Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: Most Trump tariffs ruled illegal in huge blow to White House trade policy [View all]BumRushDaShow
(159,410 posts)28. "I have no idea why Obama ever appointed those 2."
Remember during much of the time after digging the country out of a ditch, the GOP was blocking most of his nominees (for anything but especially judges), which is what forced Reid to invoke the "nuclear option" to not need 60 votes for a nominee. So I expect some of the more "conservative" nominees may have been from states where the Senators would have blue slipped them if they weren't "acceptable". I.e., it was for expediency.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
58 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations

Most Trump tariffs ruled illegal in huge blow to White House trade policy [View all]
BumRushDaShow
Aug 29
OP
and when he goes to the Supreme Court, what will they do? I sure would count on them. So far they have given
lostincalifornia
Aug 29
#1
DING DING DING!!!! That's it and why those asshats have always wanted Fat Hitler
Bengus81
Aug 29
#15
I wouldn't count on it, and they are allowing the tariffs to remain in place in the meantime.
lostincalifornia
Aug 29
#6
I wish I had a dollar for every time I have asked myself that same question. nt
Midnight Writer
Aug 29
#48
I wouldn't get too excited about this. Even though the appellate court upheld the earlier ruling by the
lostincalifornia
Aug 29
#5
So does giving him a month and a half to make another appeal. Seriously? They could file another appeal in a week.
ancianita
Aug 29
#20
"giving the "back office" time to plan contingencies" -- so this is due process?? An appeal on the current facts, law,
ancianita
Aug 29
#27
I expect that someone could easily run to "Daddy Roberts" (as he has threatened to do this evening)
BumRushDaShow
Aug 29
#31
The ruling, however, doesn't take effect immediately. The court withheld the mandate for its decision until *Oct. 14*
LetMyPeopleVote
Aug 29
#8
It's important to see if those Republicans on the US EC will totally,100% ignore the Constitution
Bengus81
Aug 29
#18
Very well could be wrong but I believe this will tie in with any SCOTUS rulings on the FED and I believe SCOTUS will
Cheezoholic
Aug 29
#21
Honest, fair judges would'a required Anal Fistula to raise the tariffs even higher.2
3Hotdogs
Aug 29
#26
Courts, Courts, we don't need no stinking courts. I know that was said on 1600 Penn Ave
LiberalArkie
Aug 29
#37