Close Menu
Must Have Gadgets –

    Subscribe to Updates

    Get the latest creative news from FooBar about art, design and business.

    What's Hot

    Today’s NYT Strands Hints, Answer and Help for Dec. 10 #647

    December 10, 2025

    Prime Video top 10 shows — here’s the 3 I’m binge-watching this week (Dec. 10-14)

    December 10, 2025

    Kids and Teen Influencers in Australia Say ‘Bye-Bye’ to Social Media

    December 10, 2025
    Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
    Must Have Gadgets –
    Trending
    • Today’s NYT Strands Hints, Answer and Help for Dec. 10 #647
    • Prime Video top 10 shows — here’s the 3 I’m binge-watching this week (Dec. 10-14)
    • Kids and Teen Influencers in Australia Say ‘Bye-Bye’ to Social Media
    • Wake Up Dead Man review: a darker, more powerful Knives Out
    • Court: “Because Trump said to” may not be a legally valid defense
    • This Nutribullet doesn’t just blend, it chops and grinds — so I put it to the test in my small kitchen
    • Can AI Design Your Holiday Card? I Tried but It Kept Giving Me a Fake Family
    • Netflix removed this one thing you probably didn’t notice — but it’s completely changed my viewing habits
    • Home
    • Shop
      • Earbuds & Headphones
      • Smartwatches
      • Mobile Accessories
      • Smart Home Devices
      • Laptops & Tablets
    • Gadget Reviews
    • How-To Guides
    • Mobile Accessories
    • Smart Devices
    • More
      • Top Deals
      • Smart Home
      • Tech News
      • Trending Tech
    Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
    Must Have Gadgets –
    Home»Tech News»Court: “Because Trump said to” may not be a legally valid defense
    Tech News

    Court: “Because Trump said to” may not be a legally valid defense

    adminBy adminDecember 10, 2025No Comments2 Mins Read
    Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email
    Court: “Because Trump said to” may not be a legally valid defense
    Share
    Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Pinterest Email

    In one of those cases, a judge lifted the hold on construction, ruling that a lack of a sound justification for the hold made it “the height of arbitrary and capricious,” a legal standard that determines whether federal decision-making is acceptable under the Administrative Procedures Act. If this were a fictional story, that would be considered foreshadowing.

    With no indication of how long the comprehensive assessment would take, 17 states sued to lift the hold on permitting. They were joined by the Alliance for Clean Energy New York, which represents companies that build wind projects or feed their supply chain. Both the plaintiffs and the agencies that were sued asked for summary judgment in the case.

    The first issue Judge Saris addressed is standing: Are the states suffering appreciable harm from the suspension of wind projects? She noted that they would receive tax revenue from the projects, that their citizens should see reduced energy costs following their completion, and that the projects were intended to contribute to their climate goals, thus limiting harm to their citizens. At one point, Saris even referred to the government’s attempts to claim the parties lacked standing as “tilting at windmills.”

    The government also argued that the suspension wasn’t a final decision—that would come after the review—and thus didn’t fall under the Administrative Procedures Act. But Saris ruled that the decision to suspend all activity pending the rule was the end of a decision-making process and was not being reconsidered by the government, so it qualified.

    Because Trump told us to

    With those basics out of the way, Saris turned to the meat of the case, which included a consideration of whether the agencies had been involved with any decision-making at all. “The Agency Defendants contend that because they ‘merely followed’ the Wind Memo ‘as the [Wind Memo] itself commands,’ the Wind Order did not constitute a ‘decision’ and therefore no reasoned explanation was required,” her ruling says. She concludes that precedent at the circuit court level blocks this defense, as it would mean that agencies would be exempt from the Administrative Procedures Act whenever the president told them to do anything.

    court defense legally Trump valid
    Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email
    admin
    • Website

    Related Posts

    Hinge CEO steps down to launch Overtone, an AI dating app

    December 10, 2025

    Reinventing your career for the AI age? Your technical skill isn’t your most valuable asset

    December 10, 2025

    Surfshark Promo Codes: 87% Off | December 2025

    December 10, 2025
    Leave A Reply Cancel Reply

    Top Posts

    Today’s NYT Strands Hints, Answer and Help for Dec. 10 #647

    December 10, 2025

    PayPal’s blockchain partner accidentally minted $300 trillion in stablecoins

    October 16, 2025

    The best AirPods deals for October 2025

    October 16, 2025
    Stay In Touch
    • Facebook
    • YouTube
    • TikTok
    • WhatsApp
    • Twitter
    • Instagram
    Latest Reviews
    How-To Guides

    How to Disable Some or All AI Features on your Samsung Galaxy Phone

    By adminOctober 16, 20250
    Gadget Reviews

    PayPal’s blockchain partner accidentally minted $300 trillion in stablecoins

    By adminOctober 16, 20250
    Smart Devices

    The best AirPods deals for October 2025

    By adminOctober 16, 20250

    Subscribe to Updates

    Get the latest tech news from FooBar about tech, design and biz.

    Latest Post

    Today’s NYT Strands Hints, Answer and Help for Dec. 10 #647

    December 10, 2025

    Prime Video top 10 shows — here’s the 3 I’m binge-watching this week (Dec. 10-14)

    December 10, 2025

    Kids and Teen Influencers in Australia Say ‘Bye-Bye’ to Social Media

    December 10, 2025
    Recent Posts
    • Today’s NYT Strands Hints, Answer and Help for Dec. 10 #647
    • Prime Video top 10 shows — here’s the 3 I’m binge-watching this week (Dec. 10-14)
    • Kids and Teen Influencers in Australia Say ‘Bye-Bye’ to Social Media
    • Wake Up Dead Man review: a darker, more powerful Knives Out
    • Court: “Because Trump said to” may not be a legally valid defense

    Subscribe to Updates

    Get the latest creative news from FooBar about art, design and business.

    Facebook
    • About Us
    • Contact Us
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms and Conditions
    • Disclaimer
    © 2025 must-have-gadgets.

    Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.