BREAKING: SCOTUS hands Trump yet another win and guess who blasts KBJ

The Supreme Court just handed President Trump another legal win as they struck down a San Francisco lower court's injunction that would stop the administration from cutting the federal work force. 

The order says the judge who put a stop to Trump cutting several federal agencies can now go ahead with the cuts and see how it plays out on its merits.

Some of the cuts will be: HUD, HHS, DoD, Department of Agriculture,  Department of Commerce, Energy, Homeland Security. These cuts will be staffing from these agencies and are designed to save taxpayer funding. 

The is part of the DOGE effort and Trump's campaign promise.

The ruling actually comes as a rebuke of Justice Jackson, but it doesn't come from a conservative justice, it comes from Justice Sotomayor. 

She writes:

"I agree with Justice Jackson that the President cannot restructure federal agencies in a manner inconsistent with congressional mandates. See post, AT 13. Here, however, the relevant Executive Order directs agencies to plan reorganizations and reductions in force "consistent with applicable law." App. to Application for Stay 2a, and the resulting joint memorandum from the Office of Management and Budget and Office of Personnel Management reiterates as much. The plans themselves are not before this Court, at this stage, and we thus have no occasion to consider whether they can and will be carried outconsistent with the constraints of law. I join the Court's stay because it leaves the District Court free to consider those questions in th first instance."

The ruling passed 8 -1 with Jackson the only one who didn't know what she was doing.

Not a doctor, and not much of a lawyer

Thus, SCOTUS came down with an opinion before they broke for their summer recess. They ruled that nation-wide injunctions with these nation-wide causes can no longer go to the level as before where, for example, a judge in San Francisco can change a policy for someone that's living in New York City. 

The fact that Jackson's colleague has to remind her of what the law really says, shows us that she really does not deserve to be a Justice. And she certainly is not a doctor.

Hey amazing readers! If you love the content you find here please consider supporting Brain Flushings. A quick coffee donation via Buy Me a Coffee fuels late-night writing sessions and fresh ideas. Every sip—er, dollar—helps me create more of the posts you enjoy. Join the crew, toss in a coffee, and let’s keep the good vibes brewing! 


Tweet

Judge takes Florida's side over Biden re: vax mandate for federal contractors

His dementia is not something to laugh at--it's something of which to impeach him 

A federal judge in Florida put a temporary injunction in place Wednesday against the federal government's Covid vaccine mandate for federal contractors.

U.S. District Judge Steven Merryday [and a Merry Christmas to all] issued a 38-page opinion challenging the Biden administration's nonsensical sweeping mandate disputing its justification. The mandate would compel employees of all agencies and businesses that contract with the federal government to be vaccinated against COVID-19 with some exceptions.

Merryday was not the first to issue an injunction against Biden's mandate; a federal judge in Georgia beat him to it.

“The extent of any absenteeism attributable to COVID-19 among contractors and subcontractors is unexplained,” Merryday wrote, as reported by the News Service of Florida. 

“The frequency and duration of any procurement delay attributable to COVID-19 is unexplained. The extent of any cost increases attributable to COVID-19 is unexplained. In other words, the extent of any procurement problem, past or future, attributable to COVID-19 is undemonstrated and is merely a hastily manufactured but unproven hypothesis about recent history and a contrived speculation about the future. Obviously, no massive extension and expansion of presidential power is necessary to cure a non-existent problem and certainly neither ‘good cause’ nor ‘urgent and compelling circumstances’ exists to justify summary disregard of the requirements of administrative law and rule-making.”

Apparently, it isn't about the logic or the science, it's about the power.

Last month, Florida's Republican Governor Ron DeSantis signed legislation outlawing vaccine mandates in his state, which is a direct challenge to Biden’s mandate.

“It’s the United States of America,” Gov. DeSantis said at a signing ceremony in Brandon, Florida, a location chosen to emphasize the viral chant, "Let's Go Brandon!" which became a verbal substitute for "F**k Joe Biden." 

De Santis continued, “The states are the primary vehicles to protect people’s freedoms; their health, their safety, their welfare, and our Constitutional system. What Biden is doing is not constitutional. There has never been a federal vaccine mandate imposed on the general public.”

A few weeks later, following a Georgia lawsuit over the mandate, U.S. District Court Judge R. Stan Baker issued a nationwide injunction against the obviously unconstitutional mandate for federal contractors. Baker’s order was not the first injunction over the mandate, but it was the first to cover the entire U.S., temporarily nullifying our alleged president's order that was set to take effect on January 4.

Federal leftist attorneys tried to get Florida’s lawsuit dismissed by arguing that the state lacked standing to sue over the vaccine mandate. Merryday disagreed, citing the conflict between state law and Biden’s vaccine mandate in his opinion. 

He used the University of Florida as an example:

“As Florida’s reply shows, the University of Florida, for example, is trapped in a bind,” he wrote. “If the federal government awards a contract proposal subject to the executive order, the university’s compliance with the mandatory clause will conflict with the university’s duty to obey state law prohibiting a vaccination requirement.”

* * *

Why not subscribe to Brain Flushings and check out the ads on these pages. It costs nothing to subscribe and it's worth every penny. And remember, every time you click on an ad, you help in the fight against the tech giants.

* * *

“Absent a preliminary injunction, the defendants’ challenged actions will force each state agency to comply with Florida law and lose existing and prospective contracts,” the judge continued. “If a state agency forgoes the opportunity to contract with the federal government, no judicial relief can remedy the loss. Even a state agency’s hesitation — in deference to state law — to acquiesce to the defendant’s request to modify an existing contract might sour and end present and prospective contracts that benefit Florida and the nation.”

So Biden and his handler(s) lose this legal battle but someone is still making a bundle of money with these vaccines, and you can bet that this person or persons are government employees at the top of the food chain.

Tweet

Top officials violate the law, federal judge orders them to appear in court

Andrew Hanen, a federal judge in the district court of South Texas, has ordered top officials of Homeland Security to appear in Brownsville, Texas next month to explain why they should not be held in contempt for violating an injunction issued against President Obama's executive amnesty order. 

This order also includes Secretary Jeh Johnson, yet another Obama appointee who believes, like many on the left, that Obama's word is the law.

When Obama announced the amnesty action on November 20th, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, who was then the state's attorney general, filed the suit on December 3rd.

Judge Hanen called Obama's response to his February 16 injunction "unacceptable" and "unprofessional" and said that he is "shocked and surprised at the cavalier attitude the Government has taken" in the way they disregarded it.

The problem stems from the federal government's failure to show why the DHS issued two thousand work permits to illegal aliens after the injunction was in place. The Injustice Justice Department announced that in May, but DHS never explained why they approved the applications.

Hanen is giving them until the end of July or else appear before him on August 19th.

"Each individual Defendant must attend and be prepared to show why he or she should not be held in contempt of Court," Hanen ordered. 

This makes one wonder if Obama is going to use his pen and phone to intervene and make the law of the land "go away." If he does, and is successful, then call it another victory for anarchy.

Tweet