Quote:A federal judge on Tuesday indefinitely barred President Trump from firing federal workers during the Schumer Shutdown.

US District Judge Susan Illston, a San Francisco-based Clinton appointee granted a preliminary injunction that blocked President Trump from firing federal workers while the lawsuit makes its way through the courts.

Earlier this month Judge Illson issued a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) to stop the Trump Administration from firing federal workers and on Tuesday she expanded that block.

The Schumer Shutdown began on October 1, and the Senate has voted 13 times – and failed 13 times – to reopen the government because Schumer wants to give illegal aliens healthcare.

Layoffs of federal employees officially began earlier this month as the U.S. government shutdown entered another tense phase, according to Trump administration budget chief Russell Vought, who confirmed the sweeping reductions in a social media post.

“The RIFs have begun,” Vought announced on X, using the acronym for “Reductions in Force.”

Norm Eisen, the Deep State’s favorite lawyer who spearheaded the color revolution and more than 180 lawsuits against Trump, sued the Trump Administration to stop the RIFs.

Norm Eisen filed a lawsuit on behalf of federal labor unions and judge shopped to make sure his case was assigned to Judge Illston because she ruled in favor of labor unions in a RIF case in the past.

Earlier this month, Judge Illston issued a TRO because she said the firings appear politically motivated.

Link

it "appears" to be another #NFS political judge hack advocate...

Trump will win this one in the end.

(10-28-2025 06:30 PM)TripleA Wrote:  Trump will win this one in the end.

like all the rest, eh?!

the kangaroo courts are so far gone into the abyss of bias, most initial rulings have become moot...

@frivolityDonktardRules

Big yup.

Just another leftist judge who thinks he has presidential powers.

(10-28-2025 07:06 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Just another leftist judge who thinks he has presidential powers.

they're worse than a liberal arts tenured professor...

Lol. Right!!!

(10-28-2025 07:16 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(10-28-2025 07:06 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Just another leftist judge who thinks he has presidential powers.

they're worse than a liberal arts tenured professor...

Stink, when I read that, I thought you had typed "liberal ants."

Used to be it was an embarrassment to be overturned by a higher court. Judges took their role seriously as to avoid having it publicly pointed out that they couldn’t effectively interpret the law.

(10-28-2025 10:35 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(10-28-2025 07:16 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(10-28-2025 07:06 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Just another leftist judge who thinks he has presidential powers.

they're worse than a liberal arts tenured professor...

Stink, when I read that, I thought you had typed "liberal ants."

lol ... is there a difference?! ...

after muh divorce, I banged one for a short period of time ... luckily, I didn't get those pesky ants in the pants for that miscue ...

(10-29-2025 01:57 AM)banker Wrote:  Used to be it was an embarrassment to be overturned by a higher court. Judges took their role seriously as to avoid having it publicly pointed out that they couldn’t effectively interpret the law.

no doubt ... instead of wearing a scarlet letter, it's become their badge of 'honour' whilst lacking courage...

it's sinful how our court system has been sabotaged by leftist lack of value and principles...

(10-29-2025 01:57 AM)banker Wrote:  Used to be it was an embarrassment to be overturned by a higher court. Judges took their role seriously as to avoid having it publicly pointed out that they couldn’t effectively interpret the law.

a lot of things that used to be embarrassing have been thrown out since ohh 2016 or so.

(10-29-2025 07:49 AM)ballantyneapp Wrote:  

(10-29-2025 01:57 AM)banker Wrote:  Used to be it was an embarrassment to be overturned by a higher court. Judges took their role seriously as to avoid having it publicly pointed out that they couldn’t effectively interpret the law.

a lot of things that used to be embarrassing have been thrown out since ohh 2016 or so.

we finally have a voice that laughs in ewer feces ... it has to suck to be ewes...

(10-29-2025 07:49 AM)ballantyneapp Wrote:  

(10-29-2025 01:57 AM)banker Wrote:  Used to be it was an embarrassment to be overturned by a higher court. Judges took their role seriously as to avoid having it publicly pointed out that they couldn’t effectively interpret the law.

a lot of things that used to be embarrassing have been thrown out since ohh 2016 or so.

Since the Obama inauguration. You’re off by just a few years

If a judge is overturned 3 times they should be subject to removal, or at least an administrative hearing where they have at support their decisions and argue their opinion directly to the overturning court. It should be embarrassing and painful.

The only tactics leftists have continue to be

1. Activist judges "ruling" to delay and ultimately get slapped
2. Chaos in the streets
3. Stall by creating scenarios like the shutdown

Quite pathetic

Sent from my SM-S928U using Tapatalk

How many times and different ways does SCOTUS need to tell them about national injunctions and who the head of the executive branch is and what he can do as chief executive?

L is for liberal...as in another loss incoming. They won't care...this is just about wasting time and governmental resources. What progressives do best.