In the post it says that the judge’s ruling was issued “after a group of nonprofit and public health organizations filed a lawsuit.”

They are supposed to be running as Independent minded legal scholars and practitioners. Of course, that is not possible. The Democrats ran this state for 20 years before 2020. However, we even had a R governor before that who was led by the Democratic women in the legislature to “collaborate”.

In 2022 the judge running in our district was a woman proud of her Scandinavian heritage–you can guess where that leads you politically.

However, her handlers were very tricky. A young man campaigning for the Democratic candidate in our district for the legislature knocked on our door, and when my DH answered, the kid held out a flyer to hand to DH.The flyer for the Democrat legislator. HOWEVER, before he actually put the flyer into my DH’s hand a young woman standing behind the kid stuck out her arm with a slightly smaller flyer. Her flyer had sticky stuff on the back so that when the young woman slapped her flyer on top of the flyer the first kid was handing to hubby it was clear they were both working for the D party, and the campaigning judge was a democrat! The flyer with the sticky stuff that stuck to the Democratic party candidate was the flyer for the “nonpartisan” judge!

These young college kids had been trained in this two-step (twp arm) maneuver!

The young woman and young man will never consider integrity important.

The Rule of Law

because everyone knows

The Rule of the Jungle

is far better.

He’s got time on his hands.

America’s Beloved Rule of Law – Psychological Horror involving various sides all fighting over the Control of Law in order to use the power of *BIG* Govt to shove the winner’s views down the throats of the other sides…

https://redstate.com/bradslager/2025/01/28/the-1st-white-house-press-briefing-for-karoline-leavitt-has-the-press-off-balance-dealing-with-competency-n2184922

An 1836 multi-volume history book titled “French Revolution” contains a version of the quotation that is similar to the one given in 1852. This history book dates the quotation to a battle in 1805. These words may have been transformed into the modern maxim:10

“In that case,” said Napoleon, “let us wait twenty minutes; when the enemy is making a false movement we must take good care not to interrupt him.”

So the advice does have a long history, and a version has been attributed to Napoleon for more than a century and three-quarters.

The point being, that the years of lawfare against Trump-the-man in many ways backfired on the Democrats, and it may be that similar lawfare against Trump-the-president will be the same.

However the (now deposed) regime media will do their best to misinform the public about what is being done.

The judges may have a valid position if they are judging whether or not one of Trump’s order conforms to any relevant statutes.

When they are imposing their own partisan druthers, which too many of them feel is their bounden duty, then they need to be smacked down as soon as possible.
I wonder if SCOTUS could develop some kind of rule like “strict scrutiny” that has to be applied to any case challenging a presidential EO before it can be docketed: do you, Judge, actually have a right to rule on this case?

If people think it would have been fair to give the orgs who routinely “access federal funds” a little notice that they won’t be able to pull their next “paycheck,” so that they could fold their tents in some kind of order, that just gives them more time to file lawsuits and clamor to the media.

Remember that many of the grants and programs are for things that we shouldn’t be doing in the first place, and shutting down a failing business is usually done fairly abruptly — a lot of private employees get surprise pink slips.