Cute that he thinks they’ll obey the order.
Why would they want to destroy evidence?
I thought this was “the most transparent administration in history”?
Transparent to them means they can be openly racist, sexist, and general xenophobic cunts.
What you are looking for is honest. They are not honest
I think they like to gaslight about the “transparent” thing, because according to them, Biden was not transparent because he wasn’t doing a presser every five minutes. Donvict doesn’t talk to the press to provide info, he does it because he is a narcissist.
That makes a lot of sense. A lot of what they do is for perceived injustice against them.
Transparently corrupt.
As “transparent” as in “nothing to see”.
Even if they didn’t destroy evidence what is going to happen? Congress seems fine with the current set of events.
Is this not covered by standing law? When it is ever legally allowed to alter or destroy evidence?
Is the distinction more that typically this would be a slap on the wrist for law enforcement, but the TRO makes it explicit that there would be consequences?
That is the job of judges- to interpret existing law. The news here is that a judge agreed that it is illegal and told them not to do it.
Again, how is there not precedence in law of or being illegal to alter or destroy evidence? You have a confident response by tone, but respectfully, I don’t hear any substance you’ve offered?
It’s as if a judge explicitly ruled that murder is illegal… Nice to reestablish, Y but yes, that’s established. I’m just trying to understand what this does distinctly?
Are you familiar with how common law systems in the US and other former English colonies work? Essentially the way it works is
-
Party A does something they believe is within their rights under the law. In this case, trying to destroy evidence. Now, the crucial part here is that Party A can be wrong about their claim, but our legal system determines that courts are the ones that have to decide whether that is true.
-
Party B sues in court claiming that Party A did something illegal. In this case, the state of Minnesota is claiming that Ice is trying to do something illegal by trying to destroy evidence
-
The judge looks at the facts of the case and determines if Party A did in fact do something illegal, taking things like precedent into account.
-
If the judge believes that Party B is right and Party A’s actions were indeed illegal, like they did in this case, they issue a judgement that both parties must abide by.
In this case, it is blatantly obvious that the actions are actually illegal but our legal system is set up in a such a way that this must be proven in court.
-
The evidence is the 10 videos all showing the same thing. ICE is guilty of murder. The videos are all over the Internet, what could they destroy? Other than the name of the murderer there isn’t anymore needed to convict.
There are ten? Can you provide a link(s)? I am collecting every one I see shared and backing them up to a single Mega share.
Estimated, seems like there are so many recording.
Evidence isn’t necessary when the law doesn’t matter
as if a judge can stop them at this point. haven’t they shown that the law doesn’t matter at all?
court in America is just political theatre now
Whats the point of your comment? Is the implication they should do nothing? The judicial branch has successfully stopped the executive multiple times. Not sure what you’re on about.
It’s another crime they’re guilty of. Hopefully a continued buildup of evidence will help some true believers see the light, but more importantly it is yet another thing they can be charged with and is harder to cover up.
The court system will never be immediate or truly dramatic, but as long as the wheels of justice continue to grind forward, however slowly, there is hope
Why would this have to be specified? Obviously the law doesn’t matter.
I would like to think that Judges, especially those leaning Republican, are starting to think that some people might start thinking they’re complicit. So maybe they want to keep heads on shoulders.
Or we set up the judiciary to be independent, despite who appointed them, and sometimes that works.
It’s even possible that judge is doing what he thinks is right
Funny, he doesn’t look French.
They…will…do…it…anyway…
Fuck it’s so frustrating watching one side pretend the rule of law still means anything.
Probably waiting on orders and a stipend before they mysteriously change there mind and throw their hands on the air as there was nothing they could do.
I mean. That’s just ignorant at this point…
Even the judges trump was placing for the federalist society a decade ago are turning on trump, and have been this whole term.
It’s not enough, we need more out of court systems. But this is something, and it is real.
Like, shits fucking serious. We need to be honest about what’s happening
