Comment Rescue: DavidTC on the Supreme Court’s ruling on the Unfreezing of Funds
From Roll Call: Supreme Court orders clarity on order unfreezing USAID funds
So, we have a bunch of Supreme Court justices showing their true colors there.
For those who do not remember what happened, a lawsuit was filed about USAID about the failure to pay debts that were already incurred and mandated by law, and Judge Amir Ali of the U.S. District Court issued an order saying ‘No, you have to keep paying those for now, the law provides a way to claw back fraudulent purchases and it gives absolutely no ability to do what you are doing’.
They were given a deadline of fifteen days. Fifteen days passed.
The judge issued _another_ order, saying ‘I am not kidding, do this in the next two days, or I will start throwing lawyers in jail for content’.
The government, having failed to follow the first court order, then panicked and tried to get the Supreme Court to step in. (Like, we’re already at a bad place here. You can’t fail to follow court orders for two weeks and then, at the deadline, run somewhere else.)
The Supremes did, pausing that order for a week, until they ruled. Well, that just happened, they said ‘Of course you have to follow that, it’s a judge, you’re in a lawsuit, you have to do what he says.’. …or at least, the people on the court who believe in some sort of rule of law did.
From others, you get this nonsense:
“Does a single district-court judge who likely lacks jurisdiction have the unchecked power to compel the Government of the United States to pay out (and probably lose forever) 2 billion taxpayer dollars? The answer to that question should be an emphatic ‘No,’ but a majority of this Court apparently thinks otherwise,” Alito wrote. “I am stunned.”
Hey, Alito, pssst: What compels the US government to release the funds is the _law_. Both appropriations and, perhaps more relevantly, normal contract law. They did the work, the government has to pay them. Which a judge just ruled on.
And they _did_ appeal it. To literally the Supreme Court. Were you not paying attention?
And how does a District of Columbia district court judge not have jurisdiction over ‘Someone suing the Federal government for not getting paid, which was apparently done by decisions at the White House’? What are you talking about? Who has jurisdiction instead?!
Also, aren’t you the same people who have no problem with a single Texas judge issuing restraining orders outlawing medications across the entire US?
—
Anyway, we have two fun questions here:
Will the US government decide to comply with this?
Who knows.
The second question is funnier: Can the US government comply with this, or is it so dysfunctional that it cannot put this stuff together in time?
They are already a week past the second deadline, which itself was a few days after the actual original deadline. The Supreme Court just said the judge should ‘clarify what obligations the Government must fulfill to ensure compliance with the temporary restraining order, with due regard for the feasibility of any compliance timelines.’, but honestly, as the Government has made absolutely no effort at any point to actually met any deadline, I suspect we’re going to get Judge Amir Ali saying ‘The first order of business today is where I make up a list of people who go to jail tomorrow if it is not done by then.’
The really really funny thing is if the US government cannot actually manage to do it in that timeframe, because the power to do it is in the hands of some 25-year-old techbro who does not actually understand the magnitude of what is going on, and possibly cannot be located in the timeframe because he’s ran off to fire all gay people at the NSA or whatever.
Which sounds unfair, but I remind everyone the government had two weeks to do this, in which they did nothing, then had another week do to this, and if they again did nothing, and are not ready to actually do this, they deserve to be pretty strongly sanctioned by the court.
On the Pollyanna side it’s good to see that a bare majority of the Supreme Court can be counted on to do the absolute bare constitutional minimum vis a vis Trump and the Muskrats.
On the realist side- holy fish did you read the deranged gabbling from the dissent? Alito basically did just rip the mask off and cackle “you fools, forget textualism and originalism, it was all just a feint, it was just will to power all along mwhahahaha!”
And, also, holy fish a bare minimum of the Supreme court justices required to uphold the law stepped up in the very barest minimal way.Report
I’m just glad they actually did. Because my gosh.Report
Likewise, but Chris’ comment below remains pertinent; let us hope it’s pessimistic and not prescient.Report
People have talked about this administration producing Constitutional crises, but I suppose here’s the first chance for them to produce a genuine one: do they comply with an order of the Supreme Court, or do they simply ignore it? I’m actually betting they’ll ignore it. And even if they actually comply, what will the administration’s response be? Packing the court? Getting to Congress to say he doesn’t have to pay the money? Going after individual justices? Some combination of all three? So many opportunities for real Constitutional crises. These are exciting times.Report
Here’s a copy of the order (warning: PDF).
The right-wingers I’ve seen are pointing out that a single judge can force the government to send taxpayer dollars overseas!!!
The left-wingers I’ve seen are pointing out that this ruling applies *SOLELY* to work that has already been completed! It’s basic contract law!
And I’m looking at this part from the ruling again: “clarify what obligations the Government must fulfill to ensure compliance with the temporary restraining order, with due regard for the feasibility of any compliance timelines”
I think that this phrasing is agreeing 100% with the left-wingers and is not talking, for a single second, about what Alito is talking about.Report
Probably because Alito is incoherent and deranged. Yes a single judge can force the government to sent taxpayer dollars overseas… … If those dollars were first duly appropriated and assigned to the sending organization by the House and then approved by the Senate and then signed off on by a President and even then only if those dollars were unlawfully impounded by a President and his billionaire appointed/not appointed/who knows side kick/co-president.Report
I see Alito as being coherent (though, perhaps, deranged). There’s an argument that he sees coming and he wants to cut it off at the pass and, as such, attempted to. Failed, of course.Report
We have plenty on the record of DJT stiffing contractors. The more amazing part is he got 4 Supreme Court justices to say that kind of behavior is OK.Report