Market resolves as YES if a member of the Executive Branch to include DOJ lawyers is held in contempt of court by a judge.
While this question is motivated by the incident involving a plane deporting alleged gang members, any event that results in a member of the executive branch being held in contempt shall resolve as YES.
1,000People are also trading
Extended market for this until end of June: https://manifold.markets/Balasar/trump-admin-official-held-in-contem?r=QmFsYXNhcg
Looks like it has not occurred yet and Boasberg has given an April 23rd deadline to avoid finding them in contempt:
@bens would they be officially held in contempt as if the issuing of the order later in the day or not until a court prosecute and find them guilty for it?
I have no idea how this works but here: https://chatgpt.com/share/67ffda1b-aa60-8011-9354-2374e9ce2cb6
@bens even if he did go through with the case they wouldn’t actually be held in contempt pf court until early May.
@LyetKynes according to chatGPT I m wrong in my previous comment, the DOJ is in contempt right now and is given the option to resolve this present situation at a later date.
@LyetKynes Contempt proceedings are case-specific. There are no overarching declarations on the whole of the DOJ
@LyetKynes I’d give more weight to the opinions of human experts than those of ChatGPT, and so far all of the former that I’ve seen are specifically saying that Judge Boasberg has found probably cause to hold the DOJ in contempt – not that he is holding them in contempt – and this is simply him notifying them of this fact to give them a chance to respond before actually holding them in contempt. Presumably, this is because he would rather not hold the government in contempt, and would prefer they rectify the situation so he does not have to.
@invisiblevision fwiw my conversation with chatGPT came to the opposite conclusion of Lyet's, that currently no one has been held in contempt.
I agree that to meaningfully talk about this though we eventually need less appeals to chatbots and more actual sources and definitions.
@barbarous There was a chance that Judge Xinis was going to hold the Trump admin in contempt during the hearing that happened at 4 PM EST today, so at least to me it made sense for the probability to hover around 30% until that hearing happened. She ended up just scolding them though, so this market will certainly resolve NO now.
@invisiblevision That makes sense. I bought it down to 30% and not more partly out of uncertainty if any hearings were going to happen last minute. None of my deep research queries mentioned this one!
I am beginning to believe that boosts should - as a bonus - include M1,000 or so of liquidity.
@Gameknight It does stand to reason that this would happen, after a good stretch of several of the people in question saying things that sound a lot like "I think this court is contemptible!" 🤷