When They Come for the Judges.... LOSING!!!!

Trump has lived in the courtroom his entire "professional" life. Until the Democrats flip the House, it looks like the only way to stop him is by challenging his every move.

Backing that idiot into a corner will result in the type of radical move that will spell his doom - dissolving the judiciary. He's already threatening judges - even GOP appointees.

We'll see how this shakes out.

https://apnews.com/article/dei-trump...70595513046ae5

A federal judge temporarily blocks parts of Trump’s anti-DEI executive orders

By CLAIRE SAVAGE and ALEXANDRA OLSON
Updated 12:24 PM CDT, March 28, 2025
Share

CHICAGO (AP) — A federal judge has temporarily blocked the U.S. Department of Labor from implementing parts of President Donald Trump’s executive orders aimed at curbing diversity, equity and inclusion efforts among federal contractors and grant recipients.

Judge Matthew Kennelly of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois halted the Labor Department from requiring federal contractors or grant recipients from certifying that they don’t operate any programs in violation of Trump’s anti-DEI executive orders.

That certification provision has stepped up pressure on companies and other organizations to revisit their DEI practices because if the government were to determine they violated the provision, they would be subject to crippling financial penalties under the False Claims Act.

Thursday’s ruling is in response to a lawsuit filed last month by Chicago Women in Trades, a nonprofit founded in 1981 that helps prepare women for work in skilled construction trades and has several grants from with the Department of Labor. The organization argued that the president’s executive orders on DEI are so broad and vague that the organization had no way to ensure compliance, and thus they threaten its core mission.


The judge also blocked the Labor Department from freezing or canceling any funding with Chicago Women in Trades, and the Trump administration from pursuing any False Claims Act enforcement against them.

“This is a critical step in ensuring that the organization can continue the important work it leads — helping women put food on the table through careers in the skilled trades and making job sites safer for thousands of women over the last four decades,” Sabrina Talukder, a senior counsel with the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, which is representing the organization, said in a statement.

The Department of Justice did not immediately respond to requests for comment. A hearing on Chicago Women in Trades’ bid for a longer-lasting halt on Trump’s anti-DEI executive orders is scheduled for April 10.

The organization’s lawsuit is one of several challenging Trump’s executive orders targeting DEI programs in both the private and public sectors.

Trump signed an order his first day in office directing federal agencies to terminate all “equity-related” grants or contracts. He signed a follow-up order that included a requirement that federal contractors and grantees certify that they don’t “operate any programs promoting DEI that violate any applicable Federal anti-discrimination laws.”

Kennelly’s decision comes nearly two weeks after an appeals court lifted a broader nationwide injunction against Trump’s anti-DEI executive orders in a separate lawsuit in Baltimore. But Thursday’s ruling is limited in scope because Kennelly declined to extend the temporary restraining order to other federal agencies.

Kennelly wrote that Chicago Women in Trades was likely to succeed in its arguments that parts of the executive orders are a violation of free speech rights and are unconstitutionally vague.

Although the government argued that the certification provision “implicates only illegal DEI programs, it has studiously declined to shed any light on what this means. The answer is anything but obvious,” Kennelly wrote.

Kennelly wrote that he extended his order to all Labor Department contractors and grant recipients because the vagueness of Trump’s executive orders, coupled with the threat of financial penalties, would likely pressure organizations to curb DEI programs in potential violation of free speech rights.

Rather than face potentially crippling penalties, “it is likely that many of these grantees will take the safer route and choose to simply stop speaking on anything remotely related to what the government might consider to promote DEI or equity. A nationwide restraining order is appropriate to protect grantees who cannot afford the risks inherent in biting the hand that feeds them,” Kennelly wrote.

During a hearing on Tuesday, the Trump administration argued that Chicago Women in Trades’ motion for relief was premature because it was based on speculation as to how the executive orders will be implemented.

Does the Chicago Women in Trades allow inclusion of men folk in their program?

Does the Chicago Women in Trades allow inclusion of men folk in their program? Originally Posted by Why_Yes_I_Do

Good question. Do you care? Wanna join?

...He's already threatening judges... Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

Like this a-here one:

...There are activist judges… and then there’s Jeb Boasberg. While other radical judges dabble in partisanship, Boasberg has set the gold standard. He’s what every weaponized, DC swamp judge aspires to be: shameless, biased, and proudly unaccountable.

This guy checks all the boxes:

• NeverTrump leadership? ✔️
• Judge shopping games? ✔️
• Absurd cruelty toward J6 defendants? ✔️

Boasberg isn’t just on the bench—he’s leading the resistance in a long, black robe.

[…]

Wouldn’t it be just par for the course if we found out USAID was somehow funding Judge Boasberg’s activism? At this point, nothing would surprise us. That’s how absurd—and corrupt—this whole circus has become.

As it stands now, with his impressive progressive resume, Judge Boasberg is an activist’s activist—he’s the Antifa of the judiciary.

And it all starts with his availability—Boasberg keeps himself right there on the shelf, ready for any judge-shopping assignment that needs a partisan rubber stamp. Need a biased bench-warmer to weaponize your case? Judge Boasberg is your guy. He’s not just available—he’s eager. Heck, he’ll probably show up on his day off just to help the regime get the ruling it wants...

Judge Boasberg isn’t the topic of this thread.

Pro tip: Read the thread before making off-topic glib remarks.

Trump has lived in the courtroom his entire "professional" life. Until the Democrats flip the House, it looks like the only way to stop him is by challenging his every move. . Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

Stopping President Trump is another way to voice opposition to returning non-citizens here illegally to their home countries.

Stopping Trump is another way to oppose reducing waste, fraud and abuse in the federal bureaucracy.

Stopping Trump means that you want to see the inevitable bankruptcy of the Nation.

Stopping Trump is another way to say that you want to render our election procured to be open to voter fraud and election rigging.

I could go on, but I would rather just state that I support the general agenda of the Trupp administration, and hope that whoever succeeds him in 2028 carries on in that same direction.

To Remain On Topic . . .

6 - Respect the topics presented by those who start a thread. Attempts to derail a thread or change it's direction is referred to as thread hijack and will be discouraged. Attempts to guide a thread in the right direction are appreciated, while responses to posts which hijack a thread are not.

Stopping President Trump is another way to voice opposition to returning non-citizens here illegally to their home countries.

Stopping Trump is another way to oppose reducing waste, fraud and abuse in the federal bureaucracy.

Stopping Trump means that you want to see the inevitable bankruptcy of the Nation.

Stopping Trump is another way to say that you want to render our election procured to be open to voter fraud and election rigging.

I could go on, but I would rather just state that I support the general agenda of the Trupp administration, and hope that whoever succeeds him in 2028 carries on in that same direction. Originally Posted by ICU 812

No idea who TF “Trupp” is, it he must be God the way you kneel before him.

I guarantee you would not publicly testify in support for his cruel, hateful policies, otherwise, your fine God fearing neighbors would throw you out of the HOA

Judge Boasberg isn’t the topic of this thread... Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

Do you even know what this thread is about? I'm just trying to guide this thread in the right direction.

Seems to be some baiting and switching, aka shuck'n and jiving, going on around here.

Is it about "When They Come for the Judges" (plural), i.e. the thread title?

Is it about:

...He's already threatening judges... Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

I see no demonstrated proof, in anything proffered, or even any inference that Trump is going after any judge, let alone Judge Matthew Kennelly, specifically mentioned in the article. In fact, the first 3 words of the article are: "A federal judge" (singular).

Is it about lawfare? Seems like it to me, based on the first paragraph:

...Trump has lived in the courtroom his entire "professional" life. Until the Democrats flip the House, it looks like the only way to stop him is by challenging his every move... Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

Yuppers. That is classic lawfare, fair and square. I could post the Common Interest Agreement, to band together 14 States and DC, i.e. to judge shop, to jog your memory if you like. I would even offer you bonus points if you knew 7 of the 14 States, but I suspect you know them all.

I could give you a name of a specific judge (give ya a free guess at their name) - (GOP appointed even, I think), that Trump is in fact purported to be going after, thus elevating this to "threatened" Judges, and back it up with an article from your beloved, though soon to be defunct, NPR.

Was this just a love-fest, puff-piece about said Judge Matthew Kennelly? Ya'll got a thing going on or something? Not that there's a problem with that.

So what is this thread about, in your mind (sic)?
Or is this just, yet another - TDS, TDS, Orange Man Bad, TDS, TDS thread?

Yet you won’t read the story posted in the OP obviously. You just wanna pick at words.

No need for you to comment further until you do.

Next?

... I read the whole thing, including the nascent additions of your screed, as evidenced in my reply to your query.

Yet you won’t read the story posted in the OP obviously. You just wanna pick at words.

No need for you to comment further until you do.

Next? Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

But not on my part.

But he wasn't elected, nobody voted for him.

Here's what high profile liberal lawyer Johnathan Turley had to say recently on this very subject.

https://x.com/rcpvideo/status/1905284237214818512

You do realize it is illegal to discriminate.
It is also illegal to force someone to discriminate.
Those are laws of the land, i.e. not ambiguous.
There are currently a dozen or more lawsuits over forced illegal discrimination.

...On January 21, 2025, President Trump signed an executive order titled “Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity.” This order revokes Executive Order 11246 and requires the Department of Labor’s (“the Department") Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (“OFCCP”) to stop “[p]romoting ‘diversity,’ mandating affirmative action,” and “[a]llowing or encouraging Federal contractors and subcontractors to engage in workforce balancing based on race, color, sex, sexual preference, religion, or national origin.”...

So why is it that you and Kennelly are advocating for discrimination in the first ding-danged place? Is it the pillow, talking? I think the President and the full force of the DOJ should be indiscriminate with discriminators.