!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.
All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.
Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.
If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.
Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.
If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.
Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!
The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!
"How many divisions has the Supreme Court?"
Even of a judge deputized someone to arrest an executive branch officer, it's unlikely to actually happen. It always ends in who has bigger guns and that's going to be the FBI, the Marshalls, or the secret service. No deputy trying to arrest someone on a bench warrant is going to get into a confrontation with a fellow LEO protecting said arrestee.
Fyi the us marshals are the enforcement arm of the Federal judiciary. There is one marshall and one cheif deputy marshall per us district court.
The marshals are the group that would most likely do the arrest in this hypothetical situation. For example the FBI is mostly investigation and usually when they get enough information for an arrest they pass it off to the marshals if it's a federal crime.
My contention is that the DOJ (who oversees the marshals) would order them to ignore the bench warrant.
Courts have the power to deputize whomever they choose. If they were to deputize, for instance, a state police officer because the marshalls wouldn't carry out their orders, my belief is that no deputized agent would arrest someone for contempt if some LEO under federal control (FBI, the marshalls, capitol police, etc.) was protecting the person held in contempt. You will not get two sets of cops shooting at each other over this.
Based on my research (watching Justified on FX) they’d sidle up to the executive, say a few pithy lines and draw down on and kill him when he goes for his gun or pen, walk away putting their Stetson back on, then get chewed out by their bosses.
I've heard this show is great, and I love me some Walton Goggins... But I've tried a couple of times and man the beginning is a slog.
Maybe I'll give it another shot.
Definitely worth it. Great show.
How long before it picks up? Is the entire first season like that?
It's honestly been long enough that I don't remember. I do remember really liking season 2, however. There's a lot of character development over the course of the series.
You left out the part where the sultry bartender/innkeeper wants to fuck him, but he pretends he's got issues and can't, right now.
Very true
Wouldn't ever even come to that, at least not under the current Trump administration.
Yes, the US Marshall Service is technically the enforcement arm of the judiciary, but they're under the Department of Justice and answer directly to the US Attorney General. The DoJ is part of the Executive Branch and the AG is a member of the Cabinet appointed by the President. The current AG is Pam Bondi, who is a VERY close Trump ally who's been working for him in various ways as a lawyer since at least 2019.
The Supreme Court doesn't order the Marshall Service to do anything. They send a request to the AG, who then gives orders to the Marshall Service. Even under previous administrations it would have been incredibly difficult to imagine the circumstance where the AG would order the Marshalls to arrest a member of the Executive Branch, and it's just never going to happen under Trump.
28 USC Sec. 566
(a)It is the primary role and mission of the United States Marshals Service to provide for the security and to obey, execute, and enforce all orders of the United States District Courts, the United States Courts of Appeals, the Court of International Trade, and the United States Tax Court, as provided by law.
(b) The United States marshal of each district is the marshal of the district court and of the court of appeals when sitting in that district, and of the Court of International Trade holding sessions in that district, and may, in the discretion of the respective courts, be required to attend any session of court.
(c)Except as otherwise provided by law or Rule of Procedure, the United States Marshals Service shall execute all lawful writs, process, and orders issued under the authority of the United States, and shall command all necessary assistance to execute its duties.
This codified the common law in the US.
The Court's order to its district marshal is superior to any DoJ order. If the marshal won't act, the Court can conpel them into court and hold them in contempt.
Courts (and marshals) can also deputize people to execute their orders. They can also hold others in contempt who contribute to orders not being followed...they can start seizing and freezing assets of Trump's helpers; they can award money damages as sanctions, they can disbar attorneys. There's a lot they can do. I hope the courts start playing hard ball with these lawless fucks.
If Marshalls ignore an order from a judge, what does the judge saying "I compel you" or "I hold you in contempt" do?
Everything you're saying is just judges saying words at people. The administration has already shown they're willing to ignore words coming out of the courts.
We're very close to the "don't quote laws to men with swords" territory here.
They do have the power to deputize enforcement...but they won't
They won't but even if they hypothetically tried to, I doubt they could. We're talking about Marshalls who have spent their career in the DoJ working alongside and for the Executive Branch. The courts try to tell the AG to order the Marshalls to do something and the AG refuses. So the courts try to deputize the Marshalls and give direct orders and we're to expect the Marshalls will go against the people they've been loyal to their entire careers?
They take the same Oath everyone else does. Not that that means anything, apparently, but maybe someone may take it seriously, some day.
I don't believe a single cop out there has ever taken their oath seriously. ACAB
Oh, I wasn't thinking they'd deputize a Marshall. Not that it makes any difference, though. Anybody with training sufficient for the job is probably a fucking pig Nazi anyway
There are plenty of ex military with the training and ethics to choose from. But with the 6-4 SCROTUS? Fat chance.
They're cops. They don't get training. Just a gun.
Individual US States are a party to some of these lawsuits, and they have their own duly sworn law enforcement officers. I bet a Federal judge would be able to find NY State Troopers or Massachusetts State Police willing to enforce their orders if there is a judgement in favor of that State in court.
Correct - the states have the explicit duty to raise and regulate militias, as stated in the second amendment.
Why would New York cops go after their own like that?
Who's going to enforce it would be the question.
US attorney general is part of Trump team.
The Marshall Service is the enforcement arm. The question is, would they refuse to do their duty?
They are under the section of us attorney general, would they even get the order? Again the attorney is party of Trump team. So no I don't think they will enforce it even give the order to do so.
I think we're also forgetting the US Supreme Court probably wouldn't even do anything resembling enforcing the constitution, as demonstrated by the 5-4 decision lately (barely respected the constitution)