In another judicial rebuke to President Donald Trump’s effort to harm funding for the nation’s arts, a federal judge on Friday evening ruled against the president’s insider attack on the National Endowment for the Arts by blocking grant applications from artists or organizations that don’t strictly adhere to the president’s right-wing ideology on gender.

 

'Important victory' for free speech as judge rules against Trump

 

One assumes Trump will appeal to the Supreme Court loaded with his appointees..

So you want the state to fund propaganda/"art" that promotes

other genders than the only 2 in existence ?

What a victory ! 🙄

4 hours ago, FlorC said:

So you want the state to fund propaganda/"art" that promotes

other genders than the only 2 in existence ?

What a victory ! 🙄

 

Personally I do not believe it is a function of the State to censor Art to align to it's political ideology. Additionally one would think in the USA it would be contrary to the Constitution which the President  has sworn to protect / defend.

Does not mean that Trump is wrong...

ROFLOL - I wonder if/when you wokes will realise this lawfare by woke Dems Judges will never stop the will of the people from being executed by Trump and the REPs.  Yes it will be appealed - and Yes it will be overturned. Why can you guys not just let things go and let the REPs put in place their agenda? If they are as bad as you say, then it will become very obvious very quickly - like in UK and Aust. But trying to delay and hinder the agenda of an elected Govt (by a landslide) tells the People that you refuse to accept their decision - which makes them even more likely to vote against you wokes next time.  You wokes are destroying the very little credibility that you have left by all the protesting and hindering - let the People's decision be enacted - if it is bad it will show.  All you are now doing is convincing the People that you know your woke Policies are bad, and are just refusing to let them be removed or changed.   

44 minutes ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

ROFLOL - I wonder if/when you wokes will realise this lawfare by woke Dems Judges

The judge on the case was nominated by George W. Bush on July 18, 2002, 

3 hours ago, simple1 said:

 

Personally I do not believe it is a function of the State to censor Art to align to it's political ideology. Additionally one would think in the USA it would be contrary to the Constitution which the President  has sworn to protect / defend.

It's not about censoring but about funding.

8 hours ago, FlorC said:

So you want the state to fund propaganda/"art" that promotes

other genders than the only 2 in existence ?

What a victory ! 🙄

so that was a nice try at twisting the issue to something that supports some other hidden agenda.

3 hours ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

ROFLOL - I wonder if/when you wokes will realise this lawfare by woke Dems Judges will never stop the will of the people from being executed by Trump and the REPs.  Yes it will be appealed - and Yes it will be overturned. Why can you guys not just let things go and let the REPs put in place their agenda? If they are as bad as you say, then it will become very obvious very quickly - like in UK and Aust. But trying to delay and hinder the agenda of an elected Govt (by a landslide) tells the People that you refuse to accept their decision - which makes them even more likely to vote against you wokes next time.  You wokes are destroying the very little credibility that you have left by all the protesting and hindering - let the People's decision be enacted - if it is bad it will show.  All you are now doing is convincing the People that you know your woke Policies are bad, and are just refusing to let them be removed or changed.   

its already obvious what a buffoon trump and his admin picks are. if you cant see that yourself you're blind or support his agenda as a wanna be king. nice moral compass trying to blame lawfare on the party and people that have been targeted by a narcissistic idiot.

9 hours ago, simple1 said:

In another judicial rebuke to President Donald Trump’s effort to harm funding for the nation’s arts, a federal judge on Friday evening ruled against the president’s insider attack on the National Endowment for the Arts by blocking grant applications from artists or organizations that don’t strictly adhere to the president’s right-wing ideology on gender.

 

'Important victory' for free speech as judge rules against Trump

 

One assumes Trump will appeal to the Supreme Court loaded with his appointees..

 

 

Number 11 I think on the "How is Trump doing "checklist

 

 

 

3 hours ago, jerrymahoney said:

The judge on the case was nominated by George W. Bush on July 18, 2002, 

The judge on the case is graduate of Georgetown University, B.A., 1982
and Georgetown University Law Center, J.D., 1987 -- Georgetown University run by the catholic Jesuit order since 1789

3 hours ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

ROFLOL - I wonder if/when you wokes will realise this lawfare by woke Dems Judges will never stop the will of the people from being executed by Trump and the REPs.  Yes it will be appealed - and Yes it will be overturned. Why can you guys not just let things go and let the REPs put in place their agenda? If they are as bad as you say, then it will become very obvious very quickly - like in UK and Aust. But trying to delay and hinder the agenda of an elected Govt (by a landslide) tells the People that you refuse to accept their decision - which makes them even more likely to vote against you wokes next time.  You wokes are destroying the very little credibility that you have left by all the protesting and hindering - let the People's decision be enacted - if it is bad it will show.  All you are now doing is convincing the People that you know your woke Policies are bad, and are just refusing to let them be removed or changed.   

I do wonder about the delusion entertained by Trump supporters that he won by a landslide. He didn't even get the majority of the popular vote. As for the people's decision...when Trump was campaigning he had to disavow project 2025 because it was extremely unnpopular with voters. Once elected, he instituted about 95% of it. So no, the voters may have voted for him, but they didn't vote for project 2025.

4 hours ago, jerrymahoney said:

The judge on the case was nominated by George W. Bush on July 18, 2002, 

Fair point - but IMO the Bushes were part of the swamp - maybe not exactly woke but definitely RINOs - like Cheney.

58 minutes ago, Alan Zweibel said:

I do wonder about the delusion entertained by Trump supporters that he won by a landslide. He didn't even get the majority of the popular vote. As for the people's decision...when Trump was campaigning he had to disavow project 2025 because it was extremely unnpopular with voters. Once elected, he instituted about 95% of it. So no, the voters may have voted for him, but they didn't vote for project 2025.

That is all only true inside your head - where Trump lives.  Project 25 was not a serious election issue for People - it was mainly illegal immigration, crime, woke BLM pro-Trans and cancel culture. Plus of course that the Dems selected a senile old swamp rat, and when it became clear he was going to lose, they changed to the incompetent idiot VP and portrayed her as black. Yes it was a landslide election victory. 

5 hours ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

Fair point - but IMO

Thanks.  Esp. your opinion on the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit and the Supreme Court.

8 hours ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

12 hours ago, jerrymahoney said:

The judge on the case was nominated by George W. Bush on July 18, 2002, 

Fair point - but IMO the Bushes were part of the swamp - maybe not exactly woke but definitely RINOs - like Cheney.

RINO George W. Bush also nominated Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court.

 

RINO George H.W. Bush (the elder) nominated Clarence Thomas to the Supreme Court.

 

And the ghost of GWH Bush appointment of the late Justice David Souter hangs over the 3 Trump nominees.

18 hours ago, simple1 said:

In another judicial rebuke to President Donald Trump’s effort to harm funding for the nation’s arts, a federal judge on Friday evening ruled against the president’s insider attack on the National Endowment for the Arts by blocking grant applications from artists or organizations that don’t strictly adhere to the president’s right-wing ideology on gender.

 

'Important victory' for free speech as judge rules against Trump

 

One assumes Trump will appeal to the Supreme Court loaded with his appointees..

I hope congress can cut all funding to the NEA.  

20 hours ago, simple1 said:

In another judicial rebuke to President Donald Trump’s effort to harm funding for the nation’s arts, a federal judge on Friday evening ruled against the president’s insider attack on the National Endowment for the Arts by blocking grant applications from artists or organizations that don’t strictly adhere to the president’s right-wing ideology on gender.

 

'Important victory' for free speech as judge rules against Trump

 

One assumes Trump will appeal to the Supreme Court loaded with his appointees..

It goes before a Court of appeals first. There are some interesting legal questions involved that I wouldn't expect you to know about.

 

The asy thing to do would be to eliminate all grants for the arts. All it does is subsidize people who cannot make any money but who want to be artists.

 

Then they can turn around and try to destroy the social system they suck off of

15 hours ago, jerrymahoney said:

RINO George W. Bush also nominated Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court.

 

RINO George H.W. Bush (the elder) nominated Clarence Thomas to the Supreme Court.

 

And the ghost of GWH Bush appointment of the late Justice David Souter hangs over the 3 Trump nominees.

Republican POTUS nominate Conservative SCOTU members - likewise Dems do the same. But Souter was and Sotomayer has been liberal on key issues. I hope Trump gets to appoint another 2-3 far right SCOTUS members to make up for those nominated by GOP that turned out liberals on some issues. I am not aware of any Dems SCOTUS nominee that ended up conservative.  

  

With the 7-2 procedural ruling against Trump on the Alien Enemies Act, Trump said:

 

"The Supreme Court of the United States is not allowing me to do what I was elected to do."

 

Regardless of what you hope, the real first SCOTUS 'merit' case during Trump take2 starts next month being the IEEPA tariff case that went 7-4 against Trump at the appeals court.

 

Trump summed it up during his Kirk memorial speech:

 

Tariffs are making us rich again, richer than anybody ever thought was possible, and the only one challenging them are people that hate our country,