#executiveorders — Public Fediverse posts

https://www.europesays.com/news/34079/ Judge refuses to block Trump executive order that limits mail voting #2026Elections #APTopNews #Boston #CarlNichols #CivilRights #Courts #DCWire #DistrictOfColumbia #DonaldTrump #elections #ExecutiveOrders #GeneralNews #GovernmentAndPolitics #Headlines #HumanRights #JoeBiden #JuanProao #Massachusetts #MidtermElections #News #Politics #TopStories #USDemocraticParty #USNews #UnitedStatesGovernment #Voting #WashingtonNews

Trump postpones signing artificial intelligence order out of concern it would hurt the AI industry | Ap https://www.byteseu.com/2041000/ #AI #ArtificialIntelligence #business #ExecutiveOrders #GeneralNews #Politics #Technology #TrumpAiExecutiveOrder #WashingtonNews

Donald Trump says US will take over Cuba ‘almost immediately’

President Donald Trump said Friday during remarks in Florida that the United States would take over Cuba “almost…
#UnitedStates #US #USA #American #Cuba #CubanEmbargo #DonaldTrump #executiveorder #executiveorders #Florida #havana #Iran #president #sanctions #trump #U.S.-CubanRelations #whitehouse
https://www.europesays.com/2960617/

https://www.europesays.com/people/53828/ Donald Trump says US will take over Cuba ‘almost immediately’ #American #cuba #CubanEmbargo #DonaldTrump #ExecutiveOrder #ExecutiveOrders #Florida #Havana #Iran #President #Sanctions #Trump #USCubanRelations #UnitedStates #WhiteHouse

https://www.europesays.com/es/527470/ EE UU sostiene que no necesita el aval del Congreso al dar por «terminadas» las hostilidades con Irán | Actualidad #BreakingNews #BreakingNews #ExecutiveOrders #FeaturedNews #FeaturedNews #government #Headlines #Internacional #International #InternationalNews #InternationalNews #LatestNews #LatestNews #News #Noticias #NoticiasDestacadas #NoticiasDestacadas #OvalOffice #President #Titulares #ÚltimasNoticias #ÚltimasNoticias #WhiteHouse #World #WorldNews #WorldNews

https://www.europesays.com/news/20476/ FDA: Three psychedelic drugs to get review following Trump directive #Business #DeborahMash #Depression #DonaldTrump #EdClay #elections #ExecutiveOrders #Fungi #GeneralNews #Headlines #Health #JdVance #JoeRogan #JohnFKennedy #MartyMakary #Medication #MentalHealth #News #PeterThiel #PublicHealth #RobertFKennedyJr #Science #TopStories #USFoodAndDrugAdministration #WashingtonNews

FDA: Three psychedelic drugs to get review following Trump directive

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Food and Drug Administration said Friday it will…
#NewsBeep #News #Medication #Business #DeborahMash #depression #DonaldTrump #EdClay #Elections #Executiveorders #fungi #Generalnews #Health #JDVance #JoeRogan #JohnF.Kennedy #MartyMakary #Mentalhealth #peter-thiel #Publichealth #robertf.kennedyjr. #Science #U.S.FoodandDrugAdministration #UK #UnitedKingdom #Washingtonnews
https://www.newsbeep.com/uk/548831/

https://www.europesays.com/uk/915881/ FDA: Three psychedelic drugs to get review following Trump directive #Business #DeborahMash #Depression #DonaldTrump #EdClay #Elections #ExecutiveOrders #fungi #GeneralNews #Health #JdVance #JoeRogan #JohnFKennedy #MartyMakary #Medication #MentalHealth #PeterThiel #PublicHealth #RobertFKennedyJr #Science #USFoodAndDrugAdministration #UK #UnitedKingdom #WashingtonNews

https://www.europesays.com/ie/451757/ FDA: Three psychedelic drugs to get review following Trump directive #APTopNews #Business #Depression #DonaldTrump #EdClay #Éire #Elections #ExecutiveOrders #GeneralNews #Health #IE #Ireland #JDVance #JoeRogan #JohnFKennedy #Medication #MentalHealth #PeterThiel #politics #PublicHealth #RobertFKennedyJr #Science #USFoodAndDrugAdministration #WashingtonNews

Facebook users share AI-generated video of Trump at Walter Reed

Two weeks after unfounded rumors said President Donald Trump suffered a…
#UnitedStates #US #USA #ai-generatedvideo #artificialintelligence #digitalwatermark #DonaldTrump #executiveorders #facebook #Factcheck #fakevideo #falseclaim #hospital #mcnd #militarymedicalcenter #misinformation #phoneinterview #policymeeting #socialmedia #SynthID #trump #TruthSocial #visualdeception #WalterReed #whitehouse
https://www.europesays.com/2936275/

US Cyber Strategy Advances with Executive Orders on Horizon

The US national cyber strategy is gaining momentum, with National Cyber Director Sean Cairncross confirming that its execution is actively underway. Executive orders are likely on the horizon, leaving us wondering what's next and who will lead the charge.

https://osintsights.com/us-cyber-strategy-advances-with-executive-orders-on-horizon?utm_source=mastodon&utm_medium=social

#NationalCyberStrategy #ExecutiveOrders #UsGovernment #CyberPolicy #EmergingThreats

https://www.europesays.com/people/9600/ Trump’s go-it-alone presidency confronts clear limits during wartime #Courts #DistrictOfColumbia #DonaldTrump #EmmanuelMacron #EnergyIndustry #ExecutiveOrders #GeneralNews #Iran #IranWar #JohnBolton #JohnThune #KeirStarmer #NorthAtlanticTreatyOrganization #OilAndGasIndustry #PoliticalEndorsements #Politics #POTUS #PresidentOfTheUnitedStates #StraitOfHormuz #USRepublicanParty #UnitedStates #WashingtonNews #WorldNews

https://www.europesays.com/iran/51758/ Trump’s go-it-alone presidency confronts clear limits during wartime #Courts #DistrictOfColumbia #DonaldTrump #EmmanuelMacron #EnergyIndustry #ExecutiveOrders #GeneralNews #Iran #IranWar #JohnBolton #JohnThune #KeirStarmer #NorthAtlanticTreatyOrganization #OilAndGasIndustry #PoliticalEndorsements #Politics #StraitOfHormuz #USRepublicanParty #UnitedStates #WashingtonNews #WorldNews

Trump’s go-it-alone certainty confronts the uncertainties of war

{‘ap_id’: ‘c5f6cba859417ad1a6997b422a6f9d43’, ‘byline’: ‘Associated Press’, ‘ap_version’: 1, ‘apProducts’: [{‘product_id’: 42433, ‘station’: ‘1010wins’, ‘section_front’: ‘news/politics’, ‘name’: ‘AP Top News…
#Politics #courts #Energyindustry #executiveorders #generalnews #iranwar #Oilandgasindustry #Politicalendorsements #w #Washingtonnews #WorldNews
https://www.europesays.com/2895766/

Trump gave Moms for Liberty a voice in the White House

Her presence at the White House underscores the meteoric rise of a group that made its name in…
#UnitedStates #US #USA #Conservatism #education #executiveorders #Genderinsports #generalnews #Governmentpolicy #LGBTQ #Politics #SchoolBoards #schools #theWhiteHouse #TrumpAdministration #U.S.News #Washingtonnews
https://www.europesays.com/2894746/

https://www.europesays.com/news/?p=13591 President Trump signs executive order that aims to stabilize college sports #CharlieBaker #CodyCampbell #CollegeSports #DCWire #DistrictOfColumbia #DonaldTrump #Education #EducationFunding #ExecutiveOrders #GeneralNews #Headlines #JeffreyGold #JimPhillips #MariaCantwell #News #Politics #SarahHirshland #Schools #sports #TopStories #USNews #WashingtonNews

A look at birthright citizenship, and how it’s seen around the world

The Supreme Court is once again hearing arguments on whether President Donald Trump can deny citizenship to …
#NewsBeep #News #Headlines #Australia #Courts #DCWire #DistrictofColumbia #DonaldTrump #Europe #Executiveorders #Generalnews #Germany #Governmentandpolitics #Immigration #NewHampshire #NHStateWire #Politics #SupremeCourtoftheUnitedStates #UnitedStates #Us #USA #Washingtonnews #Worldnews
https://www.newsbeep.com/461821/

Judge blocks Trump order to end funding for National Public Radio and Public Broadcasting Service

{‘ap_id’: ‘fbd9500e5f7400deab84ead188c35694’, ‘byline’: ”, ‘ap_version’: 5, ‘apProducts’: [{‘product_id’: 42429, ‘station’: ‘kcbsradio’, ‘section_front’: ‘ent…
#UnitedStates #US #USA #.N #america #business #Discrimination #e #Entertainment #executiveorders #f #generalnews #health #journalism #Politics #Publicmedia #sports #unitedstatesofamerica #w #Washingtonnews
https://www.europesays.com/2886488/

More coverage of Friday's appellate briefs from the four #LawFirms who stood up for the #Constitution against the tyranny of Trump's extortionate #ExecutiveOrders.

• (paywallled) https://www.law360.com/articles/2458839 "Firms Targeted By Trump Urge DC Circ. To Uphold EO Rulings"

How is it this terse and hard to unpack? Does... does Law360 think they are print journalism?

• https://www.jdjournal.com/2026/03/30/law-firms-urge-court-to-uphold-block-on-trump-orders/ — A great example of how trying to sound fair to both sides can minimize the fact that one side is completely crazypants, is an affront to the Constitution, and is willing to drag us all to hell. SNAFU.

I guess we're lucky that anyone in the "view from nowhere" camp even covered Friday's briefs because it's not getting a lot over coverage from the big networks with more visible failures like the elective war based on overdependence on AIs trained to be echo chambers replacing critical thought and Trump deciding first to put untrained ICE agents in airports to "help" TSA without a plan and then deciding that if the Constitution says he has to negotiate with Congress then laws mean nothing.

• https://abovethelaw.com/2026/03/biglaw-to-d-c-circuit-this-isnt-just-about-us-its-about-whether-the-president-can-put-lawyers-on-a-leash/

> Biglaw To D.C. Circuit: This Isn’t Just About Us — It’s About Whether The President Can Put Lawyers On A Leash

> Susman, Jenner, Perkins, and Wilmer say the executive orders are retaliatory, abusive, and very much not okay.

Now that's the headline I want to see.

And the author, Kathryn Rubino, ends the piece showing she and the law firms knows what's at stake:

> The question isn’t whether Biglaw can survive; it’s whether the legal system, as we understand it, can.

But, I guess Liz Dye is busy, because there could always be room for sharper language. :)

More coverage of Friday's appellate briefs from the four #LawFirms who stood up for the #Constitution against the tyranny of Trump's extortionate #ExecutiveOrders.

• (paywallled) https://www.law360.com/articles/2458839 "Firms Targeted By Trump Urge DC Circ. To Uphold EO Rulings"

How is it this terse and hard to unpack? Does... does Law360 think they are print journalism?

• https://www.jdjournal.com/2026/03/30/law-firms-urge-court-to-uphold-block-on-trump-orders/ — A great example of how trying to sound fair to both sides can minimize the fact that one side is completely crazypants, is an affront to the Constitution, and is willing to drag us all to hell. SNAFU.

I guess we're lucky that anyone in the "view from nowhere" camp even covered Friday's briefs because it's not getting a lot over coverage from the big networks with more visible failures like the elective war based on overdependence on AIs trained to be echo chambers replacing critical thought and Trump deciding first to put untrained ICE agents in airports to "help" TSA without a plan and then deciding that if the Constitution says he has to negotiate with Congress then laws mean nothing.

• https://abovethelaw.com/2026/03/biglaw-to-d-c-circuit-this-isnt-just-about-us-its-about-whether-the-president-can-put-lawyers-on-a-leash/

> Biglaw To D.C. Circuit: This Isn’t Just About Us — It’s About Whether The President Can Put Lawyers On A Leash

> Susman, Jenner, Perkins, and Wilmer say the executive orders are retaliatory, abusive, and very much not okay.

Now that's the headline I want to see.

And the author, Kathryn Rubino, ends the piece showing she and the law firms knows what's at stake:

> The question isn’t whether Biglaw can survive; it’s whether the legal system, as we understand it, can.

But, I guess Liz Dye is busy, because there could always be room for sharper language. :)

More coverage of Friday's appellate briefs from the four #LawFirms who stood up for the #Constitution against the tyranny of Trump's extortionate #ExecutiveOrders.

• (paywallled) https://www.law360.com/articles/2458839 "Firms Targeted By Trump Urge DC Circ. To Uphold EO Rulings"

How is it this terse and hard to unpack? Does... does Law360 think they are print journalism?

• https://www.jdjournal.com/2026/03/30/law-firms-urge-court-to-uphold-block-on-trump-orders/ — A great example of how trying to sound fair to both sides can minimize the fact that one side is completely crazypants, is an affront to the Constitution, and is willing to drag us all to hell. SNAFU.

I guess we're lucky that anyone in the "view from nowhere" camp even covered Friday's briefs because it's not getting a lot over coverage from the big networks with more visible failures like the elective war based on overdependence on AIs trained to be echo chambers replacing critical thought and Trump deciding first to put untrained ICE agents in airports to "help" TSA without a plan and then deciding that if the Constitution says he has to negotiate with Congress then laws mean nothing.

• https://abovethelaw.com/2026/03/biglaw-to-d-c-circuit-this-isnt-just-about-us-its-about-whether-the-president-can-put-lawyers-on-a-leash/

> Biglaw To D.C. Circuit: This Isn’t Just About Us — It’s About Whether The President Can Put Lawyers On A Leash

> Susman, Jenner, Perkins, and Wilmer say the executive orders are retaliatory, abusive, and very much not okay.

Now that's the headline I want to see.

And the author, Kathryn Rubino, ends the piece showing she and the law firms knows what's at stake:

> The question isn’t whether Biglaw can survive; it’s whether the legal system, as we understand it, can.

But, I guess Liz Dye is busy, because there could always be room for sharper language. :)

More coverage of Friday's appellate briefs from the four #LawFirms who stood up for the #Constitution against the tyranny of Trump's extortionate #ExecutiveOrders.

• (paywallled) https://www.law360.com/articles/2458839 "Firms Targeted By Trump Urge DC Circ. To Uphold EO Rulings"

How is it this terse and hard to unpack? Does... does Law360 think they are print journalism?

• https://www.jdjournal.com/2026/03/30/law-firms-urge-court-to-uphold-block-on-trump-orders/ — A great example of how trying to sound fair to both sides can minimize the fact that one side is completely crazypants, is an affront to the Constitution, and is willing to drag us all to hell. SNAFU.

I guess we're lucky that anyone in the "view from nowhere" camp even covered Friday's briefs because it's not getting a lot over coverage from the big networks with more visible failures like the elective war based on overdependence on AIs trained to be echo chambers replacing critical thought and Trump deciding first to put untrained ICE agents in airports to "help" TSA without a plan and then deciding that if the Constitution says he has to negotiate with Congress then laws mean nothing.

• https://abovethelaw.com/2026/03/biglaw-to-d-c-circuit-this-isnt-just-about-us-its-about-whether-the-president-can-put-lawyers-on-a-leash/

> Biglaw To D.C. Circuit: This Isn’t Just About Us — It’s About Whether The President Can Put Lawyers On A Leash

> Susman, Jenner, Perkins, and Wilmer say the executive orders are retaliatory, abusive, and very much not okay.

Now that's the headline I want to see.

And the author, Kathryn Rubino, ends the piece showing she and the law firms knows what's at stake:

> The question isn’t whether Biglaw can survive; it’s whether the legal system, as we understand it, can.

But, I guess Liz Dye is busy, because there could always be room for sharper language. :)

https://www.europesays.com/news/11597/ Birthright citizenship case hits close to home for immigrant mother #APTopNews #ConstitutionalLaw #Courts #DCWire #DistrictOfColumbia #DonaldTrump #ExecutiveOrders #FLStateWire #Florida #GeneralNews #Headlines #Immigration #JosephNLaPlante #NewHampshire #NewHampshireStateGovernment #News #NHStateWire #Politics #SoniaSotomayor #SupremeCourtOfTheUnitedStates #TopStories #UnitedStates #UnitedStatesGovernment #WashingtonNews

The birthright citizenship case at the Supreme Court hits close to home for this immigrant mother

{‘ap_id’: ‘e51d13b21b4240f6b8625700abe6030e’, ‘byline’: ”, ‘ap_version’: 4, ‘apProducts’: [{‘product_id’: 42433, ‘station’: ‘1010wins’, ‘section_front’: ‘news/politics’, ‘name’: ‘AP Top News –…
#Politics #.N #constitutionallaw #courts #executiveorders #generalnews #Immigration #w #Washingtonnews
https://www.europesays.com/2884179/

The birthright citizenship case at the Supreme Court hits close to home for this immigrant mother

{‘ap_id’: ‘e51d13b21b4240f6b8625700abe6030e’, ‘byline’: ”, ‘ap_version’: 1, ‘apProducts’: [{‘product_id’: 42433, ‘station’: ‘1010wins’, ‘section_front’: ‘news/politi…
#UnitedStates #US #USA #.N #america #courts #executiveorders #generalnews #geopolitics #Immigration #Politics #unitedstatesofamerica #UnitedStatesPolitics #USPolitics #usapolitics #w #Washingtonnews
https://www.europesays.com/2883537/

Now the #LawFirms that went 4-0 defeating the #ExecutiveOrders in the District Courts have filed their appellate briefs on 2026/03/27.

#WilmerHale:
• The Executive Order is unconstitutional and ultra vires from stem to stern, from retaliatory motive to (lack of) methodology or support in statute.
• The Article III judges rule what constitutes wrongful filings, not the President. Also, many of those filings won. Is Trump tired of (us) winning?
• Not only is the blanket security revocation an impermissible act but it was reversed at law firms that capitulated and therefore obviously done for improper, extortionate, purpose. Previously, the Government said that these were blanket revocations given to law firms, so it is too late and too far a stretch to claim *now* that they were individualized.
• The preamble can't be severed from the order when it is the organizing principle for the extortion scheme.

#JennerBlock:
• First Amendment forbids retaliation for associating with the President's political enemies.
• Everything that isn't retaliation is a fig leaf of post-hoc pretext (23 words of pretext and 200+ words of Trump's grievances).
• Blanket security clearance revocation with a promise to look for cause in a later review isn't individualized judgment (as required by the 1st, and 5th Amendments) it is just retaliation without facts or permissible method. This decision is improper and subject to court review.

Now the #LawFirms that went 4-0 defeating the #ExecutiveOrders in the District Courts have filed their appellate briefs on 2026/03/27.

#WilmerHale:
• The Executive Order is unconstitutional and ultra vires from stem to stern, from retaliatory motive to (lack of) methodology or support in statute.
• The Article III judges rule what constitutes wrongful filings, not the President. Also, many of those filings won. Is Trump tired of (us) winning?
• Not only is the blanket security revocation an impermissible act but it was reversed at law firms that capitulated and therefore obviously done for improper, extortionate, purpose. Previously, the Government said that these were blanket revocations given to law firms, so it is too late and too far a stretch to claim *now* that they were individualized.
• The preamble can't be severed from the order when it is the organizing principle for the extortion scheme.

#JennerBlock:
• First Amendment forbids retaliation for associating with the President's political enemies.
• Everything that isn't retaliation is a fig leaf of post-hoc pretext (23 words of pretext and 200+ words of Trump's grievances).
• Blanket security clearance revocation with a promise to look for cause in a later review isn't individualized judgment (as required by the 1st, and 5th Amendments) it is just retaliation without facts or permissible method. This decision is improper and subject to court review.

Now the #LawFirms that went 4-0 defeating the #ExecutiveOrders in the District Courts have filed their appellate briefs on 2026/03/27.

#WilmerHale:
• The Executive Order is unconstitutional and ultra vires from stem to stern, from retaliatory motive to (lack of) methodology or support in statute.
• The Article III judges rule what constitutes wrongful filings, not the President. Also, many of those filings won. Is Trump tired of (us) winning?
• Not only is the blanket security revocation an impermissible act but it was reversed at law firms that capitulated and therefore obviously done for improper, extortionate, purpose. Previously, the Government said that these were blanket revocations given to law firms, so it is too late and too far a stretch to claim *now* that they were individualized.
• The preamble can't be severed from the order when it is the organizing principle for the extortion scheme.

#JennerBlock:
• First Amendment forbids retaliation for associating with the President's political enemies.
• Everything that isn't retaliation is a fig leaf of post-hoc pretext (23 words of pretext and 200+ words of Trump's grievances).
• Blanket security clearance revocation with a promise to look for cause in a later review isn't individualized judgment (as required by the 1st, and 5th Amendments) it is just retaliation without facts or permissible method. This decision is improper and subject to court review.

Now the #LawFirms that went 4-0 defeating the #ExecutiveOrders in the District Courts have filed their appellate briefs on 2026/03/27.

#WilmerHale:
• The Executive Order is unconstitutional and ultra vires from stem to stern, from retaliatory motive to (lack of) methodology or support in statute.
• The Article III judges rule what constitutes wrongful filings, not the President. Also, many of those filings won. Is Trump tired of (us) winning?
• Not only is the blanket security revocation an impermissible act but it was reversed at law firms that capitulated and therefore obviously done for improper, extortionate, purpose. Previously, the Government said that these were blanket revocations given to law firms, so it is too late and too far a stretch to claim *now* that they were individualized.
• The preamble can't be severed from the order when it is the organizing principle for the extortion scheme.

#JennerBlock:
• First Amendment forbids retaliation for associating with the President's political enemies.
• Everything that isn't retaliation is a fig leaf of post-hoc pretext (23 words of pretext and 200+ words of Trump's grievances).
• Blanket security clearance revocation with a promise to look for cause in a later review isn't individualized judgment (as required by the 1st, and 5th Amendments) it is just retaliation without facts or permissible method. This decision is improper and subject to court review.

Now the #LawFirms that went 4-0 defeating the #ExecutiveOrders in the District Courts have filed their appellate briefs on 2026/03/27.

#WilmerHale:
• The Executive Order is unconstitutional and ultra vires from stem to stern, from retaliatory motive to (lack of) methodology or support in statute.
• The Article III judges rule what constitutes wrongful filings, not the President. Also, many of those filings won. Is Trump tired of (us) winning?
• Not only is the blanket security revocation an impermissible act but it was reversed at law firms that capitulated and therefore obviously done for improper, extortionate, purpose. Previously, the Government said that these were blanket revocations given to law firms, so it is too late and too far a stretch to claim *now* that they were individualized.
• The preamble can't be severed from the order when it is the organizing principle for the extortion scheme.

#JennerBlock:
• First Amendment forbids retaliation for associating with the President's political enemies.
• Everything that isn't retaliation is a fig leaf of post-hoc pretext (23 words of pretext and 200+ words of Trump's grievances).
• Blanket security clearance revocation with a promise to look for cause in a later review isn't individualized judgment (as required by the 1st, and 5th Amendments) it is just retaliation without facts or permissible method. This decision is improper and subject to court review.

https://www.europesays.com/news/10356/ Trump signs executive action to pay TSA employees #AirportSecurity #Business #CharlesSchumer #CompensationAndBenefits #Congress #DCWire #DistrictOfColumbia #DonaldTrump #EricSchmitt #ExecutiveOrders #GeneralNews #HakeemJeffries #Headlines #Immigration #JohnThune #Legislation #MarkwayneMullin #MikeJohnson #News #Politics #TopStories #TransportationSecurityAdministration #Travel #USDepartmentOfHomelandSecurity #USNews #USRepublicanParty #UnitedStatesCongress #WashingtonNews

First day Executive Orders for next President -

1. Rescind all Executive Orders from past President.
2. Disband ICE.
3. Rename Kennedy Centre - assuming it’s still there and not replaced by a Trump Tower.
3. Demolish whatever exists of Ballroom.

Then get to the rest…

#usa #president2028 #executiveorders #ICE #kennedycenter #whitehouse #ballroom

First day Executive Orders for next President -

1. Rescind all Executive Orders from past President.
2. Disband ICE.
3. Rename Kennedy Centre - assuming it’s still there and not replaced by a Trump Tower.
3. Demolish whatever exists of Ballroom.

Then get to the rest…

#usa #president2028 #executiveorders #ICE #kennedycenter #whitehouse #ballroom

First day Executive Orders for next President -

1. Rescind all Executive Orders from past President.
2. Disband ICE.
3. Rename Kennedy Centre - assuming it’s still there and not replaced by a Trump Tower.
3. Demolish whatever exists of Ballroom.

Then get to the rest…

#usa #president2028 #executiveorders #ICE #kennedycenter #whitehouse #ballroom

First day Executive Orders for next President -

1. Rescind all Executive Orders from past President.
2. Disband ICE.
3. Rename Kennedy Centre - assuming it’s still there and not replaced by a Trump Tower.
3. Demolish whatever exists of Ballroom.

Then get to the rest…

#usa #president2028 #executiveorders #ICE #kennedycenter #whitehouse #ballroom

First day Executive Orders for next President -

1. Rescind all Executive Orders from past President.
2. Disband ICE.
3. Rename Kennedy Centre - assuming it’s still there and not replaced by a Trump Tower.
3. Demolish whatever exists of Ballroom.

Then get to the rest…

#usa #president2028 #executiveorders #ICE #kennedycenter #whitehouse #ballroom

Previously, I wrote:

> Regarding the security clearance revocation, we have only the #DOJ brief, but it reads a bit more seriously than the rest.

But that's because the #Trump DOJ is hammering on the language of Department of Navy v. Egan (1988) https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/484/518/ and Lee v. Garland (2024) https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/cadc/20-5221/20-5221-2024-10-29.html with all the bluster of a con artist or chat bot in a self-reinforcement loop. But both those cases were predicated on the presumption of regularity — that the appropriate agency, following procedure, undertook a careful determination and the review of which is a nonjusticiable political question. Trump's four #ExecutiveOrders make it clear that none of that happened and all of this is retaliation for not capitulating. And NRA v. Vullo (2024) https://www.oyez.org/cases/2023/22-842 seems to say that is coercion in violation of the First Amendment.

So #MikeMasnick argues https://www.techdirt.com/2026/03/09/doj-un-drops-its-appeal-against-law-firms-files-brief-that-gets-the-first-amendment-exactly-backwards/

> The brief actually cites NRA v. Vullo, .... The Supreme Court held —unanimously — that government officials using their regulatory authority to punish or suppress disfavored private speech can violate the First Amendment, even if the official frames their actions in terms of legitimate regulatory interests.

...

> Vullo actually undercuts their entire argument. The point of the Vullo framework is that when government speech is coupled with government action designed to punish disfavored private expression, the combination can be unconstitutional coercion. The administration [tries the ruse of] ”Section 1 is just government speech.” That’s precisely the move Vullo says you can’t get away with.

So maybe that security clearance revocation is just as much Jello as Trump's Florida lawsuit against the BBC.

Previously, I wrote:

> Regarding the security clearance revocation, we have only the #DOJ brief, but it reads a bit more seriously than the rest.

But that's because the #Trump DOJ is hammering on the language of Department of Navy v. Egan (1988) https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/484/518/ and Lee v. Garland (2024) https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/cadc/20-5221/20-5221-2024-10-29.html with all the bluster of a con artist or chat bot in a self-reinforcement loop. But both those cases were predicated on the presumption of regularity — that the appropriate agency, following procedure, undertook a careful determination and the review of which is a nonjusticiable political question. Trump's four #ExecutiveOrders make it clear that none of that happened and all of this is retaliation for not capitulating. And NRA v. Vullo (2024) https://www.oyez.org/cases/2023/22-842 seems to say that is coercion in violation of the First Amendment.

So #MikeMasnick argues https://www.techdirt.com/2026/03/09/doj-un-drops-its-appeal-against-law-firms-files-brief-that-gets-the-first-amendment-exactly-backwards/

> The brief actually cites NRA v. Vullo, .... The Supreme Court held —unanimously — that government officials using their regulatory authority to punish or suppress disfavored private speech can violate the First Amendment, even if the official frames their actions in terms of legitimate regulatory interests.

...

> Vullo actually undercuts their entire argument. The point of the Vullo framework is that when government speech is coupled with government action designed to punish disfavored private expression, the combination can be unconstitutional coercion. The administration [tries the ruse of] ”Section 1 is just government speech.” That’s precisely the move Vullo says you can’t get away with.

So maybe that security clearance revocation is just as much Jello as Trump's Florida lawsuit against the BBC.

Previously, I wrote:

> Regarding the security clearance revocation, we have only the #DOJ brief, but it reads a bit more seriously than the rest.

But that's because the #Trump DOJ is hammering on the language of Department of Navy v. Egan (1988) https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/484/518/ and Lee v. Garland (2024) https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/cadc/20-5221/20-5221-2024-10-29.html with all the bluster of a con artist or chat bot in a self-reinforcement loop. But both those cases were predicated on the presumption of regularity — that the appropriate agency, following procedure, undertook a careful determination and the review of which is a nonjusticiable political question. Trump's four #ExecutiveOrders make it clear that none of that happened and all of this is retaliation for not capitulating. And NRA v. Vullo (2024) https://www.oyez.org/cases/2023/22-842 seems to say that is coercion in violation of the First Amendment.

So #MikeMasnick argues https://www.techdirt.com/2026/03/09/doj-un-drops-its-appeal-against-law-firms-files-brief-that-gets-the-first-amendment-exactly-backwards/

> The brief actually cites NRA v. Vullo, .... The Supreme Court held —unanimously — that government officials using their regulatory authority to punish or suppress disfavored private speech can violate the First Amendment, even if the official frames their actions in terms of legitimate regulatory interests.

...

> Vullo actually undercuts their entire argument. The point of the Vullo framework is that when government speech is coupled with government action designed to punish disfavored private expression, the combination can be unconstitutional coercion. The administration [tries the ruse of] ”Section 1 is just government speech.” That’s precisely the move Vullo says you can’t get away with.

So maybe that security clearance revocation is just as much Jello as Trump's Florida lawsuit against the BBC.

Previously, I wrote:

> Regarding the security clearance revocation, we have only the #DOJ brief, but it reads a bit more seriously than the rest.

But that's because the #Trump DOJ is hammering on the language of Department of Navy v. Egan (1988) https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/484/518/ and Lee v. Garland (2024) https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/cadc/20-5221/20-5221-2024-10-29.html with all the bluster of a con artist or chat bot in a self-reinforcement loop. But both those cases were predicated on the presumption of regularity — that the appropriate agency, following procedure, undertook a careful determination and the review of which is a nonjusticiable political question. Trump's four #ExecutiveOrders make it clear that none of that happened and all of this is retaliation for not capitulating. And NRA v. Vullo (2024) https://www.oyez.org/cases/2023/22-842 seems to say that is coercion in violation of the First Amendment.

So #MikeMasnick argues https://www.techdirt.com/2026/03/09/doj-un-drops-its-appeal-against-law-firms-files-brief-that-gets-the-first-amendment-exactly-backwards/

> The brief actually cites NRA v. Vullo, .... The Supreme Court held —unanimously — that government officials using their regulatory authority to punish or suppress disfavored private speech can violate the First Amendment, even if the official frames their actions in terms of legitimate regulatory interests.

...

> Vullo actually undercuts their entire argument. The point of the Vullo framework is that when government speech is coupled with government action designed to punish disfavored private expression, the combination can be unconstitutional coercion. The administration [tries the ruse of] ”Section 1 is just government speech.” That’s precisely the move Vullo says you can’t get away with.

So maybe that security clearance revocation is just as much Jello as Trump's Florida lawsuit against the BBC.

Previously, I wrote:

> Regarding the security clearance revocation, we have only the #DOJ brief, but it reads a bit more seriously than the rest.

But that's because the #Trump DOJ is hammering on the language of Department of Navy v. Egan (1988) https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/484/518/ and Lee v. Garland (2024) https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/cadc/20-5221/20-5221-2024-10-29.html with all the bluster of a con artist or chat bot in a self-reinforcement loop. But both those cases were predicated on the presumption of regularity — that the appropriate agency, following procedure, undertook a careful determination and the review of which is a nonjusticiable political question. Trump's four #ExecutiveOrders make it clear that none of that happened and all of this is retaliation for not capitulating. And NRA v. Vullo (2024) https://www.oyez.org/cases/2023/22-842 seems to say that is coercion in violation of the First Amendment.

So #MikeMasnick argues https://www.techdirt.com/2026/03/09/doj-un-drops-its-appeal-against-law-firms-files-brief-that-gets-the-first-amendment-exactly-backwards/

> The brief actually cites NRA v. Vullo, .... The Supreme Court held —unanimously — that government officials using their regulatory authority to punish or suppress disfavored private speech can violate the First Amendment, even if the official frames their actions in terms of legitimate regulatory interests.

...

> Vullo actually undercuts their entire argument. The point of the Vullo framework is that when government speech is coupled with government action designed to punish disfavored private expression, the combination can be unconstitutional coercion. The administration [tries the ruse of] ”Section 1 is just government speech.” That’s precisely the move Vullo says you can’t get away with.

So maybe that security clearance revocation is just as much Jello as Trump's Florida lawsuit against the BBC.

Here we go. #Anthropic sues the Government for labeling it a security risk out of animus. #WilmerHale, one of the #LawFirms that stood up to #Trump's bullying #ExecutiveOrders now gets paid to explain again that the government doesn't get to have hurt feelings.

Anthropic PBC v. U.S. Department of War (California N.D. 26-cv-01996) https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/72379655/anthropic-pbc-v-us-department-of-war/

Five counts, one theme — animus omnia vitiat:

Count I — APA / 10 U.S.C. § 3252 — The "supply chain risk" designation doesn't follow the statute or the facts.

Count II — First Amendment Retaliation — "AI shouldn't autonomously kill people" is protected speech.

Count III — Ultra Vires / Article II — No law lets a President destroy a company by social media post.

Count IV — Fifth Amendment Due Process — You can't de facto debar someone with no notice, no hearing, no findings.

Count V — APA § 558 — Agencies can't impose sanctions outside their delegated authority.

The Trump Administration had a temper tantrum and said "You're not the boss of me, I'm the boss of you. I'll end you!". Anthropic points out that animus is no substitute for #RuleOfLaw.

So why did they sue #Hegseth's #DepartmentOfWar rather than the statutory #DepartmentOfDefense? Because Trump authorized the name, because it shows respect to #Hegseth's sensitive feelings, and because it underscores the ridiculousness of the government tasking #AI to kill (and surveil) people autonomously. #skynet! On the off-chance the judge orders a caption change, their hands are clean and the lawyer's can't point to any act of defiance.

https://gizmodo.com/anthropic-officially-sues-the-pentagon-for-labeling-the-ai-company-a-supply-chain-risk-2000731365

Here we go. #Anthropic sues the Government for labeling it a security risk out of animus. #WilmerHale, one of the #LawFirms that stood up to #Trump's bullying #ExecutiveOrders now gets paid to explain again that the government doesn't get to have hurt feelings.

Anthropic PBC v. U.S. Department of War (California N.D. 26-cv-01996) https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/72379655/anthropic-pbc-v-us-department-of-war/

Five counts, one theme — animus omnia vitiat:

Count I — APA / 10 U.S.C. § 3252 — The "supply chain risk" designation doesn't follow the statute or the facts.

Count II — First Amendment Retaliation — "AI shouldn't autonomously kill people" is protected speech.

Count III — Ultra Vires / Article II — No law lets a President destroy a company by social media post.

Count IV — Fifth Amendment Due Process — You can't de facto debar someone with no notice, no hearing, no findings.

Count V — APA § 558 — Agencies can't impose sanctions outside their delegated authority.

The Trump Administration had a temper tantrum and said "You're not the boss of me, I'm the boss of you. I'll end you!". Anthropic points out that animus is no substitute for #RuleOfLaw.

So why did they sue #Hegseth's #DepartmentOfWar rather than the statutory #DepartmentOfDefense? Because Trump authorized the name, because it shows respect to #Hegseth's sensitive feelings, and because it underscores the ridiculousness of the government tasking #AI to kill (and surveil) people autonomously. #skynet! On the off-chance the judge orders a caption change, their hands are clean and the lawyer's can't point to any act of defiance.

https://gizmodo.com/anthropic-officially-sues-the-pentagon-for-labeling-the-ai-company-a-supply-chain-risk-2000731365

Here we go. #Anthropic sues the Government for labeling it a security risk out of animus. #WilmerHale, one of the #LawFirms that stood up to #Trump's bullying #ExecutiveOrders now gets paid to explain again that the government doesn't get to have hurt feelings.

Anthropic PBC v. U.S. Department of War (California N.D. 26-cv-01996) https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/72379655/anthropic-pbc-v-us-department-of-war/

Five counts, one theme — animus omnia vitiat:

Count I — APA / 10 U.S.C. § 3252 — The "supply chain risk" designation doesn't follow the statute or the facts.

Count II — First Amendment Retaliation — "AI shouldn't autonomously kill people" is protected speech.

Count III — Ultra Vires / Article II — No law lets a President destroy a company by social media post.

Count IV — Fifth Amendment Due Process — You can't de facto debar someone with no notice, no hearing, no findings.

Count V — APA § 558 — Agencies can't impose sanctions outside their delegated authority.

The Trump Administration had a temper tantrum and said "You're not the boss of me, I'm the boss of you. I'll end you!". Anthropic points out that animus is no substitute for #RuleOfLaw.

So why did they sue #Hegseth's #DepartmentOfWar rather than the statutory #DepartmentOfDefense? Because Trump authorized the name, because it shows respect to #Hegseth's sensitive feelings, and because it underscores the ridiculousness of the government tasking #AI to kill (and surveil) people autonomously. #skynet! On the off-chance the judge orders a caption change, their hands are clean and the lawyer's can't point to any act of defiance.

https://gizmodo.com/anthropic-officially-sues-the-pentagon-for-labeling-the-ai-company-a-supply-chain-risk-2000731365

Here we go. #Anthropic sues the Government for labeling it a security risk out of animus. #WilmerHale, one of the #LawFirms that stood up to #Trump's bullying #ExecutiveOrders now gets paid to explain again that the government doesn't get to have hurt feelings.

Anthropic PBC v. U.S. Department of War (California N.D. 26-cv-01996) https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/72379655/anthropic-pbc-v-us-department-of-war/

Five counts, one theme — animus omnia vitiat:

Count I — APA / 10 U.S.C. § 3252 — The "supply chain risk" designation doesn't follow the statute or the facts.

Count II — First Amendment Retaliation — "AI shouldn't autonomously kill people" is protected speech.

Count III — Ultra Vires / Article II — No law lets a President destroy a company by social media post.

Count IV — Fifth Amendment Due Process — You can't de facto debar someone with no notice, no hearing, no findings.

Count V — APA § 558 — Agencies can't impose sanctions outside their delegated authority.

The Trump Administration had a temper tantrum and said "You're not the boss of me, I'm the boss of you. I'll end you!". Anthropic points out that animus is no substitute for #RuleOfLaw.

So why did they sue #Hegseth's #DepartmentOfWar rather than the statutory #DepartmentOfDefense? Because Trump authorized the name, because it shows respect to #Hegseth's sensitive feelings, and because it underscores the ridiculousness of the government tasking #AI to kill (and surveil) people autonomously. #skynet! On the off-chance the judge orders a caption change, their hands are clean and the lawyer's can't point to any act of defiance.

https://gizmodo.com/anthropic-officially-sues-the-pentagon-for-labeling-the-ai-company-a-supply-chain-risk-2000731365