Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

DOGE employees ordered to stop using Slack

404media.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 413 posts

Re: DOGE employees ordered to stop using Slack

#241

Post by code_runner »

tmaly wrote: post #157
code_runner wrote: post #41

DOGE is obviously a completely illegal operation, and I really do hope it will be get reined in before they can cause an issue so big that _even trump's croniest cronies_ have to admit what is going on. For someone who claims to love freedom of speech, Elon is pretty quick to determine who can say what, and how much access to _his_ data people have.

I just saw a thread by a lawyer on X that broke down the EO creating DOGE. It was very interesting how they got around things.

They seem to be still be deciding what the EO actually is, and they also didn’t create a non-governmental entity like trump promised.

Re: DOGE employees ordered to stop using Slack

#242

Post by code_runner »

lupusreal wrote: post #107
kemayo wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

President doesn't have authority to shut them down by EO either. Congress does, yes. (It's one of those "power of the purse" things. If Congress has created an organization and funded it, the executive is required to spend that money on it.)

That would make the executive orders illegal, or at best invalid. It wouldn't make DOGE illegal. DOGE is private citizens giving their opinions about how the government should work to a politician who happens to be listening to them (for now, but probably not long given that politician's track record for getting into feuds with former allies.) Citizens voicing their opinions about the government is clear cut First Am…

This is easily the most willfully uninformed take on this topic I have seen yet

Re: DOGE employees ordered to stop using Slack

#243

Post by BryantD »

jeltz wrote: post #240
BryantD wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Judge John McConnell disagrees with you. His decision placing a hold on the spending freeze cites the Impoundment Control Act as part of his finding that the lawsuit is likely to succeed on the merits.

Yeah, it is always fun when people here know more than supreme court judges about US law.

To be fair, he's a district chief judge and I've certainly disagreed with some of them in the past. But at least it demonstrates that the question of impoundment is on the table.

Re: DOGE employees ordered to stop using Slack

#244

Post by skissane »

Volundr wrote: post #235
skissane wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> There is a lack of recent SCOTUS precedents on the topic How recent do you need? Nixon already tested this one and lost at the SC.

Train vs City of New York is almost as old as Roe v Wade. I wouldn’t assume a 50+ year old precedent would be upheld by today’s majority.

Plus, Train v City of New York didn’t actually consider the constitutionality of the Impoundment Control Act. It was about an impoundment decision made prior to that Act, under the rules in force before it. And although SCOTUS held the EPA’s impoundment action (directed by Nixon) to be illegal in this specific case, they didn’t rule on the validity of impoundments in general. In part, the case turned on the wording of the specific appropriation being impounded, and so it might not apply to another appropriation worded differently. Also, upholding congressional limits on presidential impoundment power in the context of one specific appropriation doesn’t mean they’d necessarily uphold the much broader limits on that power imposed by the Impoundment Control Act.

Another factor is this case was about direct grants to the states. It is plausible that SCOTUS might decide that (following Train), the states have the right to direct grants appropriated to them by Congress, yet still hold the President has some constitutional impoundment right in distinguishable cases

Re: DOGE employees ordered to stop using Slack

#245

Post by code_runner »

dmitrygr wrote: post #138
code_runner wrote: post #41

DOGE is obviously a completely illegal operation, and I really do hope it will be get reined in before they can cause an issue so big that _even trump's croniest cronies_ have to admit what is going on. For someone who claims to love freedom of speech, Elon is pretty quick to determine who can say what, and how much access to _his_ data people have.

No personal option stated or implied, but: exactly this was clearly promised before the election, and it is being delivered right now. The people voted for this: a majority of the American people. Democracy, no?

Trump also said he could shoot someone in broad daylight on fifth avenue. I think that might be against some rules though. Idk maybe it can be a campaign promise!

Re: DOGE employees ordered to stop using Slack

#246

Post by code_runner »

dmitrygr wrote: post #138
code_runner wrote: post #41

DOGE is obviously a completely illegal operation, and I really do hope it will be get reined in before they can cause an issue so big that _even trump's croniest cronies_ have to admit what is going on. For someone who claims to love freedom of speech, Elon is pretty quick to determine who can say what, and how much access to _his_ data people have.

No personal option stated or implied, but: exactly this was clearly promised before the election, and it is being delivered right now. The people voted for this: a majority of the American people. Democracy, no?

Elon shit posting on twitter and donating hundreds of millions of dollars to a candidate who was elected doesn’t make elons shit posts legal precedent

Re: DOGE employees ordered to stop using Slack

#247

Post by mrguyorama »

krapp wrote: post #207
ty6853 wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

What Musk is describing is a deranged conspiracy theory, that "shadow left" doesn't exist except as a modern meme-driven equivalent to right-wing fears of communist infiltrators and Jews in academia. It turns out this generation's totenkopf is an AI generated shiba inu. And there isn't a "shadow right" either, but only because they're acting completely out in the open.

There can't be a "shadow left" anything in the USA because the US, by popular request dragged its systems of leftist organization out into the street and executed them decades ago.

When Reagan narc'd on his coworkers for having "communist sympathies" he became such a national brand he got elected in one of the best election outcomes for the right basically ever.

That's why the US "left" is reduced to whinging about how democrats don't do socialism (from a position of zero power in the government) and therefore you shouldn't vote for them. They don't seem to notice it has been 50 years of only making the problem worse.

Re: DOGE employees ordered to stop using Slack

#248

Post by dylan604 »

krapp wrote: post #181
littlestymaar wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This whole operation is as related to finding corruption exhibits as the Moscow trials were to finding traitors in the Red Army. It is a (ridiculous) pretext for purging the system from people that the new power deems “uncooperative”.

Yeah, I mean Musk has literally tweeted that DOGE is "dismantling the radical-left shadow government."[0] This is not about efficiency or rooting out corruption, it's about persecuting political enemies and purging wrongthink. Which was something people here screamed bloody murder about when they accused Biden of doing it, just by asking Twitter to moderate content, but I guess this is all fine now. [0] https://x.com…

> just by asking Twitter to moderate content, but I guess this is all fine now.

It's never wrong when it's something you agree with, and that's as far as Musk's belief in free speech goes. Allowing posts he agrees with, it's free speech. If it's something that sheds bad light on something he is, owns, or believes, it's bad and must be stopped. It's a classic as old as time

Re: DOGE employees ordered to stop using Slack

#249

Post by digitaltrees »

whatever1 wrote: post #172
dangus wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course there is “unseeing.” They can be tried for rather obvious crimes and thrown in prison.

They will get a blanket pardon anyway. So in the end we will have to apologize to them.

Don’t get pessimistic. That’s how norms truly disappear. They can and will be held accountable.

Re: DOGE employees ordered to stop using Slack

#250

Post by polski-g »

outside1234 wrote: post #82
impulser_ wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They aren't. They are informing the President and the President does it either by EO or asking congress.

The president can't decide to stop spending money Congress has passed by EO.

Correct. But Congress doesn't and didn't ever say "spend $250k on transgender operas." Congress' laws are ambiguous and rely on the administrative state to dish out money to a specific cause. The law probably said something like "promote health policy in the Europe".

The Trump administration will repurpose those funds to things more aligned with GOP preferences.

Post reply on HN