They have 72 hours to bend the knee. I assume that they will bend the knee.

Nope.

Denied.

The Court has denied Trumpy's latest unconstitutional authoritarian power grab. Like it has denied his attempt to illegal fire federal workers. It's no wonder he wants to gut the judiciary too.

"Presidents may set policy priorities for the executive branch, and agency heads may implement them. This much is undisputed," wrote Judge Susan Illston in her order in U.S. District Court for the District of Northern California.

"But Congress creates federal agencies, funds them, and gives them duties that " by statute " they must carry out," Illston wrote.

"Agencies may not conduct large-scale reorganizations and reductions in force in blatant disregard of Congress's mandates, and a President may not initiate large-scale executive branch reorganization without partnering with Congress."

And people just like you will continue to support indentured servitude to get their cheap ----.

#34 | POSTED BY LFTHNDTHRDS

This is the "Goatman" argument that you can't be against Big Oil because you still use petroleum products repackaged.

You support indentured servitude. How do I know?

You use money. You have a computer and you use the internet. You probably have a smartphone too.

GFY hypocrite.

The only thing you know about me is what I've shared here - very little.

I know you use a computer and the Internet and most likely a smartphone.

And I guarantee you use money.

Don't have to know anything else about you to know support indentured servitude.

"The difference between us is the fact that I don't mind paying a little more for something if there's an upside to it down the road."

The difference between you and me is that I know it's not all about me and I care that there are Americans who ARE affected and the price of things that they need to survive and flourish really do matter.

Also.. the Mad King lied when he promised to lower prices for Americans.

And I can't abide liars.

So Boaz is for affirmative action ehhhhhh??

POSTED BY LAURAMOHR

Boazo is for whatever Trumpy tells him to be for today. Which could be the exact opposite tomorrow.

idk if its unconstitutional ...

#44 | POSTED BY ONEIRONAUT

Yeah we already knew that.

idk if its unconstitutional ...

#44 | POSTED BY ONEIRONAUT

Maybe if you actually read the article (and the constitution) you WOULD know.

The motion says that the revocation of the certification is unconstitutional and that the record is clear that the action was taken "in direct retaliation against Harvard for refusing to cede control of its academic prerogatives to the government and because the government disagrees with Harvard's perceived viewpoints."

So this is the twisting of the arm. idk if its unconstitutional, but this is similar to the Jones University case and ObamaCare, IMO.

#44 | POSTED BY ONEIRONAUT

Gotta love how you propagandists slip these little lies into a discussion so easily.

The Bob Jones University case was in no way similar. Harvard is not accused of racial discrimination and prohibiting interracial dating and marriage based on religious beliefs. So no. Trumps direct retaliation against Harvard for refusing to cede control of its academic prerogatives to the government and because the government disagrees with Harvard is not similar at all. Not even close.

The Bob Jones University v. United States case was a landmark decision by the U.S. Supreme Court that affirmed the Internal Revenue Service's (IRS) right to revoke tax-exempt status for educational institutions, like Bob Jones University, that practice racial discrimination, even if those practices are rooted in religious beliefs. In this case, Bob Jones University, a fundamentalist Christian institution, was found to be engaging in racial discrimination by prohibiting interracial dating and marriage among students. The IRS revoked the university's tax-exempt status, arguing that such discrimination was contrary to public policy.