That’s quite the national question more broadly but I look at it this way: if the administration and the Roberts court go all-in on a coup, there’s not going to be accountability without a lot of pain. In that scenario, this doesn’t matter except as evidence for some future tribunal.

However, these guys aren’t Mussolini, Franco, Salazar, etc. on their rise to power. The guy at the top is starting as a struggling octogenarian who even in his prime had an entire professional career based not on hard work but tax evasion and barratry. Most of his top delegates were selected for their social media profiles, not competency, and even within the right a lot of people disliked them personally even if they’re willing to overlook that for power. His supporters are quite loyal but are also being hit by a lot of his policies in ways which are hard to ignore.

That makes me think there are a range of scenarios where this does matter, as we can see right now. Cops tend to support Republicans but a number of them are stepping up to say this is outside of their professional standards. A lot of “law and order” suburban voters are seeing these videos not just as something they don’t approve of–especially the “he had a legal gun so we had to execute him” defense–but also recognizing that the administration completely lied about that and we know only because of the kind of evidence at risk here.

The Roberts court has taken significant moves to empower Trump, but it seems like they’re hedging their bets in key areas: note how the shield against prosecution was conditional leaving them an easy way to find the opposite in any future case, and how much of their support has been shadow docket moves designed to delay without setting a permanent precedent. I think they’re recognizing the fragility of the current administration and leaving a backup plan for the autogolpe failing.

Things like this force the administration’s supporters to be more open about what they’re doing, in ways which risk losing their less die-hard supporters. Blowing off a court order forces SCOTUS to either rule against the administration or go on the record inventing a new way the executive branch is above the law. I think they know that’s risky at a time when a majority of the country is starting to realize exactly what’s at stake.

How does it help when Trump governs by veto? Won’t be just veto it all?

ICE seems to be having a problem with their video monitoring systems having system crashes. Sorry court, we lost all the data! https://www.404media.co/ice-says-critical-evidence-in-broadv...

I'm still so confused how the issue became "her emails" when they were basically turned over, dealt with. Where-as oops, the Bush White House "lost" literally millions of emails & allowed people to delete whatever they wanted. This is the sort of hiding in the shadows evil shit that I wish Obama had tried to bring to light, tried to prosecute some people for. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_White_House_email_controv...

Marimar Martinez is trying to make public the records of what ICE did after they tried to kill her & accused her of being a terrorist. That would be interesting to see. Liars liars everywhere, no respect for society. https://chicago.suntimes.com/immigration/2026/01/26/marimar-...

It does. The judiciary has given the Executive a command that it is now part of Trump's "official duties" to ensure gets carried out. Failure to comply with that order may ultimately turn into a subordinate dismissal; but it will also be yet another time the executive failed to execute a lawful order from the judiciary.

This is all assuming Robert's plan was ultimately to give this admin enough rope to hang themselves with; and holding onto the "official duties" definition hitherto deliberately left undefined to act as the trap spring.

I wouldn't put money on that though. This SCOTUS other decisions have me thinking their a little more cushy with the Cheeto than not.

https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/poli... has a list of police body cam retention policies. 90 days is pretty common, though it ranges from 30 days to 5 years.

Documents are kept longer. But a court needs to think about the shortest possible retention time that any agency might have for any kind of evidence.

Dissolve it and DHS. Investigate every single ERO agent and prosecute those that meet the bar. Bar all of them from future public service. Prosecute agency heads.

The odds of that happening are zero.

They're all getting pardoned.

Dunno about that.

The agent kneeling on the ground is missing his head.

I'm not interested in their discourse.

Topics != community. But that's obvious - there's no reason to ignore that fact unless you're trying to insult somebody for petty reasons.