Tornado Alley (PROG)

[fuagf]

Sorry pal, to now you haven't come up with enough to suggest the legal scholar opinion here is wrong. Repeat earlier post:

I don't think you should back off dealing with the Schumer switch as easily as you appear to be. i think you should question your position more. For instance i haven't seen you comment on the substantive Schumer-switch reasons he gave. Importantly that the courts would be taken out of play by a shutdown. Might have missed it, but i haven't seen you deal directly with that yet. Stewart in his over-enthusiastic fashion didn't deal with any of Schumer's very valid reasons either. Edit in: See article below which i hadn't read carefully before writing these personal comments.

All the Schumer stuff Stewart offered, like the polls, the gym comments and especially the last video he said went viral (it sucks big time and deserves derision if it is true) i agree are weak as.

However even less impressive to me was Stewart's jumping on the popular anti-Schumer switch bandwagon, because i'm have been thinking that with every single judge decision that has gone against Trump since the cr passed we've seen more evidence that Schumer made the right decision.

Yes, and i read some of the ill-informed Dem comments too. I'm certain in time you, if you cared to really question your position on this could see more opinions as this one arising in the days and weeks ahead:

Schumer Was (Unfortunately) Right, But Either Way, the Infighting Must Stop

19 Mar 2025
Neil H. Buchanan

Schumer Was (Unfortunately) Right, But Either Way, the Infighting Must Stop

Posted in: Constitutional Law

As bad as things are right now, they could be even worse. In particular, the United States government could have shut down starting last weekend, with offices closed, millions of government workers furloughed, and millions of others being required to work without pay. There would also have been no clear path ever to reopen the government, which would have been great news to Donald Trump, Elon Musk, and their eager group of anarchists inside and outside of government.

Avoiding that shutdown took an act of clear-eyed courage from Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, but rather than being thanked for risking his own reputation to steer the country away from a cataclysm, he is being savaged by many Democrats, pundits, NeverTrump conservatives, and others. Things are so bad that Schumer felt the need to postpone a planned book tour, with liberal activists raining criticism down upon him while calling for his resignation.

In this column, I will make four points. First, shutting the government down would have been absolutely the wrong move, and Schumer was right to lead Democrats away from that disaster (a disaster that would have been even more grave than the ones that we now face). Second, I am the last person who would be inclined to defend Schumer. Third, the felt need among those who oppose Trump to “do something” is understandable but cannot possibly justify “doing anything, just for the sake of doing it.” And fourth, even if I am wrong and Schumer’s decision was a mistake, the infighting must stop immediately. This is no way to run an opposition to emerging fascism.

A Shutdown Would Have Been Much Worse than the Alternative

[...]

Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia, who disagreed with Schumer about the CR, inadvertently made a telling point when he said in an interview ..

.. that the Trump administration had lost some court cases in the last few weeks, as judges have struck down Trump’s lawless attempts to dismantle the government. Kaine seemed to think that voting for the CR would amount to an endorsement of lawlessness, but that has it precisely backward, because judges can only rule that Trump has violated a spending law if that spending law exists. Without a CR, there is no law for the courts to enforce.

[Insert: Note: As i've said here meany times that
for me was one key reason i went with Schumer.]

To be clear, Trump might well be in the final stages of pulling the plug on the rule of law entirely, which would mean that he will not even abide by the requirements of the CR that has now passed (and that he himself signed). If that is where we are headed, however, that would not make Schumer wrong but instead would mean that nothing matters anymore. If Trump is going to spend what he wants, and only what he wants, then Congress will be irrelevant.

In other words, if there is any life left in the rule of law, the CR constrains Trump in ways that a shutdown would not. And as noted above, unlike previous presidents and congresses that have viewed ending a shutdown quickly as essential to good governance, the shutdown that Schumer and his fellow group of Democrats avoided might well have never ended.

And if that had happened, Democrats would have been to blame for handing Trump power that even robust courts could not nullify.

[...]

Posted in: Constitutional Law

Neil H. Buchanan, an economist and legal scholar, is a visiting professor at the University of Toronto Law school. He is the James J. Freeland Eminent Scholar Chair in Taxation Emeritus at the University of Florida's Levin College of Law. Professor Buchanan blogs at Dorf on Law.

https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=175963553