Getting rid of the courts? I see dissolving agencies....And everyone is anticipating court rulings for that...
Also people keep saying trump is not going to obey the courts, honestly I haven't seen it yet....No constitutional crisis so far in spite of all the rhetoric
All good, i know many others do too. I suffer consequences of whatever, though not as much and not as directly as you do. My best better off than you is that i don't have to suffer Trump nearly as much as you do.
If he and China end up in a full-on trade war then Australia will suffer seriously. China is by far our biggest trading partner.
As it wasn't easy for Schumer, it wasn't easy for me to get to get there, but in the end i ended up feeling the same. Don't understand, after reading my posts, why you would say
"Don't know what you're basing your opinion on, but shruumer was only guessing what would happen based on a semi regular congress, he's stuck in 1979"
as the fact apparently, according to multiple sources, that Musk actually wanted a shutdown was just about enough for me. You don't give pricks like that what they want unless you absolutely have to. Then the apparent fact that a shutdown would allow Trump/Musk et al to classify virtually any worker they felt they could get away with as non-essential without court (open or not) interference as it's apparently legal to do that during a shutdown, then fire them. And the carte blanche for Musk. All of Schumer. and the other's, points i went with. Thought i'd made it clear.
Plus this is a special situation. Musk and his OPM/DOGE were not around in 1979. See:
Two judges order Trump administration to give fired workers their jobs back 2 days ago Lily Jamali Tech correspondent, San Francisco
Two US judges have ordered several federal government agencies to reinstate the jobs of probationary employees fired en masse by the Trump administration last month.
In California, District Judge William Alsup called the sacking of these employees part of a "sham" strategy that aimed to circumvent proper procedures for reducing the federal workforce.
His order - which was followed by another from Maryland - applies to thousands of probationary workers who were fired at a range of departments, including defence, energy, treasury, and veterans affairs.
The Department of Justice says the firings were done based on guidance - rather than a directive - from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM).
The BBC has contacted OPM for comment.
OPM, a once-obscure agency that manages the federal government's civil service, has been thrust into the spotlight amid President Donald Trump's moves to slash the size of the federal workforce.
In Thursday's hearing in San Francisco, California, Judge Alsup countered the DOJ lawyer's arguments from the bench, citing evidence including termination letters that stated the firings were carried out on OPM's instructions.
"That should not have been done in our country," Judge Alsup said. "It was a sham in order to avoid statutory requirements."
Danielle Leonard, a lawyer representing a coalition of government employee unions, said probationary employees were targeted because they lacked the right to appeal.
During the hearing, Judge Alsup also lamented the firing of a government worker in Albuquerque, New Mexico who had been given top marks for performance but was then issued a pink slip citing performance as the cause of their termination.
"I just want to say it is a sad day when our government would fire a good employee and say it's for performance when they know good and well that's a lie," Judge Alsup said.
Judge Alsup's order was followed by a similar ruling from Baltimore, Maryland, by District Judge James Bredar, who agreed that Trump's team had broken regulations and cast doubt on the idea that the workers had been individually sacked for unsatisfactory performances.
Responding to the first ruling, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt accused Judge Alsup of singlehandedly "attempting to unconstitutionally seize the power of hiring and firing from the executive branch".
She said that power rested with the president and "singular district court judges cannot abuse the power of the entire judiciary to thwart the president's agenda".
"The Trump administration will immediately fight back against this absurd and unconstitutional order," she added.
Elon Musk's name was not mentioned during the California hearing, but he has been tasked by President Trump with downsizing the federal workforce through the ad hoc Department of Government Efficiency - or Doge.
"He was on everybody's mind," said Luz Fuller, president of a local Sacramento branch of the American Federation of Government Employees, which represents more than 4,500 employees in Northern California.
The White House has denied that Musk is the agency's leader, although Trump labelled him as such during his Congressional address last week.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
