Despite Chutkan denying states request for an immediate restraint, she says their "larger case against Musk is strong"

[bigtree]

Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett @RepJasmine
The Rapid Response team is here to break down what Judge Chutkan’s Ruling meant… while also learning that according to Trump… ELON is just a lap dog with no power 🤯.

I need the names of the people doing the firings and shutting the money off, then…

Link to tweet

___Judge Chutkan said that the states hadn’t shown “that they will suffer imminent, irreparable harm absent a temporary restraining order.”

But the judge also indicated she was skeptical about the Trump administration’s statements about Musk and his powers in DOGE...

“The court is aware that DOGE’s unpredictable actions have resulted in considerable uncertainty and confusion for Plaintiffs and many of their agencies and residents,” she wrote in the 10-page ruling. “It remains ‘uncertain’ when and how the catalog of state programs that Plaintiffs identify will suffer.”

Chutkan went on to say that even though the states’ larger case against Musk is “strong,” their arguments at this stage in the litigation were not good enough to satisfy the standard that must be met to warrant emergency action by the court.

A fiery footnote from Chutkan highlighted seeming contradictions between those assertions and Trump’s executive orders creating DOGE, which connected DOGE to agency personnel decisions.

“Defense counsel is reminded of their duty to make truthful representations to the court,” she wrote.



https://www.cnn.com/2025/02/18/politics/doge-temporary-restraining-order-chutkan/index.html

___Though she stopped short of issuing the restraining order, Chutkan wrote that she thought the plaintiffs have raised a “colorable Appointments Clause claim with serious implications,” noting that Musk hasn’t been nominated by Trump or confirmed by the Senate, which is required for officers who exercise significant governmental authority.

“Musk has rapidly taken steps to fundamentally reshape the Executive Branch,” Chutkan wrote. Yet she also noted that “even a strong merits argument cannot secure a temporary restraining order at this juncture.”

The key phrase there being “at this juncture.”

So while the plaintiffs failed to win temporary relief, they might succeed later in this litigation and secure a more lasting victory against what Chutkan acknowledged is the billionaire’s bid to fundamentally reshape the government.

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/politics/how-elon-musk-and-doge-s-temporary-win-from-judge-chutkan-could-turn-into-a-loss/ar-AA1znFqH

[dchill]

1. At what "juncture," then?

Aren't we way past unconstitutional right now? If not, why not?

[Qutzupalotl]

2. We are, but we have to demonstrate harm to have standing

and get any kind of relief. I think it's coming. Chutkan seems to suspect it is coming too.

[bigtree]

4. as she explains, she doesn't have a complete record before her

...to address the scattershot of Trump actions in the 14 complaints to make an immediate stay.

She doesn't have enough material evidence in front of her from the plaintiffs about specific cases of imminent harm that can't be reversed later, which is what the law requires to make that ruling, yet.

[dchill]

5. So, soon then? Or maybe later - when we have more time.

[bigtree]

7. the plaintiffs will ask for a preliminary hearing, different from this emergency one

...the temp request would only last abut 14 days until the time the preliminary hearing could be held.

I'd expect a request filed right away, if not already done.

[spooky3]

3. As a layperson, this seems analogous to--or worse than--stalker cases.

At one time, if someone hadn’t actually physically harmed you (yet), you had no recourse. But state laws were passed to address this scary injustice.

It’s clear to me that harm has occurred and more is certain to occur in the future.

I also don’t understand what comfort there is in saying that Musk hasn’t been nominated or confirmed by the Senate. With this Senate, he would be rubber stamped, so it’s only a matter of delaying Mump by a few days or weeks.

[bigtree]

6. she's pointing out that she is likely to rule against Musk on status grounds, as well

...in addition to any findings of individual harm to those fired.

[spooky3]

8. But isn't it true that Musk can remedy this simply by getting

Republican approval in the Senate?

[bluestarone]

9. i know nothing about the laws, but i would think Musk could be sued big time class action suit, because he

DID NOT have authority to do what he;s doing. (Senate approval AFTER the fact should not help him.) This is just how i look at it.

[bigtree]

10. can he get republican approval?

...does he want to open his life to that kind of scrutiny?

Would he be able to without revealing his many foreign conflicts of interest?

[spooky3]

11. They approved Gabbard, RFK Jr., and others with

Skeletons and worse. I don’t see any Republicans standing up to Trump on this.

[bigtree]

12. Musk's closet is a mess

...why do you think Trump didn't already put him through that process?

Moreover, think of the spectacle of the republicans showing their hands in the Musk puppet, putting his job cutting rampage squarely on them.

It wouldn't merely be Trump making that happen to Americans anymore, it would be clearly be republican Senators unleashing Musk on vital government services, benefits, and jobs.

[spooky3]

14. To Trump that's not disqualifying. Look at RFK's background.

Look at all the rest. My point is that the only nominee, among all the horrible nominees, who didn’t get confirmed, was Matt Gaetz.

All it would do is slow things down a bit, and right now Mump wants to push chaos as quickly as possible.

[bigtree]

15. oh yes, what Trump or republicans want or will do

...

No sense in presenting republicans as involiable to our politics. That's just not a valid response to Democratic political action and opposition advocacy.

Hypothetical Headline:

"Democrats say republicans won't budge. All advocates are in the process of being informed of the futility of their efforts. News at 11."

[malaise]

13. Please tell the hacks at M$Greedia

[Hugin]

16. Eh, at this juncture...

I’m stepping back. My priority is now to take care ONLY of me and mine.

There is no offense and a half assed defense.

[bigtree]

18. I'm more concerned here at DU with advocacy

...than doomcasting, or cynicisn, or apathy, or pessimism.

Just a guy, looking at a faltering country and helping it to fight back, urging folks inside and outside of government to stand with me and put their best foot forward.

[NJCher]

19. we're allies

.than doomcasting, or cynicisn, or apathy, or pessimism.

I fight it, too; every chance I get.

[WarGamer]

17. The answer is simple.

For example...

Bondi runs DoJ

Bondi orders the leadership BELOW her to fire folks.

She has that authority even if it's by the suggestion of Musk or Trump.