Tornado Alley (PROG)

[fuagf]

Excellent - "“For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision,” Roberts said. “The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose.”"

Course Trump et al have shown clearly they don't give a shit about hundreds of years of relatively successful democracy practices in the USA. In fact they want to toss it all in the gutter. Or more accurately maybe, they want to drag all the good practice into the gutter with them.

More from yours:

"Although Trump has routinely criticized judges, especially as they limit his efforts to expand presidential power, his latest post escalated his conflict with a judiciary that’s been one of the few restraints on his aggressive agenda. Impeachment is a rare step that is usually taken only in cases of grave ethical or criminal misconduct."
Your - https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-federal-judges-impeachment-29da1153a9f82106748098a6606fec39

That judiciary, note, apparently would be out of play in a shutdown. Aside, it that alleged fact is incorrect i haven't see it seriously disputed yet. Okay, fuck it let's check yet again - actually i do like to be proven wrong, and haven't read here past the first paragraph yet -- let's see now ...

The foundation of the American government lies in the principle of separation of powers, dividing authority among three branches: the executive (the President), the legislative (Congress), and the judicial (courts). The system of separation is designed to act as a check and balance mechanism, preventing the abuse of power by any one branch. Central to this arrangement is Article I of the United States Constitution, which assigns the appropriation and control of government funds solely to Congress. The failure to pass an appropriation bill results in federal departments and programs losing access to funding and ultimately a government shutdown.
https://judicialstudies.duke.edu/2024/05/how-a-u-s-government-shutdown-impacts-courts-access-to-justice/

Right. That check and balance system is what Trump/Vance/Musk/Yarvin/Thiel et al want to eliminate.
They want a King executive tree, lop the branches. Democracy is messy, they say. Ok, what next...
(i often in posting don't read ahead first and haven't here):

Prior to 1980, the three branches of government would continue operations during budget gaps under the assumption that Congress would eventually approve spending at their current levels. This changed during the administration of President Jimmy Carter, when then-U.S. Attorney General Benjamin Civiletti issued guidance that the Antideficiency Act prohibits government agencies from spending money prior to its being appropriated.

Since this opinion in 1980, there have been 21 government shutdowns, but three stand out in recent history.

* The first was a 21-day shutdown in 1995-96 that occurred over opposition to spending cuts during President Bill Clinton’s administration.
* The second was a 16-day shutdown in 2013 caused by disputes over the implementation of the Affordable Care Act (ObamaCare) during President Barack Obama’s administration.
* The third and longest was a 35-day shutdown of 2018-19 caused by disputes on the funding of expansion barriers at the US-Mexico border during President Donald Trump’s administration. This remains the longest government shutdown in U.S. history.

Reasons for shutdowns range from disagreements over fund allocation to arguments over specific agencies or causes. According to an article in Fast Company, government shutdowns are becoming more common as the political parties have become more fractious.

Impact on Access to Justice

Unlike executive branch agencies, the federal courts can continue operations for about two weeks following a government shutdown. When a shutdown loomed in September 2019, the U.S. federal courts confirmed they could use reserve or carryover funds accumulated from various revenue sources not dependent on Congress, such as case filing fees. When courts are on notice that a government shutdown may be looming, they can take steps to conserve funds by deferring non-critical expenses — for example, by curbing travel, new hires, and certain contracts.

Access to the courts is fundamental to American democracy; however, not all court functions are deemed essential during a government shutdown.

While courts attempt to operate using reserve funds, their resources are limited. With less funding courts may delay cases, reduce operating hours, and suspend certain court functions.

Under the Antideficiency Act only “essential work” related to the “safety of human life and protection of property,” such as criminal prosecutions, continues unhindered. Civil cases, on the other hand, often experience significant delays. Imposing a moratorium on civil trials was even suggested as a money-saving measure in a prior shutdown.

Uniqueness to the United States

These types of government shutdowns are unique to the United States. In parliamentary systems, stalemates are less likely to be solely due to the majority status of the prime minister and their party within the legislature. Other presidential systems often empower the executive branch to maintain government function even without an approved budget.
Repeat - https://judicialstudies.duke.edu/2024/05/how-a-u-s-government-shutdown-impacts-courts-access-to-justice/

Okay. I'd read once before the "two week" bit, is clarified there. Hope the above is enough to convince all readers that this is a wrap on the question of courts staying open during a shutdown. Schumer had it right. Civil cases not essential. So i'd say appeals re DOGE elimination of jobs not essential. Appeals re Trump eliminating government agencies not essential. So court pushback to DOGE is cut off after some two weeks during a government shutdown.

Am guessing Schumer went through a similar discovery process before he changed his mind on a shutdown.