WELCOME TO THE BLOG
This blog reflects my views of current political issues.. It is also an archive for columns in the Sky Hi News 2011 to November 2019. Winter Park Times 2019 to 2021.(paper publishing suspended in 2021) My Facebook page, the muftic forum, posts blog links, comments, and sharing. Non-political Facebook page: felicia muftic. Subscribe for free on Substack: https://feliciamuftic.substack.com
Blog postings are continuously being edited and updated.
I am a small business importer of cosmetics from the European Union, and I am not a customer of FedEx, but I approve its action. FedEx sues for refund of Trump tariffs after Supreme Court ruling It is only a first step, and there are lots of possibilities that there are no further steps. The public may snort that " this will only line FedEx's pocket and consumers will never see a dime" needs some fine-tuning, but it is more likely than not, particularly if small businesses are involved. Congress can pass some laws to bring some sense to the process, but not in time to do much good, and those corporations with deep pockets will be there in the lobby looking after their own corporate interests. (Around 60% of Amazon's sellers are small businesses.)
To understand how it works with my contracted US-based import transportation shipping company is that it is, well, complicated, but while consumer relief is not a hopeless exercise, it is close to it. Don't hold your breath.
Here is what I have experienced, and I do not know if FedEx works the same way, but it probably does. However, probably the power is in FedEx's own company broker's hands if small businesses are handled the same way by any of the other import shippers.(UPS, DHL). Big volume importers can afford their own brokers. If they are very big, they ship containers full, which goes through a different process.
We, as small businesses, do not have DC lobbyists, upfront containers full, or funds to sue FedEx if they win their suit, and if they choose to keep the proceeds and do not pass them on to us or to consumers. We, the importers, have to pay the tariffs up front to the shipper/broker before we even have our product in hand to sell it, compete in the marketplace, and generate revenue to pay the import bill, the manufacturer, and operating expenses. That is why many small businesses have had to close their doors.
Once the manufacturer from which I order their products is ready to ship, they call the company that provides the best or only service to pick up the goods and transport them to the US. Since the imposition of tariffs on Liberation Day, in advance of their landing in the US, the transportation company's small package brokerage is in charge and declares the amount of tariffs and administration fees they will charge us, the receiver/importer. They demand payment based on their own interpretation of the various rules, executive orders, and laws right up front. Given the fact that the products we import are shipped by air and are small packages (we do not do containers full), we have little or no chance to protest the import fees and duties, and either refuse the shipment and return it to Europe, or take it on the chin. The shipping company, in the meantime, has its own brokerage operation to levy its fees and duties (tariffs) and then hands the whole shipment off to the actual US customs officials, who then rarely disagree with the brokerage. As with cosmetics, the Food and Drug Administration officials housed near customs also make sure labeling and content comply with US rules, regulations, and laws. If we clear both, they may be released to be delivered to our place of business by the shipping company's local trucks. The whole chain of delivery, at best, if shipped by air, takes a week from the time the order is picked up at the European manufacturer's factory until I actually get it at my doorstep. I have had some shipments take a month. I still must pay what the transportation brokerage department rules are due before they will leave with me or refuse the delivery and ship it back to Europe, because the fees are outrageously wrong. I then distribute the product to Amazon, my retail customers, or fill internet orders myself on a platform like Shopify, hoping and planning to charge enough for the new duties and fees that have been added to my costs of doing business. If we disagree with the shipper's brokerage, we can "dispute" the charges for duty as being wrong. We have had disputes unresolved since last fall, so lots of luck with that.
The problem we as small businesses, have encountered is even keeping up with Trump's ever-changing deals and executive orders, and the other is access to the breakdown of what the shipping brokerage has based their tariff charges on. There appears to be little consistency on the part of the brokerage agent in giving their best guess of what the chaos and constant changes are on any particular day. This chaos is a major challenge.
In any case, the transportation shipper brokerage knows what they ruled and charged and sent to US Customs and how much money they collected from us, the receiver and importer, in their own paper trail, which they pass on to the US government. The shipper broker keeps what they get from up front as a fee for the service.. These shipper brokers are then in a position to claim a refund from the Trump administration. At that point, if the courts approve the refund to FedEx, FedEx can choose to refund part of what they have charged us, the importer, for the courts to rule on which parts of the tariff charges are illegal duty assessments in general. If say FedEX decides to part with some of the court award and pass it on to us, then we, as the importer, can then decide whether to lower our wholesale and retail prices or keep the change to cover the past up-front costs. At that point, the competition and the free market rule. If we cannot compete at the price we need to cover expenses or make any profit, we close our doors, too.
In any case, the small business importer like us has to pay all upfront in duty and tariffs (same thing) and pray that the brokerage is also correct, or dispute their charges, or return the shipment, or go out of business with no products to sell. So far we have hung in there, but our otherwise successful business has been harmed and impacted by the chaos of Trump's tariff obsession
I think we have just begun to see the impact of tariffs on consumer prices. Until now, big companies importing by the container or like cars, will have worked their way through their 2025 inventory and now are reordering for 2026 projections...and these for sure will reflect the price hikes. 90% of tariffs get passed on to consumers.
That Trump thinks tariffs would take the place of income tax is nuts: The only people benefitting from this would be those rich enough to not care; the rest of us on a budget would realize that such tariffs are as regressive as sales tax...which mean everyone pays the same but even small change or more hits those who are counting pennies proportionate to their income the most. The poor and middle class would be screwed.
Trump's got a plan B up his sleeve despite his loss in the Supreme Court today, declaring that Trump did not have the power to impose reciprocal tariffs. (Those are the tariffs, like the 15% on all imports from the EU). How Trump plans to get around the ruling is to abuse another law: Trump orders temporary 10% global tariff to replace duties struck down by US Supreme Court. (and upped it to 15% 2/21/2026, and that may also be challenged as illegal on the basis that there are conditions attached he my have violated) He could ask his loyal Congress to just rubber-stamp his tariffs, also.. "Tariffs are taxes," declared a 6-3 Supreme Court, and Congress has that power, not the president, to levy them.
What was carved out in the SCOTUS ruling were aluminum and steel, and those tariffs remain because they were connected to national security interests. What is absurd about those is that beverages and cosmetics, mostly in aluminum containers, will still get hit by high tariffs based on the percentage and value of aluminum or steel container part of the item (50% for those smelt and cast in the EU and 200% if it comes from designated countries like Russia)...and those costs will still just be passed on to the consumers. Automobiles and steel tariffs were not affected by the relief, either. They remain, it appears. SCOTUS did not rule if consumers get a refund of some sort for the illegally imposed tariffs. So, consumers consider the price increases caused by tariffs as your donation to the federal treasury, legal or not. Supreme Court strikes down most of Trump's tariffs in a major blow to the president
What did change today with the ending of Trump's reciprocal tariffs may be that import shipments valued at below $800 will be exempted from the Trump tariff requirements, that they all had to go through US customs. CNBC addressed the issue this morning, and further verification is needed. This deminimus exemption caused such a mess in such giants as UPS, that these small package shipments that did not meet the requirements of US customs paperwork were simply destroyed, estimated by some to total worth in billions of dollars.Update: 2/32/2026: no, nothing changed. Deminimus is still verboten.
Full disclosure: Felicia Muftic is president of a small business importing cosmetics from the European Union, some of which come in aluminum containers and others in plastic containers. MelemUSA,LLC
So here is Trump's plan B, to put a 10% tariff on every import relieved from the 15% plus tariff by the Supreme Court decision today. He is clear he sees tariffs as a fundraiser for the treasury. What is clear to everyone else, he wants to raise money on the backs of all consumers. Tariffs are going to be paid by consumers. Per a study of 2025 by the Federal Reserve, 90% of tariffs were paid by consumers and businesses.
.Let me raise an issue that has not been connected to tariffs yet. To keep the national debt in check caused by his generous tax breaks to the very rich and his friends, the tariffs, paid by normal people, make up some of the loss to the treasury by Trump's tax breaks. The answer is to reverse the tax breaks and let those who are not on budgets pay their fair share. Tax Cuts Are Primarily Responsible for the Increasing Debt Ratio - Center for American Progress
Tariffs make things more expensive and contribute to the affordability gap and to the middle-class travails of not having enough income to cover living expenses like they once did..
Trump does not care a fig about affordability. He calls that a Democrat hoax. This should be a red flag, an indication of where his heart does not lie.
Update 2/21/2026:The impact on small businesses Trump’s tariffs get knocked out — but the hit to small business is just beginning described in this article, which is what we ourselves have experienced and the recommended solutions make sense. We have not gone out of business but that was almost a day by day discussion as we encountered chaos and inconsistencies throughout our supply chain. We have survived to continue. The kindest comment I can make is that the 10%-15% world wide tariff brings some stability to our planning and orders for product from Croatia for the next five months. What this world wide tariff will do, however, in result in continued higher prices for consumers, including for products previously exempted
Per Google AI description of our company, Melem USA LLC: Melem USA, LLC, based in Fraser, Colorado, isan authorized importer and distributor of Melem skin and lip balm, a popular Croatian pharmaceutical skincare brand. They sell directly through their website and Amazon, catering to consumers seeking relief from dry, irritated, or chapped skin caused by harsh climates.
Affordability vs economy is not about semantics; both are true at the same time. Why the disconnect? Trump may be touting his great economy, but those concerned about having enough money to pay for the basics have been left out of his "economy". Update: 12/18/2025: Consumer prices rose 2.7 percent in the past 12 months. Consumer Price Index Summary - 2025 M11 Results
Update 12/28/25 If you can download it, here is a non-spun look at the US by the British Guardian. It is a mixed bag of unmet promises and strength in other ways not felt by those living on a budget. The conclusions are similar to mine above. https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/the-2025-us-economy-in-charts-rising-prices-hiring-slowdown-rollercoaster-growth/ar-AA1T9XDx?ocid=socialsharehe co
Continue with original post:
U The Trump administration's Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 (TCJA) resulted in a shift of wealth toward the wealthiest Americans and corporations, the "greatest upward transfer of wealth in American history," some say, and Trump made affordability worse by his tariffs and cutting everything from SNAP to Obamacare. However, those who live paycheck to paycheck or barely make ends meet, at least 40% of Americans, are those for whom the term "affordability" means something, and the term "economy being great" looks like a lie by an out-of-touch president. Polls and rece/nt off-year election wins by those who made affordability their top issue show that the political chickens have come home to roost.
When I compared my expenses from February 2025 to November 2025, what stood out to me was a significant spike in my electric company costs. I belong to a rural provider that is non profit and provides excellent service, so I could not blame greed or bad management. Nonetheless, the cost rose. What and why? This from CBS was comprehensive and a part , not the largest part ,of the reasons had to do with a variety of Trump initiatives. Otherwise there are a large variety of pressures on prices. Why utility bills are rapidly rising in some states - CBS News
The hard truth in a nutshell: tax cuts to the rich cost $4T over 10 years; health care for the poor gets cut $1T (over 10 years); consumers get stuck with much of the tariff costs.The only winners in Trump's economic policies: the rich and the appearance of more income to the federal balance sheet. The losers: the poor and near-poor, and all American families who will pay more for what they buy.
Please do not call Trump a populist: this budget only takes away from people some popular programs relied upon by so many who are barely making it. In addition to financial deprivation, the Trump regime also subverts or destroys consumer protections from products, as well as protections from fraud, all to the benefit of business interests.MUFTIC FORUM BLOG: Donald Trump, unsafe at any speed updated 8/4/2025
Please do not cite current conditions of "how great his economy is". .These are forecasts; the stuff is just beginning to hit the fan. When Trump blows his horn, his economy is great now, the impact of his policies has not yet been felt, but will. Most cuts hurting the middle class will not take place until after 2026 midterms. MUFTIC FORUM BLOG: MAGA supporters cheer Trump's economy, but the stuff has not hit the fan yet
When Trump says his policies will be good for the economy, it will be great for him and his friends, but not for everyday Americans, who will get screwed, and so will the federal balance sheet: $3.4 trillion will be added to the deficit. Trump Tax Law to Add $3.4 Trillion to US Deficits, CBO Says (2)
Per a check with Google AI and their sources based on Congressional Budget Office figures (not the White House's) over the next 10 years, the amount cut from the federal programs serving the poor and near poor is $1 trillion dollars. Tax cuts to the rich will decrease income to the US treasury by $3 to $4 trillion dollars.
Trump tariffs could bring in about 2 trillion plus in ten years to the treasury, but it would cost a family in the US in higher prices $2400 per year since some of those costs are just passed on to consumers. It is a shift that is deceptive...consumers pay for the tariffs, but the federal balance sheet looks impressive.State of U.S. Tariffs: August 7, 2025 | The Budget Lab at Yale The bottom 60% of Americans will see $400 tax cut, however, but not enough to offset the tariff screw. Trump suggests a rebate to consumers to help offset the cost of tariffs on consumer goods, but Congress must approve, and the impact on the deficit will only make that balance sheet worse, making Congress approval unlikely. Nice BS, Trump; more empty promises about family affordability. So what about your health care insurance?
Per Google AI:
Permanently extending the expiring provisions of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) that largely favored high-income individuals and large corporations, often referred to as "Trump tax cuts," could cost the U.S. Treasury an estimated $4 trillion over the next decade, according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).
This potential revenue loss includes $3.4 trillion from extending expiring individual and estate tax provisions and $551 billion from extending business provisions.
It's important to note that extending these tax cuts would disproportionately benefit the wealthy. For example, households in the top 1% (making more than roughly $743,000 a year) would receive average tax cuts of $61,000 a year, while households in the bottom 60% (making roughly $96,000 or less) would only see about $400 a year.
Some estimates suggest the cost could be even higher. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities states that extending the expiring tax cuts could cost $4.2 trillion over the decade 2026-2035, with approximately half of the benefits going to the top 5% of earners (making over roughly $320,000).
These figures highlight the significant financial implications and distributional effects of making permanent the tax cuts enacted in 2017.
Permanently Extending the Trump Tax Cuts Would Cost $4 ...
May 8, 2024 — Permanently Extending the Trump Tax Cuts Would Cost $4 Trillion Over the Next Decade. Permanently extending the Trump tax cuts would cost $400 billion per year ...
Trump has been touting near the same interest rates and consumer prices that he inherited from Biden, and now Trump has engineered the economy's eventual slow decline into higher living costs, hurting all but the well-off. The stuff has not hit the fan yet. Many of Trump's policies will come to a head over the next six months, leaving a sustained bad taste in the mouths of voters in time for the 2026 midterms, when all congressional members are up for re-election or the filling of open seats.. That is just for starters, because the Medicaid cuts, which were once intended to enable individuals to access affordable healthcare, will not take effect until after the November 2026 Congressional elections, when the full impact of those cuts will be felt by the voters themselves.
The announcement of the "trade/tariff" deal with the EU and major Asian trading partners, which included the largest tariff increases since the Great Depression, also hit consumers' pockets. As imported inventory is sold off, the new tariffs become additional costs that are passed on to retail customers. Businesses that cannot adjust or compete by raising costs and prices to customers will likely go out of business. It is a short-term victory for Trump, but it was a bitter pill for consumers that will be felt over the next six months. Still out there, even higher than the EU tariffs of 15%, are the "deals" that have not been finalized with Canada and Mexico. That stuff has not yet hit the fan, either. The tiff with the Federal Reserve, Trump's pressure to lower interest rates, ignores the reason given by the Fed for holding off on lowering interest rates: it is due to the fear that these tariffs will lead to higher consumer prices and inflation. What the tariffs would actually be is now only partially resolved.
Those crowing that today the Trump policies of the Big Beautiful Bill and the dramatic increase in health care costs to those who are living on the economic margins and the disaster facing access to rural health have not hit the fan either. The impact of the mass deportations on farm, domestic, construction, and hospitality workers, jobs not sought by already employed Americans, has also not hit the fan.
We in Grand County, Colorado, will know who to blame. 28 to 38 percent hike in health insurance premiums and costs. That one will be felt before the November 2026 midterms when you can thank your Congressperson who voted for this....
For the record, inflation is creeping up, with the threat of higher tariffs looming, rising last month from 2.4 percent to 2.7 percent. In December 2024, Biden's last month in office, the unemployment rate was 2.9 percent...and we are not far from that. Gas at the pump prices are now near what Biden left them in January (per AAA.). Update 7/30/2025: As Biden left office, the economy grew by 2.4% in the last quarter of 2024. The growth rate released today under the Trump regime rose to 3%, as the Fed meets to discuss whether to lower interest rates. As recently stated by the Fed chair, this is a heated economy, and the impact of the high tariffs on consumers is still a threat to inflation. They will be considering this as they meet today. Google AI:and Gross Domestic Product, 4th Quarter and Year 2024 (Third Estimate), GDP by Industry, and Corporate Profits | U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA)
Conflict between presidents and the federal reserve has a history. Politicians like to lower rates,, whether they are in a democracy or in a dictatorship. It is good politics...but it could be a disaster to ignore economics
The price of crude oil, the basis for gas prices, is controlled by Middle East oil cartels, not the president of the US. The announced trade deal with the EU included "investments" in US energy, and the details and impact on the price of crude to consumers are unknown. However, it is beneficial for US oil and gas producers who have been seeking markets for the glut of oil and gas in the ground they are currently experiencing.
Pricing data shows Trump's tariffs are making some US-made products more expensive in an extensive Business Insider report. Import goods prices have already increased 3% and domestic competitors have used this cover and lack of foreign competition to raise theirs by 2%. In time, all of this will begin to impact inflation rate. That Trump has made American life more affordable is one promise he is not keeping.
Trump's pattern of blowing hot air when he cannot control a situation should be obvious by now. It may be good politics to blame someone else for the bad consequences of one's own actions. and count on the ignorance of voters to swallow that excuse for bad consequences. But in time, he risks some voters wising up. He can boviate all he wants about both interest rates and the price of crude oil per barrel, but he cannot control either.
First, he was demanding, under threat of replacement, that the Federal Reserve chair lower interest rates as a political favor to him. His own tariff TACOS, national debt, and immigration policies are pressures on interest rates to counter inflation...which goes against his promises to lower interest rates. ( FYI, the President does not have the power to appoint or remove or to shutter the Federal Reserve) The Federal Reserve makes its policies in the interest of controlling inflation, not to give a president some political good news. Trump's Foreign policies, such as bombing Iran, caused gas prices to spike, when he had promised consumers cheap gas. In the short term, the "cease-fire" between Iran and Israel will have a significant impact on those prices. Trump still ordered oil interests to lower the price per barrel when war loomed in the Middle East, and stability over the long run is still iffy..Oil prices are set mostly by international cartels and international supply and demand..over which Trump has no control.
Upate June 21, 2025;Alert: a sneak attack on the rule of law. It is bad enough that the Supreme Court gifted immunity to the president from prosecution for criminal conduct. Still, now the GOP Senate has changed this to make it virtually impossible for anyone to sue the federal government and get issued a TRO or injunction, or a temporary restraining order.A provision, first in the House version eliminating the ability of courts to issue contempt charges, and now revised to stop federal courts from issuing temporary restraining orders or preliminary injunctions per the Brennan Center "'On June 13, the Senate Judiciary Committee released a revised version of the budget reconciliation bill that also targets federal courts’ power to restrain the government. The revised provision preserves judges’ contempt authority but forbids courts from issuing temporary restraining orders or preliminary injunctions against the federal government unless the plaintiffs post a bond to cover any damages or costs to the government if the government eventually wins the case. The requirement does not take into account plaintiffs’ ability to pay, which would make it all but impossible to obtain preliminary relief against the government in many cases. Not only that, it would be retroactive to all pending cases. https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/budget-bill-would-gut-federal-courts-ability-enforce-orders#:~:text=Buried%20in%20the%20House 's%20budget,compelling%20compliance%20with%20court%20orders.
This is one more step in the Trump administration's attempt to emasculate the only leg of the separation of power, left standing, turning us into a one-man rule, controlling in the one branch of the government left: the executive branch. The legislative branch, Congress, is little more than a rubber stamp and enabler of the Trump regime's power grab. This is how we become an autocracy that is a dictatorship of one person, by removing any ability of the judicial branch to hold the executive branch accountable. It must be stopped.
I once got into a tangle with a Trumpster regarding the importance of the rule of law. The response was a litany of all of the court rulings against Trump's interest, claiming the anti-Trump decisions, from the 2020 stolen elections to now, were because the judges were all liberal... despite rulings by Reagan and Trump appointees. Yesterday, two court decisions were particularly significant: one upheld the federal government's right to use National Guard troops without the state governor's approval, as seen in the recent California case. The other went against the attempt by the Trump administration to withhold already approved funds for roads and bridges to force states to comply with Trump's mass immigration deportations. What say you, Trumpsters? The only court rulings you respect are those that support Trump's policies?
The rule of law enforced through federal courts is the only power left to stop pretender dictator Trump and save our democracy. Even that is in jeopardy. Congress has a clause in the Big Beautiful Bill that would remove the only court enforcement tool of any ruling: doing away with federal courts' ability to issue criminal contempt, resulting in fines and jail time. The Trump DOJ is attempting to halt the ability of federal courts to issue temporary restraining orders nationwide while gathering more information to inform its ruling. Courts with any power to enforce the rule of law are now an endangered species.. Democracy is on life support if any of these anti-judiciary measures are allowed to stand. MUFTIC FORUM BLOG: Keeping track of Trump court cases: updated continuously to 5/29/25
Every other way to block Trump's ascendency to full dictatorship is virtually defanged or, as an institution, has shot itself in the foot...some within five months of taking office, including the Supreme Court, Congress, the Democratic Party, the executive branch, internal watchdogs, and whistleblowers.
In the meantime, people in the streets need to educate and demand. That is a saving grace if it moves public opinion. Cudos to 50501 and Indivisible. Also flexing their muscles are Democrats who are state attorneys general, who have filed numerous cases to protect the separation of powers when they claim Trump oversteps his authority. The recent one on tariffs is one example. https://mufticforumblog.blogspot.com/2025/04/the-trump-regime-plot-to-break-rule-of.html How Trump plans to break the rule of law. Act like a dictator until the Supreme Court okays his acts
In the meantime, Trump acts like a dictator and dares the judicial branch to stop him. He continues to issue edicts, threats, and executive orders that are either blatantly or arguably unconstitutional. His DOJ arrests judges and directs Congress to impeach those who dare rule against him, testing the ultimate will of the Supreme Court, the majority he appointed, and even to defend what is left of the power of the judiciary. His strategy: he wins by losing in the courts so he can tell his MAGA crowd he tried and got stopped by liberal, woke judges he himself appointed or some GOP president before him did. If he wins a few in court, he, of course, shouts to the heavens that he is a winner.
The Constitutional crisis will happen when the Trump regime is ordered to bring back those wrongfully sent to the El Salvaor prison. There are now two cases where the Trump regime admits they were deported by administrative error: the Abrego Garcia case and one more: Trump Admin Blames 'Administrative Errors' After ICE Deports Wrong Man - Newsweek Jordin Melgar Salmeron
Remember when the MAGA movement demanded we have a "strong leader" for a president and Trump was the one? Trump has spent the first 5 months of his presidency defying the courts and the Constitution. There is evidence that even some of his voters believe he is a "dangerous dictator". The term "king" was not used in a recent poll, but the term "dictator" was. https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-poll-dangerous-dictator-2066852 The majority of those surveyed agreed Trump is a dangerous dictator, but even his base think so as well: "Among voters who once supported Trump but say they now regret it, 55 percent said they view him a dangerous dictator. That number climbs to 68 percent among nonvoters who regret not participating in the election. "
The big one happened 5/28/ 25 when the international trade court on a 3-0 decisions (including a Reagan and a Trump appointee) stopped Trump's tarffs on the basis that he did not have the power to do it because there was no national emergency under the war powers act that he claimed there was. The Trump regime immediately filed an appeal, which will end up in the Supreme Court. Trump had been counting on "his judges" putting gratitude to being appointed to their positions by him to hand down decisions favorable to him. His mob mentality has been in for a shock. Judges have been more loyal to the Constitution than to him. https://apnews.com/article/trump-tariffs-trade-court-0392dbd59f548e49ad4f64254ae3f94a
T
Every other way to block Trump's ascendency to full dictatorship is virtually defanged or has shot itself in the foot...some within five months of taking office.
At the top of the list: the Supreme Court issued a ruling that Trump is immune from criminal prosecution while performing his official duties (undefined). Free at last, Trump and his venture into cryptocurrency, accepting a $400 million gift from a king, among recent developments, can disregard the immorality clauses and charges of bribery, and then boast that they are legal because they are transparent. No wonder he can be so arrogant. He can get away with it. This one act, granting Trump immunity, has also laid the demise of the rule of law and the federal judiciary itself. The Supreme Court may be the only ones who can save themselves and the judiciary, as well,by drawing lines in the sand dictators cannot cross in future rulings.. Supreme Court 'distraught' as Trump uses ruling to emasculate justices: expert
Impeachment will not result in Trump's removal, even if the House turns blue in 2026. The Senate is in no danger of turning blue. Even if the balance changes a bit and the House impeaches, the supermajority of 2/3 of the senators is required to remove Trump so that is still a pipe dream, since only a third of the Senate is up for election at a time.
The cabinet, which could remove a disabled president, determining he is a mental case, is filled with loyal billionaire sycophants.
GOP House members, up for election every two years, are either scared to death of being primaried in their gerrymandered safe districts or live in Trump's thrall to ever be a profile in courage. The only tool left for Democrats is to win the House back in the midterms so they can hold hearings and expose the corruption that is in the open or hidden. Impeachment? Another vehicle, since it only requires a simple majority vote, will follow the same path as the other two impeachments. What Democrats could do if they gained a majority or persuaded enough GOP moderates in both houses in 2026 is pass laws that codify protections for elections, the rule of law, and the separation of powers.
The Democratic Party is in the midst of a civil war between the upstart youngsters and the geriatric leaders. No grand orator has emerged from any corner of the party except for AOC and Pete Buttigieg, which may not be easy for whatever is left of swing voters to swallow. It cannot even come up with a decent campaign slogan that says why Democrats are better, other than just being anti-Trump.
Trump's loyal base is cast in the cement of agreeing with whatever racist dogwhistles Trump utters, or are self-interested business people looking for low taxes and less regulations, or billionaires and oligarchs able to buy whatever election suits them, or the unconscious and ignorant low information voter of what it is like to lose a democracy.
Our democracy is hanging by a thread and the only hope in sight is to stop the attempts to cripple the jddicial system or a deep recession which wakes up even MAGA. Thankfully, Trump will be done and gone by 2028 unless he can finagle a destruction of the term limit clause in the Constitution or use the DOJ to manipulate election results and claims he won a losing election.
Past postings that give details to some comments above:
Here is AI Google answer to my inquiry if Trump is attempting to cripple federal courts issuing temporary restraining orders: Yes, the Trump administration and its Department of Justice are actively working to address and potentially limit the issuance of nationwide injunctions and temporary restraining orders (TROs) against federal policies.
Here's a breakdown of their actions and arguments:
1. Challenging Injunctions in Court:
The DOJ has actively appealed and challenged nationwide injunctions and TROs in various federal courts, including circuit courts and the Supreme Court.
They argue that these injunctions are overly broad, inappropriate for temporary measures, and may exceed the authority of district judges.
For example, the administration appealed a TRO that temporarily halted planned reductions-in-force (RIFs) within the federal government, arguing the plaintiffs' delay in bringing the case made the TRO inappropriate.
2. Advocating for Supreme Court Intervention:
The Trump administration is seeking the Supreme Court to take action and clarify the scope of nationwide injunctions, urging the court to limit their use.
They contend that such injunctions, especially those issued by district judges, can be seen as "judicial overreach" and impede the executive branch's ability to implement policies.
Arguments include that the current situation with nationwide injunctions is "toxic and unprecedented".
3. Implementing Policies to Counter Injunctions:
President Trump signed a memorandum instructing federal agencies to enforce Rule 65(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
This rule mandates that parties seeking injunctions or TROs provide financial guarantees (security) to cover potential costs and losses if the court later deems the injunction wrongly issued.
The administration believes this will deter "frivolous lawsuits" and hold litigants accountable.
4. Public Statements and Calls to Action:
Both President Trump and other administration officials have publicly criticized nationwide injunctions and called on Congress and the Supreme Court to take action.
They view these injunctions as frustrating the implementation of policies supported by voters and disrupting the balance of powers.
Context:
The number of nationwide injunctions issued against the Trump administration has been significantly higher compared to previous administrations, according to analyses.
This trend has intensified the debate about the use of nationwide injunctions and the appropriate role of the judiciary in reviewing executive actions.
The Trump administration's efforts to address this issue are ongoing, with lawsuits and legislative proposals currently being considered.
