Let’s investigate viral nonsense that got tens of millions of views.
The post by @DesireeAmerica4 was viewed 10.8 million times. And the post by @amuse was viewed 18.3 million times.
People are shocked by something that never happened.
Actual Court Ruling
The Actual District Court Opinion does not say arrest, but does say this.
[It is a] basic proposition that all orders and judgments of courts must
be complied with promptly. * * * Persons who make private
determinations of the law and refuse to obey an order generally risk
criminal contempt even if the order is ultimately ruled incorrect. The
orderly and expeditious administration of justice by the courts requires
that an order issued by a court with jurisdiction over the subject matter and person must be obeyed by the parties until it is reversed by orderly
and proper proceedings.Defendants are
hereby further ORDERED as follows:
- The Defendants must immediately restore frozen funding during the
pendency of the TRO until the Court hears and decides the Preliminary Injunction request. …
Appeals Court Ruling
Those who cannot read and don’t bother with the law were also shocked by the Appeals Court ruling.
NBC News reports Appeals court rejects Trump administration bid to immediately reinstate funding freeze
In its ruling Tuesday, a three-judge panel of the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals wrote that the “defendants do not cite any authority in support of their administrative stay request or identify any harm related to a specific funding action or actions that they will face without their requested administrative stay.”
“We are confident the District Court will act with dispatch to provide any clarification needed with respect to, among other things, the defendants’ contention that the February 10 Order ‘bars both the President and much of the Federal Government from exercising their own lawful authorities to withhold funding without the prior approval of the district court,’” the appeals court wrote Tuesday.
Judge McConnell granted the states’ request for a temporary restraining order on Jan. 31 in a ruling finding the states “are likely to succeed on the merits of some, if not all, their claims” that the funding freeze exceeded the president’s powers.
Billionaire Elon Musk, whom Trump named as head of his advisory Department of Government Efficiency, also complained about the judges who have been blocking his access to some federal agencies. He suggested that some of those orders might need to be defied, a position that some frustrated staffers in the White House agree with.
Shocking Language?
The legal analysis clowns were shocked by this District Court statement “Persons who make private determinations of the law and refuse to obey an order generally risk
criminal contempt even if the order is ultimately ruled incorrect.”
Somehow that ridiculously got translated to arrest.
@DesireeAmerica4 asks “Since when does a judge have the power to override the President like this?”
I pointed out that never happened but there was no retraction. I also asked @amuse to retract and got silence.
Meanwhile, the amount of idiotic nonsense the post generated was out of this world. But that was the point all along.
Amusing Nonsense
Here’s amusing nonsense by @MegaMAGA7631
“The court of appeals knows the judge’s ruling is wrong, but they’ll just kick the can down the road as usual. What a bunch of corrupt fraudsters.”
Here’s something that arguably is shocking: Someone actually got this correct.
Please consider @JimmytheButt202 who replied to @MegaMAGA7631 with “Weird how you guys know what’s really happening even when it isn’t happening at all. Great way to declare victory when losing.”
Perhaps I am mistaken, but I think he sees it correctly, for a total of 55 views.
Origin of the Shocking Phrase
Q: Who said “Persons who make private determinations of the law and refuse to obey an order generally risk criminal contempt even if the order is ultimately ruled incorrect“?
A: The US Supreme Court in 1975.
Please consider the US Supreme Court ruling Maness v. Meyers, 419 U.S. 449 (1975)
We begin with the basic proposition that all orders and judgments of courts must be complied with promptly. If a person to whom a court directs an order believes that order is incorrect, the remedy is to appeal, but, absent a stay, he must comply promptly with the order pending appeal. Persons who make private determinations of the law and refuse to obey an order generally risk criminal contempt even if the order is ultimately ruled incorrect.
Howat v. Kansas,258 U. S. 181, 258 U. S. 189-190 (1922); Worden v. Searls,121 U. S. 14 (1887). The orderly and expeditious administration of justice by the courts requires that “an order issued by a court with jurisdiction over the subject matter and person must be obeyed by the parties until it is reversed by orderly and proper proceedings.”
Yes, it is totally shocking for a District Court and an Appeals Court to side with the Supreme Court and not Trump.
How could they?
Impeach them all, I say. Trump needs to pack the court. Do it first so Trump can be king.
A Legal Review
Thanks to a few ridiculous posts on X and idiotic legal comments by Musk propelling them on, millions of people believe a judge threatened Trump with arrest.
That never happened.
Moreover, people do not understand the law. District and Appeals court justices are bound to uphold the constitution.
The phrase that upset the most people came from the Supreme Court itself. It was not a threat, it was a statement of existing law.
Should Trump Comply? Will Trump Comply?
The answers are yes and yes. And this is clear too.
No one will arrest Trump, of course. But they might hold DOGE in contempt, even Elon Musk.
So expect Trump to comply, which is what he should have done in the first place, because …. the order “must be obeyed by the parties until it is reversed by orderly and proper proceedings.”
Case closed. I suspect I will get about 1.5K views vs tens of millions of views of total garbage.
Two Key Court Rulings Go Against Trump. Expect More of the Same
Before the Appeals Court ruling, I commented Two Key Court Rulings Go Against Trump. Expect More of the Same
A judge accuses Trump of defying a court order. Surprise Not.
“Expect More of the Same”
Fact check. True.
Addendum – Reader Comments
Reader 1: “Judge in effect ordering Executive Branch to pay fraudulent claims.”
Correct
And the Judge is correct because the asinine way DOGE went to fix this was to block the 99.9 percent of payment that were legit
Had DOGE sought to block just fraudulent payments we would not be in this situation
So….
Blame DOGE not the judge
Reader 2: “DOGE just uncovered how much of our tax dollars were going to Soros and Gates! The people fighting to keep it hidden likely have their hand in the corruption.”
Close to 100% of the money is legit. There are small number of reported cases of fraud. If you were a legit contractor, would you object to not being paid?
You would be screaming – and people like you are now would be accusing you of fraud.
Had DOGE just gone about this sensibly, blocking questionable transactions, we would not be in this ridiculous setup.
And had you gone after this bullshit instead of shutting down everything, a court would not have ruled against you.
Addendum II
I am 100% in favor of DOGE stopping USAID nonsense. But the correct approach is case-by-case.
$40 billion in payments go out through this system. Musk blocked all of them.
Innocent parties were illegally harmed, and that is how the court correctly ruled.