Red Mosquito

4/5 wrote:

Stickman wrote:
Judge Strikes Down Trump Admin. Rule That Would Slash Food Stamps For 700,000 Americans.
The administration’s proposed rule change, which was finalized last year, would have impacted hundreds of thousands of individuals in need while saving the government $5.5 billion over five years.

Do you know on what grounds? Capriciousness?

A federal judge this week struck down the Trump administration’s efforts to make it more difficult for Americans to get food stamps.

D.C. Chief U.S. District Judge Beryl A. Howell on October 18 condemned the administration’s attempted rule change that would limit the number of Americans that can rely on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP.

In a 67-page opinion, Howell detailed how the administration failed to consider that the rule would negatively affect hundreds of thousands of individuals impacted by the pandemic.

“The Final Rule at issue in this litigation radically and abruptly alters decades of regulatory practice, leaving states scrambling and exponentially increasing food insecurity for tens of thousands of Americans," she said.

Beryl also said the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), which oversees SNAP, had “been icily silent” regarding how many Americans would have been impacted if the administration’s rule changes were allowed to go into effect during the pandemic.

Late last year, the USDA announced that it had finalized one of three rules that would affect the criteria in which able-bodied adults with no dependents are able to use the program — impacting hundreds of thousands of individuals in need, while reportedly saving the government $5.5 billion over five years, according to officials.

A coalition of U.S. states, Washington, D.C., New York City, and private groups then filed a lawsuit against the USDA following the announcement, saying it would result in” the termination of essential food assistance for benefits recipients who live in areas with insufficient jobs."

The rule change was even unpopular among some Republican lawmakers, who joined a bipartisan group of 47 senators asking the Trump administration to withdraw it because it would “take food assistance away from families.”

The proposal was supposed to go into effect in April 2020, but Howell temporarily enjoined it on March 13 — the same day President Trump declared the coronavirus outbreak a national emergency. Congress then waived the new SNAP requirement for the duration of the emergency, pushing back the administration’s implementation date. The USDA then appealed Howell’s order.

Howell’s new ruling grants summary judgment to the coalition that filed the lawsuit, while condemning the USDA for failing to justify how the new rule would impact vulnerable Americans during the pandemic, which she pointed out in the opinion, has also quadrupled the national unemployment rate.

Trump will be the worst lame duck president in history

it's gonna be very dark once he has lost

in fact

maybe a contested election will be a good outcome because he at least has some incentive to remain likeable

if he knows he has lost

he will just destroy all that he can within a day

78 days and not much longer...

96583UP wrote:Trump will be the worst lame duck president in history

it's gonna be very dark once he has lost

in fact

maybe a contested election will be a good outcome because he at least has some incentive to remain likeable

if he knows he has lost

he will just destroy all that he can within a day

In this vein...

Could he still have put whats her face on the Supreme Court in December even if he lost?

Bammer wrote:

96583UP wrote:Trump will be the worst lame duck president in history

it's gonna be very dark once he has lost

in fact

maybe a contested election will be a good outcome because he at least has some incentive to remain likeable

if he knows he has lost

he will just destroy all that he can within a day

In this vein...

Could he still have put whats her face on the Supreme Court in December even if he lost?

who cares, women are objects

Spoiler: show

Bammer wrote:

96583UP wrote:Trump will be the worst lame duck president in history

it's gonna be very dark once he has lost

in fact

maybe a contested election will be a good outcome because he at least has some incentive to remain likeable

if he knows he has lost

he will just destroy all that he can within a day

In this vein...

Could he still have put whats her face on the Supreme Court in December even if he lost?

Yes, but Senators are sworn in before the end of his term, so he wouldn't have much time with the lame duck Senate.

Stickman wrote:

4/5 wrote:

Stickman wrote:
Judge Strikes Down Trump Admin. Rule That Would Slash Food Stamps For 700,000 Americans.
The administration’s proposed rule change, which was finalized last year, would have impacted hundreds of thousands of individuals in need while saving the government $5.5 billion over five years.

Do you know on what grounds? Capriciousness?

A federal judge this week struck down the Trump administration’s efforts to make it more difficult for Americans to get food stamps.

D.C. Chief U.S. District Judge Beryl A. Howell on October 18 condemned the administration’s attempted rule change that would limit the number of Americans that can rely on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP.

In a 67-page opinion, Howell detailed how the administration failed to consider that the rule would negatively affect hundreds of thousands of individuals impacted by the pandemic.

“The Final Rule at issue in this litigation radically and abruptly alters decades of regulatory practice, leaving states scrambling and exponentially increasing food insecurity for tens of thousands of Americans," she said.

Beryl also said the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), which oversees SNAP, had “been icily silent” regarding how many Americans would have been impacted if the administration’s rule changes were allowed to go into effect during the pandemic.

Late last year, the USDA announced that it had finalized one of three rules that would affect the criteria in which able-bodied adults with no dependents are able to use the program — impacting hundreds of thousands of individuals in need, while reportedly saving the government $5.5 billion over five years, according to officials.

A coalition of U.S. states, Washington, D.C., New York City, and private groups then filed a lawsuit against the USDA following the announcement, saying it would result in” the termination of essential food assistance for benefits recipients who live in areas with insufficient jobs."

The rule change was even unpopular among some Republican lawmakers, who joined a bipartisan group of 47 senators asking the Trump administration to withdraw it because it would “take food assistance away from families.”

The proposal was supposed to go into effect in April 2020, but Howell temporarily enjoined it on March 13 — the same day President Trump declared the coronavirus outbreak a national emergency. Congress then waived the new SNAP requirement for the duration of the emergency, pushing back the administration’s implementation date. The USDA then appealed Howell’s order.

Howell’s new ruling grants summary judgment to the coalition that filed the lawsuit, while condemning the USDA for failing to justify how the new rule would impact vulnerable Americans during the pandemic, which she pointed out in the opinion, has also quadrupled the national unemployment rate.

I understand opposition to the rule itself, but man that seems like such a stretch. Admittedly, I don't know much about administrative judicial review but that sounds flimsy.

96583UP wrote:

Bammer wrote:

96583UP wrote:Trump will be the worst lame duck president in history

it's gonna be very dark once he has lost

in fact

maybe a contested election will be a good outcome because he at least has some incentive to remain likeable

if he knows he has lost

he will just destroy all that he can within a day

In this vein...

Could he still have put whats her face on the Supreme Court in December even if he lost?

who cares, women are objects

Spoiler: show

The best objects, though.

BurtReynolds wrote:

96583UP wrote:

Bammer wrote:

96583UP wrote:Trump will be the worst lame duck president in history

it's gonna be very dark once he has lost

in fact

maybe a contested election will be a good outcome because he at least has some incentive to remain likeable

if he knows he has lost

he will just destroy all that he can within a day

In this vein...

Could he still have put whats her face on the Supreme Court in December even if he lost?

who cares, women are objects

Spoiler: show

The best objects, though.

No need to post photoshopped images of Ma-Deuce.

Photoshop?

96583UP wrote:Trump will be the worst lame duck president in history

Oh god, the pardons alone.

We could come out of this victorious and still have a super miserable 2 months.

Think of the transition. Everyone is just going to walk away from their desks the night before and never look back.

i bet he writes himself a pardon letter

and all his family members

just to have in his drawer and bring it to court if / when he ever gets indicted

and make courts stew over whether it is applicable

96583UP wrote:i bet he writes himself a pardon letter

and all his family members

just to have in his drawer and bring it to court if / when he ever gets indicted

and make courts stew over whether it is applicable

He can’t pardon state crimes.

He's F'd in NYC, no?

That was in reference to state charges.

elliseamos wrote:He's F'd in NYC, no?

Yep

96583UP wrote:Trump will be the worst lame duck president in history

it's gonna be very dark once he has lost

in fact

maybe a contested election will be a good outcome because he at least has some incentive to remain likeable

if he knows he has lost

he will just destroy all that he can within a day

Yeah. It will be interesting to see how he acts in his last two months in office if he loses.

The Trumptards will love whatever he does no matter how destructive to the country, but I'm sure his true colors will be on full display.

The rest of the GOP will abandon him though. He won't be as dangerous without his boot lickers.

verb_to_trust wrote:The rest of the GOP will abandon him though. He won't be as dangerous without his boot lickers.

Or then he can go fully unhinged and activate his Proud Boy army.

wease wrote:

elliseamos wrote:He's F'd in NYC, no?

Yep

As much as I believe that Trump has most likely broken many laws, the NYC thing seems soloely politically motivated. That’s not what I want out of any justice system.