When the ballroom case was argued before a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in June, Judge Patricia A. Millett asked... If the government were to move very quickly to bulldoze the Statue of Liberty... was it true that “nothing can be done” by the courts?
Yaakov Roth, a Justice Department lawyer, did not try to duck the question. “I think that’s right, yes,” he said....
When the case reached the Supreme Court last month, the challengers warned the justices that Mr. Trump had “decided to try to outrun judicial review.” In response, Solicitor General D. John Sauer did not exactly deny the charge. He crowed that a 250-person crew had been working 20 hours a day, seven days a week, and that the project, which he said included key security upgrades for the White House, had passed the point of no return....
It's in the structure of things that the Executive has speed as a tool. Remember when Justice Robert Jackson quoted Napoleon — "The tools belong to the man who can use them"?
I see I have a tag "Trumpian speediness." I've used it twice before today:May 24, 2024, I quoted Trump: "I was doing great, I was sort of like a hot guy. I was hot as a pistol. I think I’m hotter than I am now and I became president. I asked somebody, was I hotter before or hotter now. I don’t know… You have to always keep moving forward. And when it’s your time you’ve got to know it’s your time...." And I wrote: "New York is his town, and — telling stories about building in the city — he conveyed real love for the place. He wanted the people of his favorite city to know he cares and he can rebuild things for them — quickly — like he rebuilt the Wollman skating rink."
January 25, 2025, after the big fires, Trump was talking to L.A. Mayor Karen Bass: "You have emergency powers just like I do, and I'm exercising my emergency powers. You have to exercise them.... You have a very powerful emergency power and you can do everything within 24 hours." I wrote: "Trump pictures the homeowners rushing in grabbing armloads of debris and heaving it into dumpsters overnight. But don't you need contractors to deliver and pick up those dumpsters? And won't some of those homeowners... injure themselves jumping about in the wreckage? What is the big hurry? But Bass comes across as weak and afraid to take action, while Trump seems commanding and sanguine, ready to unleash the power of the individual citizens who are raring to get in there and transform the landscape overnight. You can do everything within 24 hours."
ADDED: Slowness is also a tool. Courts and legislatures can be used to slow things down, even where they have no power or will to act. Listen to Liptak: "Should Democrats capture one or both chambers of Congress in the coming election, they may be able to challenge the project in court or through legislation." That's a practical plan to use slowness to achieve the end he seems to favor. Slow things down for 2 more years and Trump will finally be gone. Trump can see that, and he's using his power of speed to get what he wants.

29 comments:
Same s*** as when jackie kennedy wanted to update the White House living quarters in the nineteen sixties and Nancy Reagan wanted to update the dining service in the nineteen eighties. The dipshits and pharisees in the press immediately start ed throwing shade on the whole project deliberately not recognizing that these things are for the Whitehouse as an institution of the US government and were for the benefit future presidents , not for their own personal enhancement or enjoyment. Whatever. That's what "democracy looks like" these days.
AI tells me that some buildings have been completed in the Pacific Palisades but, to date, none have been completed in Malibu. So there you have it. Trump might complete his Ballroom before a single residence is finished in Malibu.....On the other hand, Bass will probably win re-election easily. That's her skill set. No building things. Winning elections.
Trump moving faster than the Progressive Lawyers & Judges. They are kinda lazy.
It pretty much passed the point of no return when they cleared out the debris from the demolition. Then came the fight to who got to define what replaced the old building.
"For if man without tools is nothing, to be unable to use tools is to be destitute of power; and if with tools he is all, to be able to use tools is to be all-powerful."
—Charles H. Ham, Mind and Hand: manual training, the chief factor in education (1886)
The tools were there, Trump just knew how to use them.
Trump is like the Jesus Lizard of The Swamp, outrunning the predatory reptiles out to stop him.
The problem for the Trump haters is that they don't have much to go on. Most of the stuff he has done has been a success or popular. So, they have to go apeshit over a construction project - OK.
how DARE HE!
doesn't this civilian developer REALIZE?
that Government Projects are REQUIRED to move at a Glacial pace?
At this blog, We Believe No Ballroom Is Illegal
The thing about the ballroom project is that the destruction part of the project has already taken place. So it's too late to stop that. Also, hasn't the system worked as designed? If there had been an important, legally solid case to stop the project before it had started, shouldn't they have been able to get a restraining order that would have stuck until the they ultimately won in court? Maybe a part of the system was designed to prevent people from stopping big projects for frivolous, but legal, reasons.
Ballroom = illegal.
Crime in general - especially violent crime - and fraud-D tax payer theft crime by democrats - all fine and dandy.
Oh, they'll find a a way to tear it down. Code violation, snail darter habitat, Indian burial ground...
They'll think of something.
Hey it's not fair when he moves too fast for our perfidy !
If not the ballroom, then a conference center that is ballroom-adjacent. Either way, the lawn will be cleared, the portable potties removed, women in highheels and dresses will be equitably accommodated, and the aesthetic charm will be restored.
Just like Biden got his student loan money laundering scheme, even though it was illegal?
Just like the EPA got its extortion racket, even though it was illegal?
Just like Obama and Lois Lerner got their 1st Amendment Rights oppressions, even though it was illlegal?
BTW Liptak- your paper just had to shell out $10 million for defamation. You got your lying smear story printed, even though it was illegal...
They should just be happy that he is not planning on putting a golden image of himself on top. Perhaps he will troll them with that just to get their blood pressure up. The old structure needed replacing and the US does need a better space to host get together's with foreign dignitaries. So either actually help or STFU and go find a hobby away from the keyboard.
Coming attractions across the river, cue the Arch Enemies of The Arch.
Is there a term in law for an act that is illegal only because we don't like the guy who's doing it?
...some sensible analysis form the lawprof here, some propaganda from piece of shit Leah. Not one hint of 'the law is very clear' from either but whatever...
The courts need to get over this idea that their role in the constitutional scheme is to supervise the actions of the executive. The issue with the ballroom project is the lack of express congressional approval. However, if Congress is aggrieved by that, they have a remedy: impeachment. It should have nothing to do with the courts, at least until a party other than Congress can show that the construction violates their rights in a way that can't be adequately remedied by an award of damages.
...why string along your own people here with hope like this? It's like the Red Sox 'They win today so it will hurt more when they lose tomorrow' philosophy...
...I suppose it's partly out of frustration Hillary!'s Supreme Court appointees aren't backstopping all their garbage...
It's pathetic to say, but everybody, including the NYT, knows that if a Democrat were building it the reaction from our betters would be gushing tongue baths. Trump hate is all the bastards have left, and it is so tiresome. They would tear it down, realize how much it was needed, and build a new one, uglier and slower as a charge to the Treasury.
If someone starts to build a house on my land and I don’t sue (because I don’t know) until it’s almost complete then I have no remedy? The court won’t order its removal?
Since the Democrats are planning to do mischief by any legislative means necessary, then the Republicans should beat them too it and pass a law protecting the ballroom wing from any interference from Congress without a three-fifths majority resolution to do so.
Tcrosse - I think it’s the same term in law for an act is legal only because we like the guy who’s doing it.
*****
Is there a term in law for an act that is illegal only because we don't like the guy who's doing it?
*****
"Bill of attainder"
Post a Comment
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 4 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith. Also: No italics, even briefly. Use asterisks for emphasis. And don't play with the format by changing fonts or using boldface or all caps. Never include more than one extra line break between paragraphs.