Summary
The Republican-led House passed a bill 219–213 to curb federal district judges from issuing nationwide injunctions, a response to judges rulings against Trump-era policies.
The bill restricts relief to affected parties only, not nationwide. Republicans argue liberal judges are blocking Trump’s agenda, while Democrats say courts are striking down illegal orders. GOP lawmakers also seek to limit funding for enforcing broad injunctions.
The bill faces slim chances in the Senate.
The Congressional Research Service reported 17 nationwide injunctions so far in Trump’s second term, compared to 86 in his first.
If we get out of this I want these motherfuckers hung upside down. Every single one of them.
Yup.
These are traitors and they deserve death.
This country sentences people to death for FAR less all the time.
You have committed a crime.
/s
I thought crimed.
Remember me fondly.
Ah the Italian ending, how retro lol
I say we hang their corpses from the statue of liberty. Or start the hanging from there so they may have one final view from the monument meant to welcome the immigrants they hate so much.
I’d rather they hang somewhere within rock-throwing distance, but that sounds good too.
I’m down for that
Same, I want to see Trump and Elon’s faces smashed in by a lynch mob
At a Bucc-ee’s, of course
How about a human centipede on display in state, walls of mirrors so they can be reminded of their purpose and place, til death do they part.
Amen.
By the balls/lips. If they don’t have them at the start, help create them.
Let’s get mean
I mean, yeah. They want a king. I am, without any exaggeration or irony, surprised that they haven’t tried to dissolve the legislative branch entirely yet.
They want to keep the image of legislation and a reason to keep getting bribes. They’re not ready for the complete shift yet. They’re prepping us for it by effectively making him king so when they declare he is we’re already used to it.
April 20th
We’ll see, I guess. I don’t think this administration really needs rhyme, reason, or symbolism. They’ll just do what the fuck ever when the fuck ever.
Need? No. Want? Absolutely. This president craves attention.
They have their Kombover King of Kaos, isn’t that enough for them???
They had ONE judge in the fifth circuit that hamstrung the entire Biden presidency. Now they think it’s not okay.
Judge: Not constitutional, NEXT
Clarence Thomas: “I’ll allow it”
“Now I gotta be getting on vacation. Harlan’s RV is outside, gassed up, and ready to roll!”
Carved into the Supreme Court building:
That’s a precedent, it was not in the constitution. People at the time just went along with it.
Laws are only enforced by the people. They could totally use a law to overturn Marbury v Madison and the most of the law enforcement / military would just think “seems legit” and go along with it. Separation of powers would be, for all intents and purposes, over (unless the boots on ground actually stop it)
It’s not just a precedent. It’s the precedent that all legal scholars learn on their first day of US law school. It’s a foundation stone of the US legal system. You tear that one down, and you’ve torn the system down.
Democrats petitioned for protections for people with a name change and Republicans voted against it. If your birth certificate name doesn’t match your ID, you’ll be needing new documentation if you want to vote. Yes, that includes a married surname.
I’m not sure I understand. I would need to get documentation with my maiden name? Or I just have to carry my marriage certificate with me (which I do now because changing your name is a huge pain in the ass).
I’d heard the same language that @disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world referenced, but I had to look up the text of the bill to know myself. Women are an important part of our nation and we need their voice voting.
Here’s the full text of the bill here
So for your situation it looks like if you were using your birth certificate before, and you’ve changed your name when you married, under no circumstances will your birth certificate let you vote anymore under this bill. You will need a government ID that shows your current first and last name but also show citizenship of the USA. So a regular drivers license (non Real ID) won’t work for you either.
The bill text says you would need:
“(1) A form of identification issued consistent with the requirements of the REAL ID Act of 2005 that indicates the applicant is a citizen of the United States.
“(2) A valid United States passport.
“(3) The applicant’s official United States military identification card, together with a United States military record of service showing that the applicant’s place of birth was in the United States.
“(4) A valid government-issued photo identification card issued by a Federal, State or Tribal government showing that the applicant’s place of birth was in the United States.
Goddammit, I just looked at my Real ID drivers license doesn’t indicate I am a citizen. Apparently my state started indicating if I wasn’t a citizen, but since I am, it shows nothing. According to my reading of the voting ID bill, I could be turned away when I try to vote!
So for me the ONLY document I have that would let me vote is my passport! So for you, see if you have Real ID compliant drivers license and make sure your state indicates you are a citizen. Otherwise you’d need a military id or passport.
Wait, so significant portions of the US population will need identification beyond a state-issued ID? If so I feel like this hasn’t been in the news or I’ve really missed a big headline.
Wait what the fuck? This will prevent an uncountable amount of citizens from voting. I haven’t even had a name change and from my reading this I myself would need to get some sort of new identification to vote. My state ID does not say anything about citizenship.
An estimated ~70M voters will be disenfranchised by this bill.
After thinking a bit more on this, those of us with our birth name could use the Real ID compliant drivers license and a birth certificate (has to be the official embossed one, not just a photocopy). However that wouldn’t work for women that changed their name. They’d need a passport (or military ID) I think. IANAL
That’s correct. Real ID is not proof of citizenship. You’ll need that as well as a birth certificate or passport with the same name in order to vote if this passes in the Senate.
That’s correct. Real ID is not proof of citizenship. You’ll need that as well as a birth certificate or passport with the same name in order to vote if this passes in the Senate.
…and for clarity: Women that changed their name in marriage cannot use this path for voter ID because their birth certificate (which DOES prove place of birth and citizenship) doesn’t show the married name.
So for those women, the only ID I can see that would work for them would be passport or military ID. Again, IANAL
Exactly. They would need to get a passport
with the name on their REAL IDin order to vote.If these married women (that changed their last name) have their passport, I don’t think they need Real ID to vote. They would just need to present the passport at time of voting.
So all women that married and changed their name (and don’t have a military ID showing the married name) would need to apply for at least a Passport Card costing $30. So $30 for these women to vote. How is this not a Poll Tax by another name that was outlawed in the 24th Amendment?
24th Amendment of the Constitution:
“The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay poll tax or other tax.”
You’re right. A passport satisfies both requirements.
Thank you! Also, this bill (I hope you used chat GPT or something so it didn’t take too long to get all that info!) is so impractical it borders on unhinged. Most GOP voters wouldn’t meet the requirements.
No AI or chatGPT used. Full disclosure, I didn’t go through the whole thing, just looked for the words “birth certificate” (which only appears 3 times btw) and then looked at the sections before and after it to make sure I covered that point.
Republicans argue liberal judges are blocking Trump’s agenda, while Democrats say courts are striking down illegal orders.
Well, when their agenda is composed primarily of illegal orders…
Lil Ole Magic Mike workin’ his fascist “Christian” magic
Uh, because unconstitutional totally doesn’t mean nationwide
Fascists never change.
And the only way to effectively deal with fascists also never changes.
Not sure why they needed to do this. Nobody is listening to federal judges anymore anyways. I guess now they’re trying to get that on paper.
What, so I get to stop caring what Matthew Kacsmaryk, that one judge in the fifth circuit who is the only judge in his division so he is easy to shop for, has to say. I’ll be honest, this sounds like a win to me, though I do admit it is going to make protecting the country from Trump more expensive.
This is not surprising at all. The Trump regime will be gaining absolute power step-by-step using the russian playbook but with accelerated timelines. Americans may cling to the idea of living in a democracy but it’s no longer the case.
Republicans better hope they never lose the House, Senate, White House, or Supreme Court. If so, shit will bull them over quick. Gun Laws will finally be fixed.
Nothing will happen. Democrats are completely spineless and will bend over like they have in the past.
I vote with them, because there’s no other choice, but if Democrats were given a magic lamp with three wishes, they’d negotiate it down to one and then wish for something they thought the republicans would like.
deleted by creator
They are not capable of a coup imnho.
Edit: Oh, you meant democrats are never going to get power after recent republical coup - seems likely.
deleted by creator
I think some people are incapable of processing that society is ending. They assume the superstructure will always exist and is capable of self-correction.
We should support democrats that believe in real change
That would require the removal of most of them, not easily done with the extreme misinformation
Not most, just a majority.
There’s plenty of believers. None of them are acting in a meaningful way.
Then they are not believers, they say it for personal gain.
