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

Fiendish Thingy

(22,120 posts)
21. Not as black and white as it seems
Sun Jan 11, 2026, 10:54 AM
Sunday

From your link:

The Post examined 337 lawsuits in total, finding 165 cases in which judges had ruled against the administration. The Trump White House has been accused of “defying or frustrating court oversight” in 57 cases, or around 35 percent of rulings or orders made against them, the analysis found — an unprecedented amount, according to legal experts speaking to the publication


“Frustrating court oversight” is legalese for playing procedural games as a form of delaying compliance with a court order, which Trump is an expert at as we have seen. That is distinct from openly defying a court order, which has only happened a handful of times.

Note that neither the article at your link, and the WaPo report it references, distinguishes between or defines what the difference is between “frustrating judicial oversight” and open defiance, nor do they give any specific examples of the former.

Despite this administration’s acting with lawless impunity, we must remember this one absolute truth:

Trump is not omnipotent, and the states and the people are not powerless

I think the more interesting, and important, question is: if this administration is truly a wholly unrestrained dictatorship, why do they comply at all?

At the very least Somebody is afraid of going to jail, or more likely, getting disbarred, and so is probably aggressively advocating for compliance with orders that can’t be gamed in court.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Or when a cable news anchor cites polls gab13by13 Sunday #1
"illegal" is more an obstacle to him, appears to me. RoeVWade Sunday #2
Why the name? bigmonk Sunday #3
Many of us personally know good people who are named mwmisses4289 Sunday #9
I never refer to him as president. Can't bring myself to put those two words together. Katinfl Sunday #12
I usually refer to him as t. mwmisses4289 Sunday #18
My husband and I call him the idiot. Katinfl Sunday #22
People are in total denial and it is impossible to budge them to face reality. Irish_Dem Sunday #4
Maybe that's it. Normally, I consider myself optimist. I'm optimistic Trump can eventually be crushed with facts and RoeVWade Sunday #7
You are a balanced optimist who sees hope that Trump can be defeated. Irish_Dem Sunday #8
Pretty much, yup. Hope to stay that way. RoeVWade Sunday #10
What you call negativity I would call reality. Irish_Dem Sunday #16
I thought markie Sunday #5
I kind of got that. RoeVWade Sunday #13
There was a discussion here on DU just a few days ago with a poster niyad Sunday #14
And when a judge rules against the Trump administration Chasstev365 Sunday #6
Given that they consistently have, yes EdmondDantes_ Sunday #15
Here Chasstev365 Sunday #17
Not as black and white as it seems Fiendish Thingy Sunday #21
Actually they have complied with rulings restraining their actions most of the time Fiendish Thingy Sunday #20
I remember being told that Biden couldn't do anything with the "absolute immunity" granted by SCOTUS Orrex Sunday #11
His administration indeed acts with lawless impunity Fiendish Thingy Sunday #19
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Every time someone says, ...»Reply #21