←back to thread

1245 points mriguy | 5 comments | | HN request time: 0.014s | source
Show context
rideontime ◴[] No.45308805[source]
Bit ridiculous that this article leaves as a footnote that this rule change is illegal and likely to be struck down by the first lawsuit.
replies(6): >>45308841 #>>45308854 #>>45308873 #>>45308999 #>>45309092 #>>45309490 #
1. paxys ◴[] No.45308854[source]
The trump administration has not complied with any unfavorable court ruling about immigration why would they care about this one?
replies(2): >>45308899 #>>45308906 #
2. SpicyLemonZest ◴[] No.45308899[source]
They've complied with a number of unfavorable court rulings about immigration, but precisely because that's what they're supposed to do it goes much less viral.
replies(1): >>45309585 #
3. rayiner ◴[] No.45308906[source]
The one ruling they arguably didn’t comply with was overturned by the Supreme Court, who held the district court didn’t even have jurisdiction in the first place.
4. paxys ◴[] No.45309585[source]
"Yeah they're breaking laws, but why aren't you talking about the ones they are following?"
replies(1): >>45309694 #
5. SpicyLemonZest ◴[] No.45309694{3}[source]
I do! This dynamic drives it as well. A lot of people on social media are passionately convinced that "Trump can do whatever he wants" is the anti-Trump position and "Trump's power is still limited in many ways" is therefore a pro-Trump position. I never know how to engage with that perspective other than to say it doesn't sound right to me. If you're an anti-Trump person trying to figure out how to stop him from doing bad things, it seems pretty important to know that lawsuits are a useful component.