this post was submitted on 29 May 2026
671 points (99.7% liked)

News

37777 readers
2652 users here now

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.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

A federal judge ordered the removal of President Donald Trump's name from the Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, ruling the White House's rebranding of the iconic institution is illegal.

U.S. District Court Judge Christopher Cooper, in a opinion issued May 29, ordered the Kennedy Center remove Trump's name from the institution's title, including taking down the recently installed signage on the center's facade and stripping it from other materials.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] OccamsTeapot@lemmy.world 88 points 21 hours ago (4 children)

For anyone else wondering what the ruling was based on (other than trump being a narcissistic loser):

In a 94-page opinion, the judge said the Kennedy Center's board of trustees, made up of primarily Trump loyalists, violated the 1964 federal law that created the center, arguing the statute makes clear "the Kennedy Center must be named for, and is meant to honor, President Kennedy alone."

[–] conartistpanda@lemmy.world 2 points 2 hours ago

Oldest thing he violated

[–] Akasazh@lemmy.world 7 points 11 hours ago

It's crazy that that needed including, but belated kudos to the lawyer who wrote that

[–] MeThisGuy@feddit.nl 12 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago) (4 children)

honest question:
how tf do you write a 94 page opinon on a building?

[–] OccamsTeapot@lemmy.world 6 points 10 hours ago

You should try to read one! Skim it, I mean.

I haven't read this opinion specifically (and some of this probably won't apply), but generally:

They explain all of the relevant procedural stuff in detail, and even justifying how things are being handled, with citations. Then the basics about what happened, the arguments on each side. Discuss the relevant laws and relevant edge cases. They will talk about new submissions to the court, and basically tell the story of what happened legally (there was a hearing on x date, defense submitted new evidence on y date etc). Then they sort through all the bullshit as judges, saying what's accurate/a good argument and what's not. Then write their actual opinion. 100 pages is pretty standard from the ones I've seen.

[–] Hossenfeffer@feddit.uk 1 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

When you charge by the hour, you find a way.

[–] DokPsy@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago

Judges don't charge by the hour like a law firm

[–] nwtreeoctopus@sh.itjust.works 11 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

Lots of citations. Lots.

Also, wide margins.

[–] hume_lemmy@lemmy.ca 3 points 10 hours ago

Definitely necessary with an administration that repeatedly uses loopholes and "creative interpretation" to get what it wants.

[–] swab148@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 16 hours ago

Lotsa legalese, I imagine

[–] Bristlecone@lemmy.world 10 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

I like your confidence that they're actually "basing" decisions on anything but capitulation, but I appreciate the information

[–] OccamsTeapot@lemmy.world 4 points 18 hours ago

Yeah I see your point. What I mean is what do they say it's based on as their legal justification