications of what Cisneros has revealed could reverberate in AEA cases around the country, including at the Supreme Court.

1. Timing: The headline news was Cisneros’ revelation that detainees are being given “no less than 12 hours” to decide whether to contest their imminent removal under the AEA and another 24 hours to file a habeas case. This is supposed to satisfy the notice requirement the Supreme Court imposed earlier this month in AEA cases, but it is unlikely any court is going to find the 12/24-hour combo sufficient. By way of comparison, U.S. District Judge Charlotte Sweeney of Colorado earlier this week imposed a 21-day notice requirement and other procedural safeguards on the government in an Alien Enemies Act ruling.

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/morni...key-parts-of-trumps-alien-enemies-act-defense

Chris Geidner analyzes of how the Cisneros declaration reveals the regime is telling the SC one thing and apparently doing another.
ICE contradicts DOJ filing at SCOTUS that a pending habeas case blocks AEA removal

All of which begs the question........what's the strategy behind the open defiance of court orders? I'm beginning to wonder if trump wants protests to break down in to violent interactions with police so he can declare martial law.

After Flynn called for martial law, Trump wanted to put him in charge​

After Flynn called for martial law, Trump wanted to put him in charge: NYTimes

Rachel Maddow shares reporting from the New York Times that even after disgraced former Trump NSA Michael Flynn called for using the U.S. military to re-run the 2020 election, Donald Trump wanted to put him in charge at the White House or the FBI.

www.msnbc.com

I suspect they're just creating a predicate on a relatively easy (PR-wise) case. Once the predicate is established, they can just ignore pretty much everything going forward.

And again, the world has seen this before.

 

[Rawley]

A Smoking Gun Document​

A newly unsealed court filing has revealed previously unknown details about the Trump administration’s operation to remove Venezuelan nationals under the Alien Enemies Act and threatens to undermine key elements of its legal defense.

The filing is a declaration by ICE official Carlos D. Cisneros in an Alien Enemies Act case in federal court in the Southern District of Texas. The implications of what Cisneros has revealed could reverberate in AEA cases around the country, including at the Supreme Court.

1. Timing: The headline news was Cisneros’ revelation that detainees are being given “no less than 12 hours” to decide whether to contest their imminent removal under the AEA and another 24 hours to file a habeas case. This is supposed to satisfy the notice requirement the Supreme Court imposed earlier this month in AEA cases, but it is unlikely any court is going to find the 12/24-hour combo sufficient. By way of comparison, U.S. District Judge Charlotte Sweeney of Colorado earlier this week imposed a 21-day notice requirement and other procedural safeguards on the government in an Alien Enemies Act ruling.

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/morni...key-parts-of-trumps-alien-enemies-act-defense

Chris Geidner analyzes of how the Cisneros declaration reveals the regime is telling the SC one thing and apparently doing another.
ICE contradicts DOJ filing at SCOTUS that a pending habeas case blocks AEA removal

All of which begs the question........what's the strategy behind the open defiance of court orders? I'm beginning to wonder if trump wants protests to break down in to violent interactions with police so he can declare martial law.

After Flynn called for martial law, Trump wanted to put him in charge​

After Flynn called for martial law, Trump wanted to put him in charge: NYTimes

Rachel Maddow shares reporting from the New York Times that even after disgraced former Trump NSA Michael Flynn called for using the U.S. military to re-run the 2020 election, Donald Trump wanted to put him in charge at the White House or the FBI.

www.msnbc.com

Uh, What court order have they not complied with? They are complying with Judge Charlotte's order

 

[Nostra]

Lefty opinion pieces are funny.

 

[1srelluc]

Trump will be just fine. Real America is behind him, not the batshit crazy or disinterested.

 

[Nostra]

I am heartened that the majority of Americans support the rule of law....even if they disagree

Trump’s Job Rating Drops, Key Policies Draw Majority Disapproval as He Nears 100 Days

Trump's approval rating stands at 40%, and Americans mostly disapprove of his tariffs and government cuts.

www.pewresearch.org

With many of the administration’s actions facing legal challenges in federal courts, there is widespread – largely bipartisan – sentiment that the administration would have to end an action if a federal court deemed it illegal.

• 78% say the Trump administration should have to follow a federal court’s ruling, rising to 88% if the Supreme Court were to issue the ruling.
• 91% of Democrats and 65% of Republicans say the administration would need to stop an action if a federal court ruled it illegal, rising to 95% of Democrats and 82% of Republicans for a Supreme Court ruling.

However, the latest national survey by Pew Research Center, conducted April 7-13 among 3,589 adults, finds much wider partisan differences in evaluations of Trump’s overall job performance and some key policies.

Seven-in-ten or more Republicans and Republican-leaning independents approve of:

• Trump’s job performance (75%)
• The administration’s cuts to government (78%)
• Increased tariffs (70%)
• Ending diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) policies in the federal government (78%)

By comparison, even wider majorities of Democrats and Democratic leaners disapprove of:

• Trump’s job performance (93%)
• The administration’s cuts to government (89%)
• Increased tariffs (90%)
• Ending DEI policies in the federal government (86%)

Cool story.

Now show us which court orders they are not complying with.

 

[mudwhistle]

A Smoking Gun Document​

A newly unsealed court filing has revealed previously unknown details about the Trump administration’s operation to remove Venezuelan nationals under the Alien Enemies Act and threatens to undermine key elements of its legal defense.

The filing is a declaration by ICE official Carlos D. Cisneros in an Alien Enemies Act case in federal court in the Southern District of Texas. The implications of what Cisneros has revealed could reverberate in AEA cases around the country, including at the Supreme Court.

1. Timing: The headline news was Cisneros’ revelation that detainees are being given “no less than 12 hours” to decide whether to contest their imminent removal under the AEA and another 24 hours to file a habeas case. This is supposed to satisfy the notice requirement the Supreme Court imposed earlier this month in AEA cases, but it is unlikely any court is going to find the 12/24-hour combo sufficient. By way of comparison, U.S. District Judge Charlotte Sweeney of Colorado earlier this week imposed a 21-day notice requirement and other procedural safeguards on the government in an Alien Enemies Act ruling.

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/morni...key-parts-of-trumps-alien-enemies-act-defense

Chris Geidner analyzes of how the Cisneros declaration reveals the regime is telling the SC one thing and apparently doing another.
ICE contradicts DOJ filing at SCOTUS that a pending habeas case blocks AEA removal

All of which begs the question........what's the strategy behind the open defiance of court orders? I'm beginning to wonder if trump wants protests to break down in to violent interactions with police so he can declare martial law.

After Flynn called for martial law, Trump wanted to put him in charge​

After Flynn called for martial law, Trump wanted to put him in charge: NYTimes

Rachel Maddow shares reporting from the New York Times that even after disgraced former Trump NSA Michael Flynn called for using the U.S. military to re-run the 2020 election, Donald Trump wanted to put him in charge at the White House or the FBI.

www.msnbc.com

It's called following the constitution.

 

[EvilEyeFleegle]

Cool story.

Now show us which court orders they are not complying with.

LOL. I often wonder if you even read the posts you comment on?

No one, in this article, alleges anyone is not complying with anything.

It just says that a majority of Americans..no matter their party, support compliance.

 

[Donald H]

I think this is just another case of all of you trying to get attention by trolling each other.

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

Trump will be just fine. Real America is behind him, not the batshit crazy or disinterested.

Remember, whenever a magaturd says Real American, they mean them.

 

[mudwhistle]

I am heartened that the majority of Americans support the rule of law....even if they disagree

Trump’s Job Rating Drops, Key Policies Draw Majority Disapproval as He Nears 100 Days

Trump's approval rating stands at 40%, and Americans mostly disapprove of his tariffs and government cuts.

www.pewresearch.org

With many of the administration’s actions facing legal challenges in federal courts, there is widespread – largely bipartisan – sentiment that the administration would have to end an action if a federal court deemed it illegal.

• 78% say the Trump administration should have to follow a federal court’s ruling, rising to 88% if the Supreme Court were to issue the ruling.
• 91% of Democrats and 65% of Republicans say the administration would need to stop an action if a federal court ruled it illegal, rising to 95% of Democrats and 82% of Republicans for a Supreme Court ruling.

However, the latest national survey by Pew Research Center, conducted April 7-13 among 3,589 adults, finds much wider partisan differences in evaluations of Trump’s overall job performance and some key policies.

Seven-in-ten or more Republicans and Republican-leaning independents approve of:

• Trump’s job performance (75%)
• The administration’s cuts to government (78%)
• Increased tariffs (70%)
• Ending diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) policies in the federal government (78%)

By comparison, even wider majorities of Democrats and Democratic leaners disapprove of:

• Trump’s job performance (93%)
• The administration’s cuts to government (89%)
• Increased tariffs (90%)
• Ending DEI policies in the federal government (86%)

 

[Paradoxical#1]

LOL. I often wonder if you even read the posts you comment on?

No one, in this article, alleges anyone is not complying with anything.

It just says that a majority of Americans..no matter their party, support compliance.

It is the way questions are posed. If they added whether or not he should obey radical left wing crazy judges when they say he can’t deport people any more like Obama did, see what they say.

 

[Nostra]

LOL. I often wonder if you even read the posts you comment on?

No one, in this article, alleges anyone is not complying with anything.

It just says that a majority of Americans..no matter their party, support compliance.

So you started a thread based on a fantasy.

How Dimwinger of you.

 

[Orangecat]

they mean them.

Did someone ask for your pronouns?

 

[Nostra]

Remember, whenever a magaturd says Real American, they mean them.

Of course. Your Cult hates America.

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

Did someone ask for your pronouns?

Did someone ask you to vomit a response?

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

Of course. Your Cult hates America.

Now you sound just like the left.