Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   Kim Scheinberg (kims@mas.to)'s status on Thursday, 06-Mar-2025 00:13:51 JST Kim Scheinberg

   Supreme Court denies President Trump‘s emergency bid to cancel nearly $2 billion in USAID spending. The vote is 5-4.

   Five fucking four on what should have been a 9-0 decision requiring no more than three sentences of explanation. A win is a win, but this is a bad harbinger

   • Embed this notice
     Samer Farha (samerfarha@mastodon.social)'s status on Thursday, 06-Mar-2025 05:02:18 JST Samer Farha

     in reply to

     • Paul Cantrell
     • Don Whiteside

     @donw @kims @inthehands but also, uh, they got to rule on it so it isn’t a single judge???

   • Embed this notice
     Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Thursday, 06-Mar-2025 05:02:18 JST Paul Cantrell

     in reply to

     • Don Whiteside
     • Samer Farha

     @samerfarha @donw @kims
     Read the last sentence of the previous post again. •That• is the important thought here.

   • Embed this notice
     Don Whiteside (donw@mastodon.coffee)'s status on Thursday, 06-Mar-2025 05:02:20 JST Don Whiteside

     in reply to

     • Paul Cantrell

     @kims @inthehands The willingness of those four to flat-out lie by omission in the dissent freaks me out a bit too.

     "Does a single … judge … have the unchecked power to compel the Government of the United States to pay out … 2 billion taxpayer dollars? The answer to that
     question should be an emphatic “No,” but a majority of this
     Court apparently thinks otherwise.”

     To ignore that this is money appropriated by Congress (in a law signed by a President!) to pay a contracted debt is abhorrent.