|
|
|
|
|
by bawolff
254 days ago
|
|
> In the sense that you can sue to have the order challenged? How's this different than what Trump's doing, where the government does something illegal (or at least legally dubious), and there's "judicial oversight" because aggrieved parties can sue the government? Umm,that's how court systems work in general. You sue when someone wrongs you. I'm not sure how else it could possibly work. > Were the bank accounts seized before or after the conviction? This is a different topic, but there were 2 different bank account freezes. Some were frozen due to a contempt of court order (this didn't involve the government, a private citizen brought the lawsuit). The more controversial was the emergency powers seizure. Arguably the protestors were engaging in manifestly illegal conduct. Personally i think its akin to how you can arrest someone before conviction, but opinions vary. As far as i know, the bank accounts were only frozen while the protestors were engaging in illegal action and were released once the situation was resolved. |
|