The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent
vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums
here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules
document is now in effect.
Leadership Problems at the CFPB
Posts
Well, at least there's an appeals process?
3DS: 0473-8507-2652
Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
PSN: AbEntropy
When you create a written constitution and over time put final power in the hands of courts, sophistry, barratry, shenanigans and hypocritical chutzpah are bound to become the coin of the realm. This is the price of power. I got red pilled with Bush v Gore, but I soon realized that, unlike War Games, with politics the sure fire way to lose is to refuse to play. The equilibrium is maintained by civil servants who realize that blowing the whole thing up will also blow up their sinecures, but these days things are looking pretty grim.
― Marcus Aurelius
Path of Exile: themightypuck
Running an understaffed and budget sequestrationed Federal agency to combat the best lawyers money can buy while you're stuck hiring on the General Schedule can be called many things, but a sinecure it isn't.
Apparently the vacancies act explicitly says that it does not apply to agencies founded according to statute passed after the vacancies law was passed, that have explicit succession plans.
Of which I imagine the CFPB fits this criteria pretty much to a T?
Meaning Trump has absolutely no legal bearing?
He never had a legal bearing. No law can override subsequent law. The vacancies act could not affect agencies created with legislatively explicit succession post vacancies signing even if it contained no language as such because the entire concept of law does not work if subsequent legislation does not have precedence.
The Judge after a hearing yesterday declined to issue a restraining order or deny one, saying he “needed more time to review the law on the matter.”
Given that the relevant law on the matter would fit on the front and back of a loose leaf sheet of paper I am guessing this is a stall.
No clue on if there is a statutory time limit on deliberations or if he can just do this forever.
Stall long enough with Mulvaney occupying the office and "well, in this case it causes less harm to let him stay" becomes a reasonable argument. Or he just might be trying to come up with a way to rule in favor of Trump.
But the case was heard late enough yesterday I'm theoretically okay with a ruling early today.
the judge should have still put an injunction on new leadership coming in then
Anyone know how an appeal of a ruling would play out?
we knew he would as he was a trump appointed judge
hopefully the appeals court cares about the law
steam | Dokkan: 868846562
It's not baffling at all. trump was allowed to appoint judges so he chose the ones that hate the law. same as he did for all of his cabinet picks.
and it is bananas and counter to the spirit of the constitution that the President's appointment powers include the interim appointment of a director without Senate confirmation. There is no technical recess appointment loophole here anyway, this is just a contravention of the direct intentions of the Congress that wrote the bill--which we know, because those officials are still alive and reporting on their intentions. I hope this raises serious questions of separation of powers in the appellate court--provided they appeal--because this represents yet another unwarranted power grab for the executive. This is one of those cases where even the most die-hard originalist should nervously cough and tug at their judicial collars if they have to argue that the intent of the Federal Vacancies Act supersedes the intent of Dodd-Frank.
NNID: Hakkekage
In both meanings.
Anyone seeing a written judgement anywhere?
He ruled from the bench, which I believe means no written anything yet.
https://www.buzzfeed.com/zoetillman/a-judge-just-ruled-that-that-trump-can-install-his-own-pick?utm_term=.guKDVzYEwD#.qxL4KOaDX4
My serious response to this is I think it's highly likely.
#1)Don't need two bosses
#2)New bosses tend to replace some/most of the existing executive team with their own people
Yeah, but you can't count on the Courts to actually get involved in this shit because as much as many are working within rulings to keep shit in check, they still display no interest in the larger issue of the corruption of the judiciary via appointments and general fuckery.
We'll have to see how this case shakes out though to at least keep rearranging those chairs.