Jacksonville Jaguars Fan Forums

(06-24-2025, 06:21 PM)The Drifter Wrote: [ -> ]

If term limits cured rottenness, Mexico would be the freshest country in the world.

Term limits aren't bad, but they don't fix anything either.

Poor NYC doesn’t have a decent candidate to choose from on either side of the ticket. 

Cuomo concedes to Mamdani as primary heads to ranked-choice count

(06-27-2025, 12:13 PM)WingerDinger Wrote: [ -> ]

Well, we wouldn't need to worry about getting rid of the Bodies that's for sure........

BOOM. Supreme Court limits on 'colossal abuse of power' by federal judges. Mikey, whats up?

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-c...ral-judges

(06-27-2025, 01:56 PM)Jag149 Wrote: [ -> ]BOOM.  Supreme Court limits on 'colossal abuse of power' by federal judges.  Mikey, whats up?

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-c...ral-judges

Hasn’t been many good years for ole Mikey and it’s not going to be any better for him any time soon..

Sucks for him, good for The USA!!

(06-27-2025, 02:09 PM)WingerDinger Wrote: [ -> ]

(06-27-2025, 01:56 PM)Jag149 Wrote: [ -> ]BOOM.  Supreme Court limits on 'colossal abuse of power' by federal judges.  Mikey, whats up?

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-c...ral-judges

Hasn’t been many good years for ole Mikey and it’s not going to be any better for him any time soon..

Sucks for him, good for The USA!!

He and his fellow liberals are still floating along in denial up where the air is thin.......meanwhile the ground is hurtling up towards them at 180 mph.  It's going to be a painful impact!

(06-27-2025, 11:37 AM)The Drifter Wrote: [ -> ]

Those are the mfs we should build a wall around.
Don't NY my FLA

(06-27-2025, 03:52 PM)Thewitnessofsolinvictus Wrote: [ -> ]

(06-27-2025, 11:37 AM)The Drifter Wrote: [ -> ]

Those are the mfs we should build a wall around.
Don't NY my FLA

They don't need to stop in NC either. We're already a purple state thanks to those bozos.

(06-27-2025, 03:52 PM)Thewitnessofsolinvictus Wrote: [ -> ]

(06-27-2025, 11:37 AM)The Drifter Wrote: [ -> ]

Those are the mfs we should build a wall around.
Don't NY my FLA

Escape from New York style Huh...... A Huge wall around NYC with guard towers and choppers to blow anyone out of the water that tries to escape........ I'll support that......

‘No one’ excited about Kamala Harris’ potential gubernatorial run, say California donors
Major fundraisers cite 'traumatizing' presidential campaign collapse as reason for waning enthusiasm

Former Vice President Kamala Harris’ prospective gubernatorial bid is not striking up much excitement among Democratic fundraisers in California, Politico reported Friday.

The outlet spoke to multiple Democratic Party donors in California to see how they felt about Harris possibly running for governor. So far, her interest in exploring a gubernatorial run in the state following her 2024 presidential election loss hasn’t enthused many.

"She still would probably lead, but honestly, no one is incredibly pumped," one Southern California fundraiser told Politico.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/no-one-exc...nia-donors

(06-27-2025, 01:56 PM)Jag149 Wrote: [ -> ]BOOM.  Supreme Court limits on 'colossal abuse of power' by federal judges.  Mikey, whats up?

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-c...ral-judges

You got me confused with someone else.
I was never in favor of judges being allowed to issue nationwide injunctions for situations that aren't time-sensitive.

(06-27-2025, 05:40 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]

(06-27-2025, 01:56 PM)Jag149 Wrote: [ -> ]BOOM.  Supreme Court limits on 'colossal abuse of power' by federal judges.  Mikey, whats up?

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-c...ral-judges

You got me confused with someone else.
I was never in favor of judges being allowed to issue nationwide injunctions for situations that aren't time-sensitive.

Perhaps, but as I remember when an action is taken you disagree with you always mention the courts stopping it. Now, with this ruling .... 

Anyone else remember ?

(06-27-2025, 07:18 PM)Jag149 Wrote: [ -> ]

(06-27-2025, 05:40 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]You got me confused with someone else.
I was never in favor of (edit: lower court ) judges being allowed to issue nationwide injunctions for situations that aren't time-sensitive.

Perhaps, but as I remember when an action is taken you disagree with you always mention the courts stopping it. Now, with this ruling .... 

Anyone else remember ?

The Supreme Court will ultimately rule against some of the tariffs and also against this executive order revoking birthright citizenship.
But there is a process to follow.
Worth noting that no one had heard of a nationwide or universal injunction until 2017 with the first travel ban.  Folks were stuck in airports far from their homes.  It was appropriate for the first judge to say, time is of the essence, this is wrong, stop it.
Birthright citizenship isn't that type of issue.  We're talking about babies that aren't born yet.  As soon as the universal injunctions started they immediately got overused. Also worth noting that Biden got some universal injunctions thrown at some of his policies also, involving student loans if I recall correctly.

(06-27-2025, 08:40 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]

(06-27-2025, 07:18 PM)Jag149 Wrote: [ -> ]Perhaps, but as I remember when an action is taken you disagree with you always mention the courts stopping it. Now, with this ruling .... 

Anyone else remember ?

The Supreme Court will ultimately rule against some of the tariffs and also against this executive order revoking birthright citizenship.
But there is a process to follow.
Worth noting that no one had heard of a nationwide or universal injunction until 2017 with the first travel ban.  Folks were stuck in airports far from their homes.  It was appropriate for the first judge to say, time is of the essence, this is wrong, stop it.
Birthright citizenship isn't that type of issue.  We're talking about babies that aren't born yet.  As soon as the universal injunctions started they immediately got overused. Also worth noting that Biden got some universal injunctions thrown at some of his policies also, involving student loans if I recall correctly.

Actually they have been around for a long time. It has only been recently they have been politicized by both parties. The Dem's however have used it as an extension of their law fare against Trump. The over use most likely contributed to the Supreme Court finally clarifying the issue before the Congress did. It is in their hopper. 

Here's a breakdown by administration: 

• George W. Bush: 6 nationwide injunctions.
  
• Barack Obama: 12 nationwide injunctions.
  
• Donald Trump: 64 nationwide injunctions.
  
• Joe Biden: 14 nationwide injunctions (first three years).
  

Hegseth announces Navy oil tanker named after gay rights leader renamed after Medal of Honor recipient
Defense Secretary declares, 'We are taking the politics out of ship naming' as Pelosi condemns change

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth announced a Navy oil tanker named after gay rights leader Harvey Milk will be renamed after Medal of Honor recipient Oscar V. Peterson.

"We are taking the politics out of ship naming," he wrote on X along with a video announcing the move.

Milk was California’s first openly gay politician, who was shot and killed inside San Francisco city hall by former San Francisco supervisor Dan White. The ship, a fleet replenishment oiler, was originally named after him in 2016 under President Barack Obama.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/hegseth...-recipient

(06-27-2025, 10:06 PM)Jag149 Wrote: [ -> ]

(06-27-2025, 08:40 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]The Supreme Court will ultimately rule against some of the tariffs and also against this executive order revoking birthright citizenship.
But there is a process to follow.
Worth noting that no one had heard of a nationwide or universal injunction until 2017 with the first travel ban.  Folks were stuck in airports far from their homes.  It was appropriate for the first judge to say, time is of the essence, this is wrong, stop it.
Birthright citizenship isn't that type of issue.  We're talking about babies that aren't born yet.  As soon as the universal injunctions started they immediately got overused. Also worth noting that Biden got some universal injunctions thrown at some of his policies also, involving student loans if I recall correctly.

Actually they have been around for a long time. It has only been recently they have been politicized by both parties. The Dem's however have used it as an extension of their law fare against Trump. The over use most likely contributed to the Supreme Court finally clarifying the issue before the Congress did. It is in their hopper. 

Here's a breakdown by administration: 

• George W. Bush: 6 nationwide injunctions.
  
• Barack Obama: 12 nationwide injunctions.
  
• Donald Trump: 64 nationwide injunctions. <---first term
  
• Joe Biden: 14 nationwide injunctions (first three years).
  

Oh I left out the 40 nationwide injunction used against Trump so far this term.

(06-28-2025, 09:47 AM)Jag149 Wrote: [ -> ]

(06-27-2025, 10:06 PM)Jag149 Wrote: [ -> ]Actually they have been around for a long time. It has only been recently they have been politicized by both parties. The Dem's however have used it as an extension of their law fare against Trump. The over use most likely contributed to the Supreme Court finally clarifying the issue before the Congress did. It is in their hopper. 

Here's a breakdown by administration: 

• George W. Bush: 6 nationwide injunctions.
  
• Barack Obama: 12 nationwide injunctions.
  
• Donald Trump: 64 nationwide injunctions. <---first term
  
• Joe Biden: 14 nationwide injunctions (first three years).
  

Oh I left out the 40 nationwide injunction used against Trump so far this term.

While it's good for Trump that the SCOTUS reined in the district court lawfare, just remember it's a two-way street. Much like the Republicans using Harry Reid's filibuster rule change to forward their agenda, this ruling will most certainly be used by the next Democrat president to advance some Executive Actions which will be very unpopular with Republicans.

(06-28-2025, 11:23 AM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]

(06-28-2025, 09:47 AM)Jag149 Wrote: [ -> ]Oh I left out the 40 nationwide injunction used against Trump so far this term.

While it's good for Trump that the SCOTUS reined in the district court lawfare, just remember it's a two-way street. Much like the Republicans using Harry Reid's filibuster rule change to forward their agenda, this ruling will most certainly be used by the next Democrat president to advance some Executive Actions which will be very unpopular with Republicans.

Agreed.  These EO’s used to circumvent congress need to be reined in as well.  At the same time congress needs to off their collective you know whats and address real issues instead partisan politics.