Posted on 02/08/2017 9:42:04 AM PST by Sean_Anthony
Except what if it doesn't play out? What if the courts rule that he can't follow the law? He should have said at the outset "The judge in Washington for political reasons can't change the law that the executive branch passed and has abided by. Therefor we will observe the laws of the United States of America and not let the opinion of one judge change long established law."
He would have taken some flack, but not near the flack if it goes to the supreme court and they rule against it. At that point he either defies the court of loses all presidential power.
Of course that's what we've needed for a long time...a president who will assert the power of the executive branch and refuse to let the judiciary rule over the other two branches.
I agree on taking the high road - except I do not regard GW as a gentleman; I regard him as a treacherous RINO who used that as a pretext to do what he wanted to do: allow leftist policies and perceptions hold sway (especially in preparation for handing the reins back over to the other half of the Uni-Party.
The Bushes are globalists, little different than the Clintons.
No reason, yet, to ignore these judges. Trump has the HIGH GROUND now, and he becomes A GOD if there is a terrorist hit...effectively putting a spike through the Democrat Party for decades.
While I certainly prefer that Americans not have to suffer through a hit, particularly if it’s relatively big - Americans do need to WAKE UP...they need a Pearl Harbor moment to clarify things - and then they will realize just who the Democrats are (and have always been), and what they want to do to this country.
The Dems on on VERY THIN ICE right now, waging their existence as a party on the fact that the terrorists behave for a while...let’s see what happens.
I disagree.
Recognizing the supremacy of the Seattle judge's restraining order was a strategic blunder of huge, and possibly historic proportions.
The President's EO was supported by statute law, historical precedent (including USSC decisions), and the Constitution. He was well within his authority to issue the travel restriction order.
THAT is the real constitutional crisis.
The Seattle judge has nothing supporting his ruling but feelings, opinions, partisan opposition, and pure speculation. His ruling was illegal on its face, and should have been condemned by the Trump administration, while they went about the legal business of ensuring our country's national security.
Instead, the administration has put itself into the position of asking for the judiciary's permission to do their jobs.
Now that they've been granted the power to overturn the very existence of the executive branch, they may very well do so - at least for this President.
Arizona passed a law (SB 1070) because of massive illegal immigration. The Federal government refused to enforce Federal border security. The left argued in favor of Federal Supremacy over State interests to defeat many of effective provisions of this law.
Now, the Federal government is temporarily forestalling immigration of a class of aliens from [foreign] states known to export terrorism. And now States (with the assistance of a Federal judge chosen for his activist bent in a district with a circuit court known for its deviations from constituional law) are arguing that enforcing Federal laws on halting immigration is, in fact, unconstitutional! The left is no longer arguing for Federal Supremacy over State interests, now that a law abiding President is in charge.
Well, which is it? Does or does not the General Gov’t have power to both permit and deny immigration?
Religious discrimination is a red herring. “Religious tests” only apply to US Citizens running for public office:
“...but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.” (Art IV, Para 3)
Violent, Sharia-law-honoring bad actors can be excluded, because their religion defines them. It’s not a “religion of peace”. It is a “religion of subjugation” which is constitutional opposed to our Constitution. Islam is not compatible with our free institutions.
The left is nuts and are hell bent on our destruction.
Here is an essay on inferior courts from the Heritage Foundation Guide to the Constitution.
-PJ
He should withdraw the EO since the court battle will be over 90 days. Stop the appeal. Instruct the departments to vet with prejudice.
All the more reason to vacate the EO.
Of course!
As the sole certified homosexual on the Supreme Court, together with the two lesbians, the court's validity is open to serious challenge.
Speaking of Rush, I have reached my tipping point; I can't listen to him any more, dealing with 1-1/2 hours of commercials to hear 1-1/2 hours of actual programming, factoring in the local commercials on KFBK Sacramento.
Please spare me the option of paying Rush to hear his programs commercial free. I can't afford it. On Social Security and Obamacare burning up my 401(k) I have simply reached my limit. I prefer to contribute to Free republic when I can.
I would think that Rush could make allowances and invent a modest rate for really elderly listeners, 90% of whom probably are long term listeners and support our current president!
If I’m in the car I listen to him. And I’m not in the car very often.
This is my hoped for solution of choice and a certain possibility.
There is NOTHING to suggest that the Mass murdering Muslim primitive animals are rational and their only future planning is concentrated on finding new ways to murder maim and kill worldwide.
If there should be a mass murder target by the irrational koranimals, they may do America a favor and choose the Supreme Court.
Would solve a plethora of serious national problems.
In other words, a captive audience for commercials.
I am retired, now, but been there, done that... but it used to be only around an hour of commercials then. I have been retired 8 years now.
I change the station when a commercial comes on. Same with TV and I don’t have cable.
Felo de se = "Suicide."
At 3:00 breaking news on FNB. They have a “secret list” of names of terrorists from the seven countries on Pres. Trump’s list. The list supposedly is headed for the three judges; they had asked for evidence.
Agreed, let it play out. Were only a few weeks in, they have been pouring in for 8 years so a few more weeks won’t matter much. Better to expose the sycophant judges than give the liberal media more ammo to call Trump more names.
If you go on youtube, you can listen to his shows commercial free. It looks like people upload copies of the show daily.
Here’s today’s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PNe3LInU39c
Many Thanks....
That should have been a triple many thanks. The essay is very informative but that Heritage Guide that contains it will be a gift that keeps on giving. Many, many, many thanks.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.