this post was submitted on 19 Mar 2025
133 points (98.5% liked)

News

27476 readers
4228 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

U.S. District Judge James Boasberg warned of "consequences" after the DOJ resisted his request for details on deportation flights conducted under Trump's use of the Alien Enemies Act.

The government argued that providing details would expose sensitive foreign negotiations and asked for a delay. Boasberg, frustrated by the pushback, extended the deadline but questioned the secrecy claim, noting officials had already disclosed details publicly.

The administration insists the court lacks jurisdiction, while Boasberg ordered the DOJ to comply or formally invoke the state-secrets doctrine.

top 23 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] magnetosphere@fedia.io 2 points 4 hours ago

Oh no! Consequences! That might even mean a strongly worded letter in… bold type!

This Judge Boasberg character is going to “fall out a window” if he keeps it up.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 4 points 5 hours ago

Fucking do it. Let’s get this knock out drag out fight started.

[–] Freshparsnip@lemm.ee 17 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Yes, consequences, I demand consequences, I demand to know what consequences

[–] limer@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 6 hours ago

I’ve never seen consequences, except for very poor people such as millionaires ( the new upper middle class).

I wonder if it involves handouts of food

[–] orclev@lemmy.world 63 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

Maybe, possibly, some day. Shit or get off the pot. Stop threatening consequences and actually do something for once.

[–] Limonene@lemmy.world 38 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

This reminds me of Trump's trial where he was threatened like 5 times with contempt, for outbursts in the courtroom. They never actually held him in contempt.

[–] NotLemming@lemm.ee 7 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

I think a lot of his not getting held to account is because of an idea about upholding the sanctity of the presidency, which isn't even law. Shame they couldn't uphold the sanctity of human rights and the rule of law.

[–] Freshparsnip@lemm.ee 6 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Which is ridiculous because what really undermines the sanctity of the presidency is allowing the president to get away with such crimes

[–] NotLemming@lemm.ee 2 points 4 hours ago

Exactly. It's like 'if we didn't see it, it didn't happen', except he's tweeting it himself and loudly threatening anyone he has a petty grudge against.

[–] atzanteol@sh.itjust.works 4 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

Courts are infuriatingly slow. It's not like on TV where a judge will threaten to jail somebody for contempt at the drop off a hat.

[–] Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world 10 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

People have been saying that about Trump's ostensibly incoming justice for almost a decade.

We are way past the point of being able to explain this as a slow justice system; we don't have a justice system.

[–] atzanteol@sh.itjust.works 1 points 4 hours ago

People have been saying that about Trump’s ostensibly incoming justice for almost a decade.

People have been saying that about everytime people complain about the slow workings of the courts. Every lawyer in the world will tell you that these things move slowly.

[–] Freshparsnip@lemm.ee 8 points 9 hours ago

So slow, a man awaiting conviction for multiple felonies can successfully run for president

[–] kikutwo@lemmy.world 43 points 11 hours ago

There's no consequences, that's why they keep flouting laws and judges.

[–] Freshparsnip@lemm.ee 9 points 8 hours ago

300 people are in a mega prison without having been convicted by due process but Donald Trump gets to have infinite delays in being held accountable

[–] solsangraal@lemmy.zip 26 points 11 hours ago

government immediately appealed the ruling, and said in a filing Tuesday that the judge’s order lacked proper jurisdiction “because the presidential actions they challenge are not subject to judicial review.”

i mean don't these judges know how fascism works?

[–] NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world 15 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago)

Narrator: "But, at the end of the day, there would be no consequences"

Ruffling leaves as the Narrator uses a camera team to record us like zoo animals

[–] ctkatz@lemmy.ml 12 points 11 hours ago

consequences?

WHO'S GOING TO ENFORCE THEM?

[–] A_A@lemmy.world 9 points 10 hours ago

"possible consequences". So maybe, a slap on the wrist ... or more likely, a severe gazing ... or even more likely, this warning alone.
We are so fed up of all this corruption and apathy.

[–] thesohoriots@lemmy.world 4 points 9 hours ago

They came in your soup and you might write a bad yelp review.

[–] floo@retrolemmy.com 6 points 11 hours ago

We’ll see…

[–] solsangraal@lemmy.zip 5 points 11 hours ago

imagine not being satisfied with only 1 punisher patch on your rentacop uniform

[–] MyOpinion@lemm.ee 1 points 10 hours ago

I wonder who is going to deliver these consequences? Trump owns all the power. This has always been the weakness of our system. Courts mean nothing unless their decisions are enforced.