this post was submitted on 05 Feb 2025
269 points (99.3% liked)

politics

19775 readers
5112 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

A Congressional Research Service report states Trump lacks the authority to abolish USAID, as congressional approval is required.

It explains that a 1998 law briefly allowed reorganization but expired in 1999. While past administrations have modified USAID's functions, they consulted Congress.

Lawmakers are concerned about Trump's executive order pausing foreign aid and potential USAID-State Department consolidation.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world 48 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

People don't seem to understand that there is a whole new order now. Previously, we said the President can't do X, Y, or Z, and we relied on long-standing norms, beliefs, and traditions as a self-enforcing mechanism. We told the President "You can't", and he said "Okay". But now, we're saying "You can't", and Trump is saying "Who says I can't, and what are you going to do about it?", knowing that the answer is largely "Nothing."

This is the way it works now.

Unless there is something directly in the Constitution explicitly saying that Trump cannot do something, then as far as Trump is concerned, he can and will do it.

Even if there is something in the Constitution explicitly stating that Trump cannot do something, Trump is going to do it anyway to see if anybody is willing to enforce it.

If nobody is willing or able to stop him, Trump essentially has the power to do it.

Even if a court ruling were to prevent Trump from directly shutting down a federal agency like USAID, what's to just stop him from firing the entire staff and saying "Sure, USAID can remain open. It'll just have zero employees.". Then what?

[–] LesserAbe@lemmy.world 8 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

I get it, he's doing all kinds of shit that's illegal now. And I get it, people need to stand up to him.

At the same time, let's not do his work for him by treating it like a forgone conclusion he will do whatever he wants.

Sometimes politicians, law enforcement and just rank & file workers need assurance and official blessing to not comply.

I don't like how things are going at all, and want to be clear eyed about the situation. Still, lets not assume it's all over, cause it's not.

[–] Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world 7 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

I get it, he’s doing all kinds of shit that’s illegal now. And I get it, people need to stand up to him.

At the same time, let’s not do his work for him by treating it like a forgone conclusion he will do whatever he wants.

Have you not been paying attention? Have you seen even the slightest smidge of indication that anyone in power will stand up to him? Because right now, he's doing whatever he wants and being rewarded for it, and that doesn't look like it's going to change any time soon.

Sometimes politicians, law enforcement and just rank & file workers need assurance and official blessing to not comply.

And right now the official word they're getting is comply, be fired, or be sent to Gitmo/El Salvador. There is nobody in a position to be able to give them "an official blessing to not comply" even if they wanted to. If you want, I'll give you my official blessing not to comply. It carries just as much weight right now (read: none).

I don’t like how things are going at all, and want to be clear eyed about the situation. Still, lets not assume it’s all over, cause it’s not.

I wish I had your optimism. But right now, every political body that could stand up to Trump is either marching in lockstep with him or rolling over and playing dead. That optimism right now just isn't based in reality.

[–] LesserAbe@lemmy.world 2 points 18 hours ago

Didn't things look worse when Nazi Germany was at its height? Didn't things look worse when slavery was at its height?

The state of the world has been much worse before, and things still got better.

We have to acknowledge that a lot of people died, and a lot more were hurt, before things got better. And it may come to that in our times as well. But barring nuclear disaster, things can improve. And one prerequisite is not agreeing to lay down and die.

Like I said, I get it. Seems like anyone with any real power doesn't recognize the severity of the situation. Seems like there's no justice. Are you going to say "no point in trying"? I don't think so because you wouldn't be so mad about it if you didn't care. I don't have the answer. But believing change is possible is a crucial ingredient in change happening.