Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Disqualification is based on insurrection against the Constitution and not the government. The evidence of Donald Trump’s engaging in such insurrection is overwhelming.
Trump v. Anderson, 601 U.S. 100 (2024), is a U.S. Supreme Court case in which the Court unanimously held that states could not determine eligibility for federal office, including the presidency, under Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment.
In some areas, however, Trump appears to be claiming powers that go well beyond the president's authority set out in the Constitution. He says he can, by executive order, rewrite the 14th ...
Trump may like that idea – he recently asserted on social media that, “he who saves his country does not violate any Law” – but an executive order does not carry the force of law and so it ...
President-elect Donald Trump is poised to seize greater control of the federal government than any modern president before him when he takes office on Monday, charging ahead with plans to ...
The Court is subject to some checks, if it clashes intensely with the other branches of government: proposals for term limits or court expansion can get its attention and encourage it to think ...
Donald Trump and appointees to his second administration argued the Impoundment Control Act is unconstitutional, though few legal scholars agree. [10] Trump's assertion of this power resulted in the 2025 United States federal government grant pause, which was put on hold by a preliminary court injunction before it took effect.
The new brief established the prosecution's support for the injunctions against Trump on the basis that the actions Trump took were made outside the duties of the office of the presidency as to satisfy the Supreme Court decision in Trump, removing the evidence that was tied to the Justice Department, but introducing new evidence including ...