The Supreme Court has long held that “a pardon cannot stop” courts from punishing cases of civil contempt. And while the marshals have traditionally enforced civil contempt orders, the courts have the power to deputize others to step in if they refuse to do so.
This authority is recognized in an obscure provision of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which govern proceedings in federal trial courts. Rule 4.1 specifies how certain types of “process” — the legal term for orders that command someone to appear in court — are to be served on the party to which they are directed. The rule begins in section (a) by instructing that, as a general matter, process “must be served by a United States marshal or deputy marshal or by a person specially appointed for that purpose.”
The next section, Rule 4.1(b), is entitled, “Enforcing Orders: Committing for Civil Contempt.” It sets some geographical limits for where “[a]n order committing a person for civil contempt of a decree or injunction” may be served based on the federal vs. state nature of the underlying lawsuit. But it does not say who may enforce such an order, and it never modifies the general rule that process may be served by a marshal, deputy marshal or person specially appointed for that purpose. Thus, by its plain terms, Rule 4.1 contemplates that the court may appoint individuals other than the marshals to enforce civil contempt orders.
Nah, that’s nonsense. Trump controls umpteen kinds of law enforcement already anyway; he doesn’t need to deputize anything.
Your comment is just fearmongering to discourage resistance against his tyranny.
A lot of that going around lately, including telling people that the way they plan on resisting is “doing it wrong.”
There’s huge amounts of tone-policing anytime someone mentions active resistance or even non-compliance. Well, they might see some things that offend their delicate sensibilities, so they should stay home and let serious people deal with matters by any means necessary.
I’ve actually dealt with the opposite from keyboard warrior freedom fighters who chide me for wanting to do things like create parallel systems of mutual aid so that when the violence inevitably comes we have systems to support and take care of one another.
To quote a recent reply to me:
Not everyone has the capacity to be a fucking freedom fighter. Many of us are already physically disabled but these fucking chumps want me to go buy a gun, figure out how to afford training somehow even though I’m in poverty, and storm the capitol or some stupid shit.
Guess what, chumps, it takes a diversity of tactics and you need support systems like community doctors and community food to keep anything and anyone alive. You can’t fucking eat bullets, but I guess I’m stupid for wanting to have a plan.
Precisely, serious people have plans and don’t run in guns blazing like Meal Team Six.
No. Akshually, I keep having comments removed for urging resistance.
It isn’t trump who would be deputizing.
When shit hits, though, it won’t matter who is deputized.
It’ll be us vs them.
But, like you said, they basically control LEO. From FBI to marshalls and on down to the already rogue constitutional sherrifs.
In the meantime, do you think certain judges having the ability to deputize literally anyone for civil matter won’t also be weaponized?
Such as in cases of pardons, or the media, or congress, where the magats will likely lay ridiculous charges on anyone and then have the trump appointed maga judges annoint and send forth their crusaders.
Caution is warranted. There is danger in this power. And we know who will use it.
Edit: wanna complain about my assessment?
Do something to stop it. Stop them. Fucking do something. Anything.
The dems won’t. The feds won’t.
Only those who do will.
Fight back.
Courts and.laws mean.nothing now.
Understand that.
That is reality.
The judges already have the power and legal precedent to do so. The trumplets have already demonstrated zero care about needing either of those things, so I’m really not seeing what you hope to achieve by not using one of the few legal avenues actual consequences could be enacted on the fascists is?
Whatever you let them do, they will. stop complying with fascism.
The fuck you on?
You’re arguing a point I didn’t even make.
I’m not complying. I’m fucking warning. Know what to expect. Jfc . you really like to be mad at your allies.
Anyway. Good luck.
So your point is that they’ll do it too.
But if we don’t do it, they’ll still do it.
That’s not anything close to what I said.
You aren’t the voice of reason here. Caution is no longer warranted. If you intend to continue fear mongering, just stop talking. You have a defeatist mentality and we do not need it.
We’re very near the point where the only options are to resist, or to passively wait until they come for us (or in hopes that someone else will risk their neck to do the right thing). It’s a bleak choice, but that is the choice.
It is a warning, an educated expectation to prepare for likely outcomes.
If you aren’t prepared for likely futures you aren’t preparing.
Seeing the possible uses and outcomes is not defeatist. It is awareness.
Warning: bridge out You may drown, crash, etc
Yep, Defeatist.
Not a warning, not educated. Just foolishness. The other user already told you about deputizing and how you are wrong. You have the same mentality as the current Democrats in office - do not use the avenues available to you in fear they will be used against us.
They are already being used against us.
We are already crashing.
You are advocating for weakness. Like that user said, stop complying with fascism and expecting a better outcome.
Yes, defeatist.
You are reading what you want to hear.
That is not what I said.
At all.