- 516 Posts
- 860 Comments
44·5 days agoUnclear, but in any case I think this was more of a sign they were spooked by the pushback. People showed up to protest right away, and planned to stay at the protests until he was freed
Remember that we the people have power
As an update to this, they now have fully released her following a judge ordering her immediate release! Here she is speaking to supporters
32·5 days agoThe administration is also folding in many, though not all, of these cases. Just with 10x less media coverage
For instance, a week ago ICE released Columbia pro-Palestine activist Mohsen Mahdawi from detention after a judge ordered immediate release. Here’s a photo of him leaving
Or when Maine’s governor stood up to Trump’s anti-trans attacks, he at first suspended federal school lunch funding to the state. But a month later he backed down
The Trump administration has agreed not to freeze funds to Maine schools, a win for a state that was targeted by the president over its support of transgender rights.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/may/02/trump-maine-funding-freeze
This is not to say what they’re trying to do is not dangerous. This is to say they are weaker than they want us all to think
EDIT: also just now, Rümeysa Öztürk has been released from ICE detention after a judge ordered her immediate release earlier today. Here she is speaking to supporters
Maybe, maybe not. Don’t assume it’s a given that they will ignore it. This is not a defense of this administration. This is a reminder against always having the hopelessness that this administration wants us all to have. They want us to assume all fights are hopeless so we don’t fight them
While they have very notably been ignoring the order on Abrego Garcia, they have followed some of the court order in other related cases like this
For instance, a week ago ICE released Columbia pro-Palestine activist Mohsen Mahdawi from detention after a judge ordered immediate release. Here’s a photo of him leaving
13·7 days agoDon’t spread the fear they want us to have to stop people from acting. This is a nationwide protest - not a protest at the parade itself. This isn’t the first nationwide protest against Trump recently nor will it be the last. There have been millions on the street across the US without incident on April 5th, April 19th, and May 1st. There were smaller nationwide protests on February 5th, February 17th, and March 4th as well
Aside about Rwanda - not only are they another dictatorial country, but they are also heavily backing the M23 militia in the DRC who have been committing some pretty horrible war crimes. Rwanda claims they aren’t tied to M23 at all, yet things have been happening like Rwanda suddenly exporting resources that it doesn’t have (that do exist within the DRC)
The war in the DRC has substantially less attention in the west than that of Ukraine and Gaza, but is still pretty horrifying
Oh hmm, maybe I had just heard people misuse it in the past? Had only heard it being used as a synonym for possibility in the context of “every eventuality” but other times meaning something definitive. Looking it up I see that it’s supposed to just always refer to possibility
It is not an eventuality, it is a possibility that he tries
Thinking that everything is 100% certain to happen is how we get ourselves too paralyzed to act. We can reduce the odds of many things from happening by showing up and building pressure
Join protests, boycotts, strikes, etc.
EDIT: or maybe I apparently have misunderstood how the word eventuality is supposed to be a synonymy of possibility. My bad on that one
Musk will likely control elections going forward
Elections are run by the states themselves even for federal office. Notable race in particular for Musk was the Wisconsin Supreme Court race earlier this month. Musk poured millions to try to make it go the other way and tried to bribe voters with $1 million lotteries if they “signed a petition against activist judges”. The Musk backed candidate still lost by 10 points
Don’t do his dirty work for him and suppress the vote before anything happens. The fight ain’t over till it’s over
Lopez-Gomez was reportedly released Thursday evening after protestors gathered outside of the Leon County jail, where he was being held.
In good news, they were released after public backlash and protest. Protesting can work, boycotts can work, and so on. Don’t let anyone think we can’t act because we the people can
They want to take our rights, but we are not powerless to stop them. Fight back!
Don’t give into the doom that Trump & Musk want us to have. They want us thinking we’ve already lost so we don’t try to stop them, but the fight ain’t over till it’s over. We the people have power if we’re willing to use it
Join on the streets, take a part in boycotts, join strikes, etc.
Don’t just hope, join the fight back! April 19th is the next day of nationwide protests
Don’t play into the doom that Trump & Musk want us to all have. The fight ain’t over till it’s over
If the Marshall Service does not enforce contempt, it is possible for the courts to appoint others to enforce for them if they are willing to do so. It would be unprecedented, but well within the bounds of what the law states
The rule begins in section (a) by instructing that, as a general matter, process “must be served by a United States marshal or deputy marshal or by a person specially appointed for that purpose.”
[…]
Thus, by its plain terms, Rule 4.1 contemplates that the court may appoint individuals other than the marshals to enforce civil contempt orders.
[…]
Even a rogue marshal’s service, in other words, is not an insurmountable obstacle to courts enforcing the rule of law. If courts have the courage, the legal tools are there.
They aren’t just protesting Trump here? I mean the tour itself is called “Fighting Oligarchy” which is about a system
* for press releases and announcements
Headline makes it sound like internal communications, but that’s not the case at least currently. Still, we shouldn’t rely on third party services for important info - especially one that sometimes requires login to view
I think it’s unlikely they will do so directly given their other actions. Senate Majority Leader Thune has been pretty adamant about keeping it even stating he wanted to keep it in his very first speech this year as the new senate majority leader. I think the bigger threat to the filibuster at the moment is Republicans abusing reconciliation beyond what is supposed to be in there. Republicans appear likely to test the waters with bending the rules in the near future. This would be one of those piece by piece kinds of things, so more of a medium-term to longer-term issue
Reconciliation is supposed to be strictly for budget related policies and allows a strict majority vote without going through the filibuster and is only allowed to be used a limited number of times among other restrictions. The senate parliamentarian is the one who is supposed to interprets the senate rules and procedures including what’s allowed in reconciliation. One of the requirements the Byrd Rule gives to reconciliation is that the bill passed through the senate it may not add to the deficit overall.
Republicans appear likely to ignore the senate parliamentarian and declare by themselves that extending Trump’s 2017 tax cuts for the rich that will expire are “current policy” and not counted in deficit computations. By itself that doesn’t sound that interesting, but the reason that’s a little concerning is that the senate parliamentarian is also the one who decides if the bills are strictly budget related. For instance, in 2021 the senate parliamentarian was the one who frustratingly ruled that a minimum wage increase to $15/hr couldn’t be included via reconciliation. If ignoring the senate parliamentarian becomes the norm, they could stuff non-budget thing into these massive reconciliation spending packages without anyone to say no
(It’s also possible the Senate parliamentarian rules in their favor and they don’t override what they say)
Before we preemptively doom about it, it also needs to pass the senate filibuster meaning 7 senate dems need to vote in favor. Call your senators and tell them to vote against it
The bill appears to face long odds in the Senate, where it would need 60 votes to overcome an expected Democratic filibuster.
[…]
“I am leading the fight in the Senate to push back against this effort to disrupt our already safe and secure elections. This bill cannot pass the Senate — and I will fight every step of the way to block it,” Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) said in a statement.
[…]
Last year, the House passed a similar bill but it stalled in the Senate and then-President Joe Biden vowed to veto it
State & local dem parties have, generally speaking, been better about standing up compared to the national party
Obviously not 100% of them, but certainly a lot more
See: States limiting involvement with ICE, tons of state AGs suing trump, Maine’s Governor directly challenging trump’s anti trans actions and winning, NY Governor challenging trump’s threats on pulling congesting pricing, Illinois Governor signing an EO to limit the state’s sharing of any Autism data with the federal government after RFK’s registry comments, etc.