• Flamekebab@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    53
    ·
    2 days ago

    Why even bother hearing the case if you’re not going to do anything about it regardless of the outcome? To waste everyone’s time?

    • DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Well, they can probably get the one month pay they lost out on. They just can’t get their jobs back.

      That being said, I both agree and disagree with this ruling. I disagree that there is no irreparable harm by Trump not providing a reason. The law requires it to create transparency and accountability. However, I agree that technically, the inspectors general are not the people harmed by this. So it shouldn’t have been them suing Trump, it should have been democrat congressmen and congresswomen who are owed an explanation.

    • REDACTED@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      It’s on a record he broke law. Can’t do anything while he has presidential immunity. He won’t have presidential immunity forever.

      • astronaut_sloth@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 days ago

        But there is something the courts can do that doesn’t involve punishment: simply order the administration to re-hire the IGs with back pay and scrub the termination from the record. That’s the actual legal remedy in this situation.