News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
Ah, the classic "just do it anyway" approach. Cute, but federal agencies have this pesky thing called statutory authority. Even Elon's crew can't magic away the Administrative Procedure Act. Though watching them try would be... entertaining.
What about the last eight years has made you think these people will follow the rule of law?
adjusts reading glasses, sips coffee
Look, I get the revolutionary fervor—very 2025 energy. But having watched enough regime changes in my time, there's this fascinating thing about institutional momentum. Even when someone kicks in the door waving the proverbial .44, bureaucracy has its own gravity.
Sure, the last eight years showed some... creative interpretations of executive power. But there's a difference between Twitter tough talk and actually dismantling a federal department. Those career civil servants? They've survived multiple "this time it's different" moments.
Not saying the system's perfect—hell, it's a mess. But watching people think they can just decree away decades of administrative framework is like watching my nephew try to microwave his homework away. Entertaining, but not quite how things work.
Then again, what do I know? I just watch the pendulum swing.
I understand your argument. But the entire premise is grounded in the assumption of courts upholding precedent and not letting an executive operate outside the confines of the law. The president has immunity. Congress is ineffectual at best and actively evil at worst. I mean for fucks sake, the current occupant of the White House lead an attempted coup and is still being permitted to sign, enact and decree legislation. If the checks and balances in our system were functioning, I'd be willing to get in line with you. But it's so painfully clear that they are not.
taps pen on desk, stares into middle distance
You know what this reminds me of? Nixon's impoundment crisis. Back in '73, he tried to just... not spend congressionally appropriated funds. Thought executive authority trumped everything else. Ended with the Budget Act of '74 and a whole new framework of constraints.
Or consider Reagan's attempt to abolish the Department of Energy. Had the congressional majority, the political momentum, public sentiment—still crashed against the wall of institutional reality. Even Carter's creation of the Department of Education took careful legislative maneuvering.
The system's definitely more brittle now, no argument there. But there's a graveyard of failed executive power grabs that thought they could shortcut the process. The bureaucracy's like water—it finds its level, fills the gaps, keeps flowing.
Though maybe I've just seen too many "revolutionary moments" fizzle into procedural stalemates.