Judge Says President's Executive Action on Immigration Unconstitutional [satire]

Semi-News/Semi-Satire ^ | 19 Dec 2014 | John Semmens

[John Semmens]

Judge Arthur Schwab of the Western District of Pennsylvania ruled that portions of President Obama's unilateral action on illegal immigrants violate the US Constitution's separation of powers.

“The alleged grounds of prosecutorial discretion are inadequate to support the totality of what he has tried to do,” Schwab said. “He can decline to prosecute these lawbreakers. That is the limit of his discretion. He does not have the authority to issue them identity papers that would make them eligible for employment or government benefits that existing law prohibits.”

Democratic U.S. Senators Dick Durbin (Ill) and Richard Blumenthal (Conn) contend that Schwab is wrong. “The issue is one of human rights,” Durbin argued. “It is because existing laws have neglected to fulfill these rights that the President has been forced to take the law into his own hands.”

“The President could have, through a refusal to act, become complicit in Congress' failure to do the right thing,” Blumenthal declared. “But he rose above obedience to the lesser authority of heeding the Constitution in order to meet his greater responsibility as a human being.”

Both senators urged the President to “ignore this small-minded judge. He has no means of compelling the President to do anything. He only has power if we, ourselves, yield to his decision.”

Joyce Branda, acting Assistant Attorney General, concurred in the senators' assessment saying that “the President has absolute discretion to interpret and enforce, or not enforce, or to modify the law as he deems fit.”

Determined not to sit by idly while President Obama runs roughshod over the Constitution, Congress passed legislation (HR4681) that empowers the government to collect, retain, and disseminate all electronic communications including voice calls on all US citizens. “There are a lot of dangerous people with dangerous ideas out there,” House Speaker John Boehner explained. “We cannot let these people hide behind the freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution as a means of concealing their antipathy toward what those of us in government are doing for this country. The ability to collect information on what they are doing and saying is vital to defending the government's interests.”

In related news, the Obama Administration demanded that a lawsuit contesting the President's executive action on immigration be dismissed by the court. The suit was filed by Arizona sheriff, Joe Arpaio. According to Attorney General Eric Holder, “as a minor local official, Arpaio lacks standing to challenge an action taken by a president who embodies the supreme authority of the nation.”

if you missed any of this week's other semi-news/semi-satire posts you can find them at...

http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,157154.0.html

[John Semmens]

ping

[piytar]

“a president who embodies the supreme authority of the nation.”

Sadly, barely satire...

[EDINVA]

Can’t tell one semi from the other any more; where does news end and satire begin?

[Mark]

Life is like a box of chocolates.

[marktwain]

So close to the the truth, it hurts.

[Seaplaner]

Gottemoeller asserted that “it is our fervent hope that our example will inspire others to follow suit” and maintained that “a nuclear-free world will be a safer world.” Whether either of these aspirations would bear out is unknown. Prior to the dawn of the nuclear age less potent weaponry took the lives of 50 million people during World War II. It is also conceivable that the United States' leadership in disarming may be seen as an opportunity for aggression rather than a model to be emulated.

Not much "satire" above; and, the Semensian editorial tag should be required reading for those who think "no nukes" somehow might be "good nukes".

Another fine/scary and semi-educational column.

.

[sima_yi]

Another good one, John. If I might make a minor editorial correction:

"...what those of us in government are doing for to this country."

[TheConservativeParty]

Sadly, our present hell makes this 99% true, 1% satire.

That jerk has 3 more Christmases to cast doom upon, has 3 Hawaiian vacations, and countless more unconstitutional actions ahead before he is perp walked out of our White House.

He will leave. Some say not. He will. Even his own party will abandon him should he pull something as stupid as cancelling 2016 elections in some way.

Let’s consider his walk out of the White House on Jan.20, 2017 (oh good grief that’s an eternity away) to be a perp walk. He’s guilty of more crimes than Al Capone.

[fatnotlazy]

No satire here, John. This is the real deal, or at least, this is what they’re thinking even if they don’t say it out loud.

Thanks yet again for the ping.