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.
But that’s not an originalist thing to do. At least 2 Supreme Court justices think this way.
Man I completely forgot about the Court’s ability to deputize.
Something tells me that it was intended that I forget that.
And when the courts go rogue they can deputize … Anyone. Like Andrew Tate, or elon.
Monkey paw urges caution
Marshals can also deputize, and they’ve already deputized Elon’s private security.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.”
