In a ruling Friday, District Judge Christopher Cooper ordered the cessation of all repair plans for the Kennedy Center and the removal of Trump’s name from the building within two weeks. It is a detailed and comprehensive opinion, but I believe that Judge Cooper is wrong on the cessation of repairs.
I previously expressed skepticism over the claim that the board could order such a change unilaterally. At that time, I raised the very issues that Judge Cooper cited in his rejection of the right to rename the Center without congressional approval.
I agree with the court on its standing decision (which is hardly a surprise given my past writings in favor of broader standing).
However, the opinion becomes more challengeable when the court addresses the decision to close the Center for two years to carry out major renovations. The opinion is rife with digs at President Donald Trump for his social media postings and his unilateral plan for a ballroom. Judge Cooper editorializes that “Especially after the demolition of the East Wing of the White House— which occurred out of the blue a few months after President Trump pledged that construction would not ‘interfere with’ and would ‘pay[] total respect to the existing building’—there has been understandable concern that the Kennedy Center may be the next target of the wrecking ball.”
Judge Cooper accepts that the Center is long overdue for major renovations and that the Board had the authority to order them. He further rejects the sweeping claims of litigants that Trump was planning to effectively raze the Center: “The evidence before the Court does not demonstrate that the Center is poised for wholesale destruction and rebuilding, à la the East Wing.”
However, Cooper rules that the Board could not have given the decision sufficient time or attention in carrying out the plan. He declared that “None of the board members had sufficient information in advance of the March 16 meeting to make a well-considered decision to close the center.”
The court’s tight analysis is lost in supporting the cessation of repairs. While he acknowledges that such repairs have long been planned and studied, he cites differing statements on the plan to continue operations before a later decision to close the Center. The court finds that the record illustrates a failure to fulfill the fiduciary duty of the board and Chair:
“Whatever happened during that purported four-month incubation period, Board input was, most evidently, an afterthought. Trustees learned about the plan to close the Center at the same time as the general public, by social media post. Deprived of time and information, they had no meaningful opportunity to consider perhaps the most momentous decision in the Center’s lifetime since it opened in 1971.”
That analysis is heavily laden with assumptions on the lack of consideration of the Board. The same approach could be used to set aside an array of board decisions that do not evidence sufficient concern or scrutiny for the satisfaction of a judge.
Judge Cooper seems to recognize how far the court was taking its own authority in countermanding the decision:
“The Court appreciates that, in both the charitable and corporate spheres, board meetings are often scripted affairs… The Court should not be heard to suggest that trustees must scrutinize every piece of prefatory work that has been done, or labor through the night debating the relative merits of their decisions in order to discharge their fiduciary duties— especially where, as here, a board is large and comprised of members who may not be well schooled in the subject matter before them. “
Yet, the court still concludes that this Board “seems to have fallen grossly short of prudent decision-making.” That seems far too subjective and fluid a standard for federal courts to micromanage executive branch decision-making.
For example, Judge Cooper recognizes that lawyers were present at the critical meeting, but suggests that they were not relied upon enough due to the lack of direct statements preserved on the record. Since when is there an obligation for counsel to speak and be memorialized in such records? The court writes:
“Where were the lawyers? The answer appears to be “nowhere.” The Center’s General Counsel and Associate General Counsel were present at the March 16 Board Meeting but, according to the minutes, did not speak. There is, further, nothing in the record to indicate that the Board relied on any legal advice in reaching the closure decision. It goes without saying that, for all his background in project management and construction, Mr. Floca is no legal expert.”
Yet, the court answered its own question. Where were the lawyers? They were there. There is simply no record of their views expressed in this meeting as opposed to other conversations or inquiries. Moreover, lawyers give advice, not commands, to political appointees. The court seems entirely adrift in reading the lack of such references as proof that the decision was made without legal guidance or consultation. Finally, given the thrust and tenor of the decision, I doubt seriously that a notation reading “the lawyers stated that they agreed with this plan” would have made any material difference to the court.
For his part, President Trump was equally sweeping and unrestrained in his response. He declared that he would order the Commerce Department to transfer the Center to Congress “so they can make a determination as to what to do with it.”
Given that Judge Cooper’s order on the cessation of repairs may be reversed, it is unnecessary unless the naming of the Center is the overriding consideration. In either case, it would make little sense for the Center to be placed under the supervision of Congress. It would be appropriate for Congress to address the naming question as well as potentially being heard on the need for a closure.
In the end, I thought that the court’s cessation analysis conveyed ample reasons, but Judge Cooper himself (and others) may be unhappy with how the decision was made. It is less clear why that should matter. There are ample reasons to close the Center to facilitate what the court acknowledges will be extensive and major renovations. That construction can only be facilitated and expedited if there is not a simultaneous need to keep a substantial part of the Center operating for the public.
The Administration should appeal the decision and may soon be able to resume work on the Center, regardless of its name.
Here is the opinion: Beaty v. Trump
An Iranian ballistic missile strike on a Kuwaiti air base caused minor injuries to several Americans, according to a new report by Bloomberg.
While Kuwaiti air defenses were able to intercept Iran’s Fateh-110 missile, falling debris hit the Ali Al Salem Air Base. Along with the roughly five people who had minor injuries, the strike also seriously damaged two MQ-9 Reaper strike drones, which cost roughly $30 million each.
Fake news. trump said he decimated all Iranian Air Force and navy assets. Iran has no missiles, trump blew them all up. They are gone, we won, I heard trump say multiple times, we won. So how in the heck can they say Iran has missiles that hit a U.S. Air base? Not possible. Fake news.
All you’ve shown is that you have no idea what the word “decimate” means. You’d probably never even heard of it until the President used it.
The common use of “decimate” has slipped it from meaning a 10% reduction over to meaning nearly total destruction.
I’ll wager that Trump doesn’t know the origin of the term.
Probably not – nor does it matter.
Trump absolutely engages in hyperbolee.
And Everyone knows it.
The left converts that into “Trump lies”
But as Selena Zito correctly observed a decade ago.
Trumps detractors take him literally but not seriously.
Trumps supporters take him seriously but not literally.
fake post. ^^^^
Trump actually said that Iranian capabilities were” significantly diminished.” Exact words. He also noted the destruction of Iranian “air defenses/”
BTW, is an Iranian drone hitting Kuwait an OFFENSIVE move or an “air defense?”
The US has decimated SOME parts of the Iranian government.
We are MOSTLY leaving the Iranian Army alone – The reason the IRGC exists is because the Army is not sufficiently loyal to the Ayatolahs.
We have “decimated” signicant portions of Iran’s capabilities.
And Iran can over time rebuild all of those.
Some quicker than others.
We have NOT eliminated all of Irans missle and Drone capability – but we have “decimated” it.
We have destroyed possibly 90% of their missles and Drones – and particularly with respect to missles their launchers.
But 90% is not 100%. And even now – they are producing more.
We have “decimated” their ability to produce more – they are not producing more than a fraction of what they were 6 months ago.
Further – 6 months ago Iran was producing massive amounts of Arms – particularly drones – for export to Russia. Today few if any are going to Russia – because Iran needs every single one they can make for themselves.
One of the consequences of this is that the war of attrition in Ukraine seems to have tipped in favor of Ukraine – which is NOT where it was a year ago.
The US is NOT in Ukraine fighting Russia – but by engaging Iran we have effectively reduced Russias arms supplies by 40% – that is huge.
Next we are in the midst of a mostly peaceful cease fire while negotiations continue.
During that Cease Fire – the US is rebuilding its stockpiles and Iran is rebuilding theirs.
If this is a war of attrition – Iran loses.
Striking Kuwait is actually significant. Kuwait is a short range target.
Iran is either unable or unwilling to engage in longer range strikes.
If the measure is -0 has the US met its objectives – the answer is NO – though it has made significant progress towards them. Accomplishing them requires either an enforceable agreement from Iran or regime change.
We can destroy absolutely all weapons in Iran – and given enough time they can rebuild.
Current estimates are the damage to Iran is somewhere between 350B and $1T
There is nothing we have destroyed that Iran can not replace Quickly.
At the same time Iran can not replace EVERYTHING we have destroyed quickly.
If they choose to restart their nuclear program – it will likely be 6months to a year before they have Hiroshima type weapon – those are very easy to build. But it is likely several more years before they can deliver it to Israel or beyond by Missle – Little Boy – the simplest Weapon to build and virtually guaranteed to work – weighed 10,000lb. Iran’s longest range missle – 1000-200km has a max payload 1200kg That is far short of the weight of Little Boy. A smaller U-235 Nuke is possible, but that will take much longer to design and probably can not be made to work without live testing.
Iran is working towards longer range and higher payload missles but those take time.
If the US left the gulf tomorow, Iran could restart its nuclear program OR restart its Missle program OR fund terrorism in other countries OR rebuild its air defences OR rebuild its drone production, OR rebuild its infrastructure OR rebuild its energy production.
But it can not do all of those at once.
Nothing prevents Iran from rebuilding everything eventually.
But limited funds and resources prevent doing so quickly.
While it can chose to rebuild SOME of its capabilities rapidly – whatever it chgoses comes at the expanse of the others.
More Simply – Iran is dramatically weaker than before.
It is much LESS of a danger. It is NOT zero danger,
And again absent an agreement or regime change – we will eventually have to do this again.
W88 Warhead: The primary thermonuclear warhead used on US Navy Trident II submarine missiles weighs roughly 386 lbs (175 kg).
W78 Warhead: Deployed on Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missiles, this warhead weighs between 700 and 800 lbs.
B61 Mod 12: The advanced, precision-guided gravity bomb in the US stockpile weighs 825 lbs (374 kg).
And,
As if NK, Russia and other enemies of ours wouldn’t sell a nuke to the scum in Iran
“Attack On The Deep Deep State Swamp”
______________________________________________
The swamp doesn’t like attacks on its high station.
Just more of the same TDS.
Does rule of law meaning anything to you?
The rule of law has nothing to do with the Deep State. The constitution is the supreme law of the land, and it vests the executive power in the president and only the president. Bureaucrats are given no authority whatsoever. They seized power illegally, and are now slowly being brought to brook.
…. brought to book.
It there was a Deep State, then Trump would be able to publish the organizational chart.
So far Trump makes only unsupported accusations which the Trump Cult followers lap up.
Bureaucrats are given specific authorities necessary to perform their jobs. Without that authority no government agency could function.
The phrase you screwed up is “brought to book.”
“Brought to brook” refers to the act of making someone accept or tolerate something, often used in a context similar to “brought to book,” which means to bring someone to justice or punish them. This expression has been used in English since the 19th century.
AI summary
“It there was a Deep State, then Trump would be able to publish the organizational chart.”
Because you say so ?
“So far Trump makes only unsupported accusations which the Trump Cult followers lap up.”
Not onlyu have most of Trumps claims proved true in some form – but Qanon has a better track record for accuracy than the MSM
As an example Multiple pedophile rings have actually been found within the inteligence community. Many people were fired – hopefully they will be prosecuted.
“Bureaucrats are given specific authorities necessary to perform their jobs. Without that authority no government agency could function.”
Correct – they have only the authority they are given When they act outside that authority – they act lawlessly and possibly criminally. Further that authority is trivially revokable, and those given that authority are obligated to report up the chain on their actions.
If ANYONE in the executive branch is acting contrary to the wishes of the president – they are acting WITHOUT AUTHORITY – hence “the deep state”
The Deep State has been arround – atleast since the 60’s. It has threatened blackmailed and coerced presidents for as long as it has been arround.
It has goals and objectives of its own – independent of those of either party.
Why is it that Obama did not keep his campaign promises to end torture, to end the war in afghanistan and Iraq ? Or many other related promises ?
Presidents often campaign against the interests of “the deep state”
Bush 43 absolutely did. While as president he served the interests of the Deep State better than any recent president.
This is also a difference between Trump 45 and Trump 47.
While Trump is still lobbing rhetorical grenades at “the deep state”,
At the same time he has come to terms with significant portions of “the deep state”
While Trump is still going after the Comey Types who actually carried through on disrupting the presidency, At the same Time Trump is pushing a much more muscular foreign policy that is appealing to SOME of the deep state.
Taking out Maduro, Taking out Cuba, Taking out Iran, Taking out Russia are all objectives of “the deep state”
Further – it is 10 years since 2016 – even “the deep state” grasps that the significance of Russia is dramatically diminished. Despite the current conflict with Iran – the importance of the Mideast to the US is vastly diminished.
While the importance of China is for the next decade greatly enhanced.
We have had 10 more years for those with power in the Deep State derived from their roles regarding Russia, Europe and the Mideast to see the writing on the wall and retire.
Even Deep State bureaucrats do not hold power forever.
Conversley we have had 10 years for another generation of “deep state” – that draws power from its roles regarding China and Asia to rise through the ranks.
While left wing nuts are still ranting “russia russia russia”
Most ordinary people – as well as those rising to power in government – are NOT looking to head the “russia desk” – like they were in 2016. The want the “china desk”.
Put simply the interests of the deep state have changed over a decade
AND Trump has to some extent accommodated them better.
Trump is no longer after the “actual deep state” – he is after those who went after him over the past 10 years, because he saw that america’s international focus needed to shift to asia.
“Russia, Russia, Russia” no longer plays – outside of the far left.
Like “climate change” – most everyone knows that Russia is a paper tiger.
Almost No one – not even in the deep state is looking for power by being the “russia expert”
Is shape of Pentagon still constitutional? Cooper needs to decide that as well. Trump might be connected somehow.
Article 2, Section 4
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.
___________________
A federal judge is considered an “Officer of the United States.” Under the Constitution’s Appointments Clause (Article II, Section 2), principal officers—including federal judges and Supreme Court Justices—are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate.
And how many Democrats will vote for the impeachment and conviction of this judicial clown? Not a one, clowns stick togerther.
Article 2, Section 1
The executive power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.
The executive executes the laws that Congress passes.
Indeed he does. The point is that it’s HE who is to execute them, not the bureaucrats who are hired to assist him but pretend that he is there to assist them.
I don’t see Trump arresting undocumented aliens or inspecting fruit to ensure no invasive insects make it to American farms. If only Trump is allowed to do so, then anyone else is acting illegally, particularly ICE members.
ATS – are you really this dense ?
Does the CEO of Netflix direct every program netflix produces ?
No.
Is ALL power over how netflix operates his ? Absolutely.
The CEO of Netflix is free to take over the direction of a program,
or to hire and fire directors that perform as he wishes, or to order directors to do as he wishes, or to ignore that some directors go off and do their own thing.
Regardless the power is his, He can intentionally delegate it. He can passively delegate it.
And the Board of Directors of Netflix can reward or fire him for most any reason.
But mostly based on whether his vision of how Netflix should operate has been profitable.
While not identical – the same is loosely true of the president.
While it is possible to create a functional structure different from that of the constitution and the US with distinct legislative executive and judiciary branches,
pretty much all governments in the world are structured very similarly.
There is good reason for this – and why the constitution designed the US govenrment as it did – because this works.
Myriads of truly independent executive bodies does not work very well.
Mixing legislative, judiciary and executive functions does not work very well.
What we have is NOT be accident.
Our founders did not write the constitution saying – “Wouldn’t this be neat”
They studied history and government and constructed something that based on what they had seen in other countries and history they hoped would work well.
No the executiver executes the powers that the constitution grants to the president.
That includes but is not limited to powers congress delegates to the president.
But even of those powers that congress delegates to the president – that does not mean EVERY strong congress puts on those powers is constitutional.
The constitution specifically gives all executive power to the president.
If Congress increases that power – that becomes presidential power.
Congress – particularly with regard to budgets – can constrain that power.
But as an example with regard to hiring of firing – particularly of people with policy making roles – that is nearly pure executive power. The Senate does have power over SOME appointments.
But otherwise congress has ZERO hiring or Firing power and virtually ZERO power to constrain hiring and firing of policy makers.
Put more simply – just because Congress puts something in a law does not make it constitutional.
The same is true of Executive orders – just because the president issues an executive order does not make it constitutional.
The acts of congress and the president and the judiciary MUST be within the scope of their power within the constitution.
When they act outside that scope – their actions are null – just noise.
In Other News: “Judge Orders U.S. Army Bands to Cease Use of Trumpets.”
The federal judge handed down his order on Saturday to avoid fanfare in the news.
Article 2, Section 2
The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States,….
Everyone named Donald will also be kicked out of the Armed Forces as they are all named after Donald Trump and the judge said that is not allowed.
Renaming the Kennedy center is just a troll shot in the direction of the Washington elites that go there. It’s working. rent-free. love it.
Trump has made politics entertaining again.
Most likely…
It’s not rent free. It is a massive diversion of tax money for self-aggrandizement by Trump. Every tax payer is participating in this abuse and fraud and waste that Trump is perpetrating.
Oh, you left out pedophile, rapist, severely ill, and porn star adulterer from your TDS rant. Are you doing okay today?
How So ?
Funding Kennedy Center at all is a waste or tax payer money – entertainment is not a legitimate government function.
But given that we are funding Kennedy Center at all – maintaining it, and renovating on occaision is a necessity not a waste.
Entropy is REAL.
Nor is Judge Cooper debating the necescity of renovations – he just seeks to micromange the way they are being done – to do so in the most expensive and most dangerous way possible.
He is also in doing so making CLEAR Why we have a unitary executive.
The means that Judge Cooper is attempting to force – has its own positives and negatives.
Trump’s approach has a different set of positive and negatives.
There is NOT an actual right way to do this.
There are benefits to keeping Kennedy Center open through renovations.
There is a benefits to closing it during renovations.
There is NOT an objectively right way to do this.
What each individual perceives as the best approach depends on their personal values.
But these are PERSONAL values – they are NOT universal. Hence no objectively correct answer.
Where there are many ways to do things and each has advantages and disadvantages,
and which is better depends on PERSONAL rather than UNIVERSAL values.
The WORST CASE scenario is a pi$$ing contest between multiple different parties each claiming to have the power to decide.
This is specifically why What Roberts calls political questions and the political questions doctrine – is actually just a restatement of judicial jurisdiction from the constitution.
Judges do not get to chose the PERSONAL VALUES that should prevail in a government decision.
That is idiocy – it is likely that the next appellate court will have different personal values than Cooper, and SCOTUS different from both.
Courts do NOT have jurisdiction over choices within government EXCEPT to establish whether those choices comport with the constitution and constitutional statutes.
Just another way that Trump forced the democrats into a petty TDS corner while he gets the real work of government done.
Please dems, work tirelessly to thwart the TRUMP! name on everything. The voters are watching.
You’re absolutely correct the voters are watching🤣🤣🤣
Just another Obama appointed judge writing a partisan decision instead of sticking to the law.
Thank you for voicing what the majority of us were thinking.
…just a call from obama.
When I come across something regarding a judge’s decision on an issue relating to an action by the Trump administration I first check to see who appointed the judge. So far the meddling judge is almost always an Obama or Biden appointee. That also holds for judges having sex with police officers in their chambers during office hours. I will concede that appending his name to the center was a bit much. Trump does himself no favors with such flagrant self promotion. I do appreciate his efforts in trying to beautify the nation’s capital.
Those giant banners with Trump’s scowling face applied to all the Federal buildings certainly look beautiful. It reminds me of Pyongyang with all the banners with Kim Jong Un on all the North Korean Federal buildings. From one dictator to another, amiright?
You are confused. Kim Jong Un is a third generation nepo baby who holds his position purely by genetics and implied force. He is a dictator.
President Trump, on the other hand, is the duly elected President. He earned his position by winning an election. He won a majority of the votes cast. He won all seven swing states. But the only thing that matters in our system is that he won the Electoral College. Which he did win in a landslide. 312-226.
===========
Leading up to the general election, Democrat voters were tasked to decide who they wanted to be the Democrat nominee for president. Tens of millions of them voted for Biden.
But “elite” Democrats decided they did not want Biden. So they nullified the votes of the tens of millions who chose Biden to be the Democrat nominee and they made Kamala Harris the party’s nominee instead.
Nullifying the votes of tens of millions may not be “dictatorial”, per se. But it is as far from “democratic” as you can get.
Adolf Hitler was also elected. Still, why would a democratically elected leader follow in the footsteps of a nepo baby dictator? Same level of narcissism seems the main drive.
Unlike the Republicans, millions of Democrats, about 70 Million of them, supported the change due to clear decline in mental acuity. The Republicans looked at the same decline in Trump and decided that brain damaged felon was the one for them.
Nixon took 520 to 17. That’s a landslide.
312 to 226 is not a landslide. It’s just 60%, a bare majority, and was almost exactly the amount that Biden beat Trump.
I agree that self agrandizement comes off poorly politically.
But as several others note – Trump putting his name on something – makes the left Rapid.
Better to have them ranting about “the Trump-Kennedy Center” – than messing with other things.
Many on the right accuse Trump of playing 4D chess. I do not know if that is true.
But while I am sure those on the left will take issue – Trump is the most politically adept person the United States has ever produced.
Only Grover Cleavlan ever served non-consecutive presidencies.
In 2015 when he came down the escalator – virtullay no one thought he would win.
After 2020 – most thought he was finished.
As the democrats started their “Get Trump” strategy in 2022 – most would have bet he was toast.
Yet he won in 2024, and not only did he win – but he won both the electoral college and the popular vote. That was not accidental – it was intentional. Trump needed to win both to have the sweeping mandate he intended to implement.
I would further note that he has changed – both as a person and as a president between Terms.
Trump 47 is NOT Trump 45. This is a MUCH more muscular presidency.
Further Trump is in near complete control of his destiny and the GOP – while in his first term he was battling democrats and republicans alike.
I would further note that this Kennedy Center nonsense is small potatoes.
It is inconsequential.
But Trump has the left wasting huge amounts of effort fighting STUPID battles over pointless conflicts.
This is just a distraction. But it is NOT a distraction for Trump – while he fields reporters questions on this – he is off doing many many other things.
And the left looks like they are opposed to anything Trump.
It does not much matter whether Kennedy Center is renovated now or in 2 years or in 4.
It does not much matter whether it is closed for renovations or not.
When Trump looses these conflicts he gets to point out the pettiness and political bias of democrats.
When he wins – which is near always he gets to spike the ball.
Democrats look bad regardless.
More simply put another liberal nutcase judge suffering from TDS exceeding his authority.
The Kennedy Center does not constitute “general Welfare” and may not be taxed for and funded by Congress.
Any and all bills that tax for and fund the Kennedy Center are unconstitutional and must be found as such and struck down by the judicial branch.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Estimate: roughly 1–3% of Americans have attended the Kennedy Center at least once.
Reasoning (concise): recent Kennedy Center annual attendance typically ranges around 1–2 million visitors per year (performances, tours, events). U.S. population ≈ 335–340 million (mid‑2020s). 1–2 million ÷ 335–340 million ≈ 0.3%–0.6% per year; cumulative unique visitors over many years (accounting for repeat attendees and tours) plausibly raises the share of Americans who have ever been there to about 1–3%. This is a rough estimate; precise figures require attendance breakdowns (unique vs. total visits) and up‑to‑date population and attendance data.
– Gemini
____________
Article 1, Section 8
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes…to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States;….
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
“The greatest danger to American freedom is a government that ignores the Constitution.”
– Thomas Jefferson
_______________________
“They are not to lay taxes ad libitum for any purpose they please;….”
To lay taxes to provide for the general welfare of the United States, that is to say, “to lay taxes for the purpose of providing for the general welfare.” For the laying of taxes is the
power, and the general welfare the purpose for which the power is to be exercised. They are not to lay taxes ad libitum for any purpose they please; but only to pay the debts or
provide for the welfare of the Union. In like manner, they are not to do anything they please to provide for the general welfare, but only to lay taxes for that purpose. To consider the latter phrase, not as describing the purpose of the first, but as giving a distinct and independent power to do any act they please, which might be for the good of the Union, would render all the preceding and subsequent enumerations of power completely useless.
It would reduce the whole instrument to a single phrase, that of instituting a Congress with power to do whatever would be for the good of the United States; and, as they
would be the sole judges of the good or evil, it would be also a power to do whatever evil they please.
– Thomas Jefferson
The president should announce he’s building government run grocery stores in NY city. The left will go bonkers and end all government run grocery stores, now and in the future.
Zorro Madmani is denying Americans their constitutional right to liberty, property, and equal protection of the laws by unfairly competing with their free enterprises through public grocery stores; by denying their right to private property through public grocery stores, rent control, confiscation of property, etc.; and by denying them the equal protection of the laws.
________
14th Amendment
No State shall…deprive any person of life, liberty, or property…nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Trump is too busy curing cancer, which he promised Democrats would not like for him to do.
I expect Trump to produce a breakthrough any day now. Yup, no more cancer for anyone.
Well, that was just another promise that Joe Biden failed….
I agree that the president sticks his nose into things out of his purview. But I am so sick of the elitist judges sticking their nose into anything and everything the president does. The president irritates the left and the judges turn around and irritate the right.
So you acknowledge that Trump “sticks his nose into things out of his purview”, but you have a problem with judges who try to correct his behavior that you acknowledge to be out of bounds.
This is cult behavior where you are willing to accept the transgressions of the leader, even when you know he is wrong.
This is the road to perdition and autocracy and unaccountable dictatorship.
The poster you are responding to is both incorrect and your characterization of what he said is incorrect.
The Executive branch is the purview of the president.
He is constrained by the constitution and the constitutional laws passed by congress.
That is it. The fact that You or I or some Judge do not LIKE what a president has done, does not change whether it si actually in the presidents purview or not.
Matters of Politics and preferred polices and choices are NOT in the purview of the courts.
The law and constitution are.
Can you cite a constitutional constraint on Trump’s actions regarding Kennedy Center ?
Can you cite a Statutory constraint ?
Absent those – Judge Cooper is the one acting outside his authority.
Turley spent a great deal of time dealing with whether Trump’s actions were a good idea or a bad one. Turley’s or the Courts opinion on that is completely irrelevant.
I have no idea what Turleys argument regarding standing is – I too generally want broader standing.
But standing is not the issue – jurisdiction is.
The courts exist to ensure that the law and constitution are followed – not to excercise broad oversite, not to judge whether something is a good or a bad idea.
Broad oversite as well as passing judgement on the merits of an executive action are the role of congress – not the courts.
Oh geez, John Say is incorrect.
“The executive branch is the purview of the president… He is constrained only by laws”
John Say explicitly asks, “Can you cite a Statutory constraint?”—yet he ignores that Judge Christopher Cooper’s entire ruling is built on an exact statutory constraint.
The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts was named and established by a specific federal law passed by Congress in 1964.That statute makes it “crystal clear” that the institution is named solely for President John F. Kennedy.
The law does not grant the president or a handpicked board the authority to unilaterally change, alter, or co-brand a statutory national memorial.Under the U.S. Constitution, the President’s job is to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed”—not to rewrite or bypass explicit congressional statutes for personal vanity.
“Matters of policies and choices are NOT in the purview of the courts”
Wrong.
The judge did not strike down the board’s decision because he “disliked” their choice; he struck it down because the board violated its explicit statutory bounds.In federal administrative law, a board or agency cannot act ultra vires (beyond its legal authority).
Judge Cooper ruled that the board overstepped its legislative charter by illegally adding Trump’s name and bypassed its legal fiduciary obligations by rubber-stamping a total two-year closure without analyzing how it would fulfill its statutory mandate during that time.
Enforcing compliance with federal charters and board bylaws is the exact, standard legal purview of federal courts.
“ Standing is not the issue – jurisdiction is”
So wrong it’s embarrassing.
Federal courts have absolute and unquestionable jurisdiction over federal statutory violations, making the “jurisdiction” argument completely irrelevant.
The lawsuit was brought by U.S. Representative Joyce Beatty, an ex-officio member of the Kennedy Center’s Board of Trustees whose voting rights were unlawfully stripped by the administration.
Because a sitting board member was stripped of her statutory rights and the board violated federal law, the court possessed federal question jurisdiction to hear the case.
John Say claims the court is “acting outside its authority,” but he is confusing a judge enforcing a written law with a judge making a political choice.
John Say frames this as a dry lecture on the separation of powers, but it fails the most basic test of his own logic. He claims the president must follow laws passed by Congress, yet he fiercely defends the president’s right to break a 1964 federal naming statute. The court didn’t engage in “broad oversight” or “second-guess a policy”—it simply reminded the Executive branch that only Congress can change a law passed by Congress.
The judicial branch enjoys no power to usurp and exercise any aspect, facet, or degree of executive power.
The legislative branch enjoys no power to usurp and exercise any aspect, facet, or degree of executive power.
No judicial decision may usurp and exercise any aspect, facet, or degree of executive power.
No legislation may usurp and exercise any aspect, facet, or degree of executive power.
The executive branch is vested with the executive power solely and in totality.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Article 2, Section 1
The executive power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.
“No legislation may usurp and exercise any aspect, facet, or degree of executive power.
The executive branch is vested with the executive power solely and in totality.”
Trump can murder anyone and not be charged with a crime. Just have them dragged to the South Lawn and shoot them. Total power, beyond review.
That is what that interpretation allows.
“Trump can murder anyone and not be charged with a crime. Just have them dragged to the South Lawn and shoot them. Total power, beyond review.
That is what that interpretation allows.”
Wrong, Wrong and Wrong.
SCOTUS literally ruled on this in the past couple of years.
First is the murder an exercise of executive power ?
Obama ordered the murder of a US citizen in Yemen (actually more than one).
That was an excercise of executive power – and it can not be charged as a crime.
And absolutely it is beyond judicial review
Things get complicated if it is Not an excercise of executive power or if it is sort of an excercise of executive power.
Regardless, the president can not be charged WHILE PRESIDENT.
But in ALL cases ANY acts of the president are impeachable.
This is one Turley is WRONG about.
There is no judicial review for impeachment.
That means despite the conditions in the constitution – the house can impeach a president for any reason or none at all. Including legitimate or illegitimate excercises of executive power.
Whether impeached or impeached and removed – the Courts power to review – is NOT conditioned on impeachment, it is conditioned on whether the president is currently in office and whether the act is an excercise of executive power.
Obama could have been impeached for ordering the assassination of a US citizen.
But he could not be convicted of murder – they case could not even get to court.
Congress does have SOME power to constraint executive power.
Primarily by controlling funding – which is EXCLUSIVELY a legislative power.
But also through impeachment.
Those are not the ONLY ways in which congress can constrain executive power – but the power of congress to constrain executive power is NOT infinite.
It is narrow rather than broad.
– we have been through this before OVER AND OVER.
You have LOST repeatedly.
No Judge Coopers opinion is not built on statute – it is built on personal opinion.
He does not have Jurisdiction PERIOD.
How many times does Article II Section 1 have to be rammed down your throat ?
Congress does not have the constitutional power to create executive positions that are independent of the president.
To the extent that any statute you MIGHT site claims otherwise – that part of the statute is unconstitutional.
The constitution is nearly 250 years old – It Trumps any subsequent laws.
Further it was constructed as it is Deliberately.
It was constructed that way because this idiocy of Judges attempting to subject other branches of the government to their personal preferences is a messy inefficient and stupid way to run a government. Which is why virtually no other government is structured that way – and those that try to operate that way fail – often quickly.
Our founders did not write “The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.” Because they wanted a king.
They did so because they did not want government wrapped up in idiotic nonsense over should a building be closed while it is being renovated.
There is not an objectively right answer to that question – though I would note that Judge Cooper is Clearly among those who have no training or education in the matter – and aparently he skipped Con Law while in law school.
Idiots like Him and YOU are going to tie up the appeals courts and possibly SCOTUS until Cooper is B**CH slapped for overstepping his jurisdiction.
Which is near certain.
The Kernal of Coopers argue has litterally been addressed probably half a dozen times by SCOTUS just since Jan 21, 2025 – and another Dozen in the past 2 decades.
AGAIN – nor is that “partisan” – Obama firing or overriding supposedly independent bi partisan boards created by congress has been upheld. Trump 45 doing is – upheld, Biden Doing it – Upheld.
Your claim – and Coopers flies in the face of recent and less recent supreme court decisions.
It flies in the face of the plain text of the constitution.
And it flies in the face of logic, and sanity.
It literally DOES NOT MATTER how the Kennedy Center is renovated.
While as I noted before – Cooper is actually clueless about the tradeoffs between his prefered approach and Trump’s and without any knowledge skill or experience.
While Conversely Trump has built probably more than a thousand buildings – as in some small part have I.
But even that really does not matter.
I doubt Biden was compent to tie his shoe – much less manage building construction and renovations – but he was inaugurated as president on Jan 21, 2021 – whether he actually won the election or not – he WAS president and he had the authority to do exactly what Trump is doing. Obama was more competent than Biden – but relatively clueless about buildings.
Still no judge – no matter their experience gets to substitute their opinion for that of any president.
You say the law appoints and independent bipartisan board in the executive – SCOTUS has said OVER AND OVER – there is no such thing. If it is in the executive – it is not independent of the president. BTW that has ALWAYS been true. Since FDR the courts allowed Congress to create bipartisan boards, but it has NEVER allowed actual independence. Even Congresses statutory requirement that the Majority of the board must be selected by the president – is specifically to provide fig leaf compliance with the constitution.
“John Say frames this as a dry lecture on the separation of powers, but it fails the most basic test of his own logic. He claims the president must follow laws passed by Congress”
No I do not claim that. I have claimed the president must follow rthe CONSTITUTIONAL laws passed by congress. If on occasion I omit constitutional – for future reference that is ALWAYS implied.
“yet he fiercely defends the president’s right to break a 1964 federal naming statute.”
Wrong, Wrong, and Wrong.
The statute is not a “naming statute – it is a law that does many things – including naming something. It does not preclude future alterations in the name.
I am sure there are myriads of laws passed by congress that refer to “fort Bragg” or to Mt McKinley. Yet Obama renamed the Mountain and Biden renamed the Fort, and Trump renamed both back.
Inarguably presidents have the power to name and or rename things.
Now there is a legitimate legal question as to whether the statute you cite irrevocalbly precludes renaming Kennedy Center, and a separate question as to whether it precludes renaming Kennedy Center while Retaining Kennedy as part of the name.
It is MY opionion that was politically stupid.
It is also my opinion that it is legally and constitutionally allowed.
But it is not the hill I am looking to die on. It is constitutionally completely insignificant whether Congress can override the power of the president to name anything.
If I were to guess that is the one part of this decision that MIGHT be upheld, but more because bad cases make bad law and hubris is a great way to get a court to make a bad decision.
But just because I think the courts PROBABLY will uphold Cooper on Naming, does not mean they are correct constitutionally.
Though again – UNLIKE you and the left, I am not going to war over something inconsequential.
And this WHOLE THING is inconsequential.
It DOES matter that we actually follow the constitution.
But does NOT matter how the decision to renovate one of many many federal buildings is made. What does matter is that the left is waging holy war over something this inconsequential and over which they are constitutionally full of Schiff.
If Obama or Biden had directed the renovation of Kennedy Center – it would barely have made the news. SOME people MIGHT have had an opinion as to how those renovations should have been done but no one would have gone to war over it.
And Had some extreme right wing nut challenged HOW the president chose to renovate Kennedy Center – the courts would not have taken the case.
And YOU KNOW THAT. And Had all the above happened and somehow some Right wing nut had managed to find a sympathetic Judge – YOU would be arguing that Obama or Biden has the constitutional power as president to manage federal buildings as he sees fit.
Though I DOUBT you would be well versed enough on the constitution to be ablke to cite where or why.
“The court didn’t engage in “broad oversight” or “second-guess a policy”—it simply reminded the Executive branch that only Congress can change a law passed by Congress.”
Wrong and Wrong. SCOTUS declares unconstitutional paws or portions of those laws unconstitutional all the time.
And the portion YOU have cited – has been nullified for significantly more than a decade.
There is no such thing as a part of the executive that is independent of the president.
PERIOD. There are only 3 branches to our government, and congresses power over the executive is not limitless. It is PRIMARILY based on controling FUNDING.
Regardless, the ONLY control congress has over the appointment of people who have the power to make executive decisions is the senate advise and consent clause.
This is NOT some secret or arcane aspect of Constitutional law.
It has been addressed on this blog REPEATEDLY over the past decade and over the past year plus.
It has been addressed by the courts and ultimately SCOTUS -repeatedly – over the past decade + and atleast half a dozen times since Jan 21, 2025.
You can not pretend ignorance.
In the recent case where SCOTUS allowed the president to remove the MSPB chair SCOTUS without even granting Cert ordered as follows
“Because the Constitution vests the executive power in the President, see Art. II, §1, cl. 1, he may remove without cause executive officers who exercise that power on his behalf, subject to narrow exceptions recognized by our precedents….The stay reflects our judgment that the Government is likely to show that both the NLRB and MSPB exercise considerable executive power.”
This is NOT the only case like this – there have been atleast a have dozen in 2025.
Nor is Trump the only instance in which SCOTUS has ruled this way.
They did so in cases where Biden and Obama fired so called “independent board members”
This case is not even a close call.
The power to manage federal property is UNARGUABLY an executive power.
“Because the Constitution vests the executive power in the President, see Art. II, §1, cl. 1, he may remove without cause executive officers who exercise that power on his behalf, subject to narrow exceptions recognized by our precedents….The stay reflects our judgment that the Government is likely to show that both the NLRB and MSPB exercise considerable executive power.”
Supreme court of the united states – May 22, 2025.
TRUTH!!!
The problem is that the judges you worship who try to “correct” Trump are far left activist judges who write partisan decisions rather than impartially interpreting the law.
If you can’t understand the difference, then you must be an DEI Retard.
The entire executive branch is the presidents Purview.
If you do not want Trump meddling in the Kennedy Center – Sell it and let it operate privately.
So long as it is part of the federal government the president is responsible for it.
“The entire executive branch is the president’s purview”
Nope.
The president’s authority over the executive branch is strictly defined and limited by laws passed by Congress.
The president cannot simply do whatever they want with a federal entity. Under the U.S. Constitution’s Take Care Clause, the president’s primary job is to ensure that “the laws be faithfully executed”—not rewritten or ignored.
Congress intentionally designs many federal agencies, boards, and commissions to be independent or quasi-independent to shield them from direct political meddling. A president cannot unilaterally dissolve, remodel, or alter a federal entity if doing so violates the specific legislative charter Congress used to create it.
A president has zero legal authority to sell or privatize federal property.
Under the U.S. Constitution’s Property Clause (Article IV, Section 3), only Congress has the power to dispose of and make all necessary rules respecting territory or other property belonging to the United States.
The Kennedy Center is a national monument and a federally funded bureau. President Trump cannot “sell it” to the highest bidder any more than he could sell the Lincoln Memorial or Yellowstone National Park. Telling critics to “sell it” ignores the fact that the executive branch doesn’t own it—the American public does.
“ So long as it is part of the federal government, the president is responsible for it”
Nope.
John Say confuses accountability with absolute control.
The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts was established by an explicit 1964 act of Congress. That law specifically vests operational control in a Board of Trustees—which includes bipartisan members of Congress—not the Oval Office.
When the administration bypassed that board to unilaterally change the building’s name and force a two-year closure, it wasn’t “taking responsibility.” It was committing an illegal administrative ambush.
Federal judges stepped in because the president broke the specific statutes Congress put in place to govern the building.
John Say’s poor understanding of how government works seems to contribute to his ire and anger over these issues.
WINNING!!!
“Because the Constitution vests the executive power in the President, see Art. II, §1, cl. 1, he may remove without cause executive officers who exercise that power on his behalf, subject to narrow exceptions recognized by our precedents….The stay reflects our judgment that the Government is likely to show that both the NLRB and MSPB exercise considerable executive power.”
Supreme court of the united states – May 22, 2025.
John Say,
Step outside for a smoke and a vodka and then come back to your job of interfering in US politics.
Perhaps the building could be renamed: “The John F. Kennedy and Marilyn Monroe Center for the Performing Arts”
Happy birthday, Mr. President…
I have a much better suggestion.
“The Donald J. Trump and Stormy Daniels Center for the Performing Arts”
I agree !!
Much more appropriate name.
Great idea !!!
Stormy was most definitely a “performer”, so the name would be very appropriate.
Stormy’s performances have earned her many awards, so it is appropriate that her name be attached together with Trump’s name.
She won the Pornhub Lifetime Achievement Award in 2023, and she was inducted into both the Adult Video News Hall of Fame in 2023 and the X-rated Critics Hall of Fame in 2014.
Truly a great performer worthy of being honored by attaching her name to the Center in DC.
Replying to yourself is LAME!!
The left would have had no problem it George Floyd’s name was added.
WINNING!!!
Why sully the good name of a hard working adult film star with an association to Donald Trump?
Perhaps renamed as the Barack Hussain Obama Center .
WINNING!!!
So good to hear JT say at least a few words about how unhinged trump is. But hey, a few words are better than none.
Concerning trump, here are a few words about this health…
“The memo also showed that Trump gained 14 pounds since his physical in April 2025.”
I guess he now ways 240 Lbs? His linebacker status may be slipping.
“Cognitive and physical performance are excellent,” he concluded. “He is fully fit to carry out all duties of the Commander-in-Chief and Head of State.”
I guess by that they mean he can tell the difference between a beaver and a lion?
Is any of this meaningful ?
Trump is slightly outside the ideal weight range for a male of his height and age.
He is not inside a range for concern.
As to cognition – unlike Biden he does not slip and fall daily, have to be shown by the easter bunny where to go, has to be corralled by foreign leaders to keep him from wandering off aimlessly.
And is not speaking gibberish constantly.
You may nopt like his administration of policies – but they are what he promised – everything he has done is consistent with Agenda 47 – he campaign promises. He is clearly president, he is clearly making the decisions. Again – you may not like those decisions, but they are not batschiff crazy, and they are inarguably his decisions – not some children in the White House.
John Say, really?
“Unlike Biden, he does not slip and fall… or speak gibberish”
In June 2025, President Trump visibly stumbled and lost his footing while ascending the stairs to board Air Force One, forcing him to grip the handrail to steady himself. This directly refutes the claim that he is immune to the physical vulnerabilities of aging.
He has also previously described walking down basic ramps as akin to walking on “an ice-skating rink”.Speech Degradation and Fillers: Cognitive and linguistic experts tracking Trump’s speech patterns over decades have noted a sharp, measurable decline in his vocabulary and sentence complexity. His modern speeches rely heavily on simple words, repetitive structures, filler phrases (such as “uh” and “I mean”), and sudden, unintelligible phonetic slip-ups that qualify as literal gibberish.
At a town hall event in Pennsylvania, Trump stopped taking questions entirely and instead stood on stage, visibly swaying silently to music for nearly 40 minutes while his team and the audience looked on.
Trump has repeatedly confused major political figures under oath and on camera, including a prolonged rally speech where he repeatedly blamed his primary opponent, Nikki Haley, for security failures on January 6th, completely mixing her up with Nancy Pelosi.
During multiple official events, Trump has derailed structured policy discussions to embark on highly bizarre, incoherent hypothetical scenarios, such as a lengthy stream-of-consciousness monologue about choosing between being electrocuted by a sinking electric boat battery or being eaten by a shark.
John Say is experiencing severe partisan confirmation bias. He interprets every slip, stutter, or misstep by Biden as definitive proof of senility, while re-branding Donald Trump’s rambling, incoherent speeches, physical stumbles, and frozen moments as a “brilliant” communication strategy. In reality, both men are elderly figures who have exhibited clear, age-related physical and cognitive limitations on the national stage. The bigger problem is Trump is a moron.
The bigger problem is that Trump is looking to exploit the Presidency to the maximum advantage of himself to the detriment of the United States and to accomplish this has surrounded himself with those who heap lavish praise upon him while also exploiting their positions to the maximum advantage of themselves to the detriment of the United States. It is a creeping corruption that is flowing from the top down and which the Heritage Foundation and the Federalist Society have moved to exploit to the detriment of the United States on behalf of a handful of billionaires.
Trump descending into severe mental decline doesn’t erase his basic character, it just make his ability to do damage control in the public eye more difficult. His ability to spin terrible outcomes of his actions as someone else’s responsibility is fading and a few conservatives are seeing what the rest of the world have known for more than a decade.
Trump hasn’t seen a beaver since he paid a porn star for a look at one.
Before Donald Trump, no president has ever made it his business to sieze control of a cultural institution. That’s not a president’s job.
Trump hi-jacked Kennedy Center simply because it was named for John F Kennedy. And because Trump packed the board with toadies, no one honestly knows if this renovation is really necessary.
In other words, ‘Everything Trump touches becomes tainted by his buffonish impulses’.
Dems have demanded that Government take over culture forever.
Contra your claims – Trumps actions are not unusual, they are just unusual for a republican.
I not only agree that presidents should not meddle with culture and the arts – but that government should not do so.
Privatize the Kennedy Center and the problem goes away completely.
I do not want Trump putting his toadies on the Board – I do not want Biden or Obama putting theirs on the board.
You solve that by removing the Kennedy Center from Government.
So long as it is part of government – the president is going to be in control of it, and only constrained by the constitution and statutes.
“Dems have demanded that Government take over culture forever”
Wrong again.
The creation of national cultural institutions in the United States has historically been a deeply bipartisan effort, not a one-sided Democratic plot.
The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts was originally authorized as the National Cultural Center under President Dwight D. Eisenhower (a Republican) in 1958.
The subsequent 1964 legislation that officially named it to honor President Kennedy was passed with overwhelming bipartisan support from both parties in Congress.
Framing a long-standing, bipartisan national monument as a modern “Democratic takeover” completely rewrites American history to satisfy a partisan narrative.
“Trump’s actions are not unusual… just unusual for a Republican”
ROFL!!!
No previous president—Democrat or Republican—has ever attempted to unilaterally append their own name to a statutory national monument while serving in office.
Furthermore, no previous administration has ever completely blindsided a federal board by announcing a total, two-year shutdown of a multi-billion-dollar public facility via a social media post without a formal board vote.
Calling these radical actions “not unusual” downplays a blatant violation of federal administrative law and board bylaws.
John Say tries to sound like a principled small-government libertarian, but he ends up carrying water for authoritarian overreach. He argues that because an institution is publicly funded, a president has the right to treat it like a private real estate asset, add their own name to it, and shut it down by executive decree. Wow.
I thought he should have named the Center for Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis…then the Dems would just have to eat it.
Little Fascists in black robes think they are gods. Let Cooper be responsible if the Center collapses and injures people. Let Cooper be held accountable if someone is injured by falling debris or by a parking garage that tumbles. Fascist Judge Cooper should be held personally liable for any and all injuries caused by his obstruction since he has taken on the role of Kennedy Center God Almightly.
The Kennedy Center is NOT on the verge of collapse. I attended a concert there last night. It does need updates and repairs in many areas–especially ones out-of-public-view, but the public areas are fine. As the judge said, only Congress can change the name, but the board should be able to move needed renovations forward. Since Congress apparently has already appropriated funds to do so, if Trump walks off in a huff–and lets hope he does since he’s already messed some things up at the KC–the needed repairs can still be made.
Biden changed the name of numerous military bases.
What is the statutory or constitutional basis that limits name changes to congress ?
I am not aware of any – please illuminate.
I do not like the way that public things get named. We have lots of things named as monuments to people no one remembers or cares about. Politics more than anything determines the name of things.
But the fact that I do not like it – does not make the presidents actions unconstitutional or illegal.
Congress does NOT have exclusive naming authority – the vast majority of named public fascilities are not named by congress. Congress does have the power to override a president on naming – or many other things. The Courts do not.
John Say, oi vey.
“Biden changed the name of numerous military bases”
Nopey.
President Biden did not unilaterally change the name of a single military base.
The renaming of military bases (such as Fort Bragg becoming Fort Liberty) was explicitly ordered by Congress through the bipartisan 2021 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).Congress passed the law, overrode a presidential veto by Donald Trump, and created the Naming Commission to execute the changes.The executive branch was simply carrying out a mandatory directive passed by the legislature, which is the exact opposite of a president unilaterally renaming a building on his own whim.
“What is the statutory or constitutional basis that limits name changes to Congress?”
The explicit statutory basis is the John F. Kennedy Center Act of 1964 (78 Stat. 4).
This federal law, passed by Congress and signed into law, legally designated the structure as a national monument named solely to honor President John F. Kennedy.
Under the U.S. Constitution’s Property Clause (Article IV, Section 3), only Congress has the power to dispose of and make all necessary rules respecting property belonging to the United States.
Once Congress passes a statute naming a national monument, that name is encoded in federal law. A president cannot alter, amend, or co-brand that name because the executive branch does not have the constitutional authority to rewrite or ignore a standing federal statute.
“Congress does not have exclusive naming authority… the vast majority of facilities are not named by Congress”
Not quite.
While local post offices or military assets may be named by executive agencies under authority delegated to them by Congress, the Kennedy Center is a specific statutory monument.
There is a massive legal distinction between a local administrative building and a designated national memorial created by an Act of Congress.
An executive agency can only name things if Congress gives them the statutory permission to do so. Congress never gave the executive branch or the Board of Trustees the authority to change or append names to the Kennedy Center.
“ Congress has the power to override a president… The Courts do not”
The courts do not “override” a president based on political preference; they enforce compliance with the law.
When a president or his political appointees take action that is ultra vires (acting beyond their legal authority) and violate a federal charter, the courts are constitutionally mandated to step in and strike down the illegal action.
U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper ruled against the administration precisely because the executive branch tried to bypass the law.
John Say is trying to argue that the president has an inherent, sweeping right to rename federal property. He completely fails to understand that a president cannot override a statute. Because Congress explicitly named the building via federal legislation in 1964, only another Act of Congress can legally change it.
In other words, while dems flip through mountains of law books, Trump shrugs and continues making America great.
Maybe we need to petition congress to make the change anyway just to own the libs.
Trump, the chief law enforcement executive is ignoring laws for personal gain.
Trump owns the Republicans and holds them by the hair on their genitals. Any time one steps out of line Trump summons the radical right and out they go.
Cooper is one of the far left wing nuts – not the worst, but certainly not close to aiding by the constitution. He has been b***h slapped by apeals courts and SCOTUS repeatedly.
Another spanking is coming.
I do not know the standing issue in this case – but clearly the court does not have jurisdiction.
Courts have jurisdiction over constitutionality and statutory compliance, not whether something is a good idea or not.
“ Cooper is one of the far left-wing nuts”
Oh geez.
U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper was nominated by President Barack Obama in 2014, but he was unanimously confirmed by the United States Senate by a vote of 100–0.
This unassailable, bipartisan consensus from both Republicans and Democrats directly refutes the claim that he is a “fringe” or “far-left radical.” His credentials include graduating with distinction from Stanford Law School and serving as the President of the Stanford Law Review.
“ He has been b***h-slapped by appeals courts and SCOTUS repeatedly“
Evidence ?
Judge Cooper is a highly respected institutionalist on the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. He does not have a record of unusual or frequent reversals by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals or the U.S. Supreme Court.
“ Clearly the court does not have jurisdiction”
The federal court has absolute, explicit federal question jurisdiction over this case.
John Say admits, “I do not know the standing issue in this case,” immediately before declaring that jurisdiction is missing. This is a massive logical contradiction; you cannot evaluate jurisdiction while remaining completely ignorant of the parties involved or the claims brought.
“ The court is deciding whether something is a good idea”
Judge Cooper’s 2026 injunction is explicitly built on statutory compliance, not a policy preference.
John claims the judge is just micromanaging a policy. In reality, the judge’s ruling targets a direct breach of the John F. Kennedy Center Act (20 U.S.C. § 76q), which legally mandates that the national monument be named solely for President Kennedy.
Cooper’s opinion states clearly that “Congress gave the Kennedy Center its name, and only Congress can change it.”. He didn’t halt the two-year total closure because he disliked it; he halted it because the executive branch violated the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) by completely blindsiding the governing board and rubber-stamping the shutdown on social media without a lawful, informed board vote.
John Say has repeatedly shown a total lack of awareness about what the law actually says and how courts work.
John Say’s propaganda is to sow doubt. It doesn’t have to be factual or based on reality; it merely has to find an audience which is ready to be enraged and is looking for anything to support that reaction. I suspect the John Say output could be more influential, but Putin doesn’t pay well, what with the war going so poorly for Russia. Still, John Say writes what he does in order to avoid being sent to the meat grinder of Ukraine.