Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Head of DHS Gets Smacked Down By Judge After Saying They Choose Which Laws To Enforce
mrconservative ^ | Bookworm

Posted on 04/29/2013 12:59:21 PM PDT by virgil283

"Under the Constitution’s separation of powers, the Executive is charged with enforcing the laws that Congress enacts. In Obama’s America, the executive office has aggregated to itself a previously unknown power: the power to pick and choose which laws to enforce and which laws to ignore. ......That arrogance has trickled down to Janet Napolitano, Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, who is actually in charge of immigration matters. Last year, agents from the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency (“ICE”) sought an injunction against Napolitano challenging her directive that the agents must stop any efforts to deport illegal immigrants. The agents claim that neither Napolitano nor Obama can set the law, by selective enforcement decisions. Instead, said the agents, they must enforce the law as written...."

(Excerpt) Read more at mrconservative.com ...


TOPICS: Reference; Society
KEYWORDS: bigsis; dhs; lockdown; whichlawsenforced; wot
"The only problem is that , the day before she said those words, a federal judge had announced that Napolitano is dead wrong – the executive branch of government does not get to nullify properly passed laws by refusing to enforce them. There is a possibility, then, that when Napolitano boldly stated in the Senate that she and the President could do whatever the heck they want, and laws be damned, she was deliberately ignoring a contrary judicial finding. If that’s the case, she’s also claiming that the separation of powers is completely invalid, because the executive office trumps everything.

On April 23, the day before Napolitano testified in before the Senate, U.S. District Judge Reed O’Connor held explicitly that the executive has no discretion when it comes to enforcing United States law: “The court finds that DHS does not have discretion to refuse to initiate removal proceedings.”

The ICE case isn’t over yet because the court, having stated the law, still needs to determine where the facts fit in on that continuum. The one thing that’s plain, though, is that Napolitano declaration of power before the Senate is unconstitutional executive overreach."

1 posted on 04/29/2013 12:59:21 PM PDT by virgil283
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: virgil283

The saving grace here is that all of the officials appointed by Obama appear incompetent. There’s not one Rommel or Eisenhower, Netanyahu or Churchill. For that we can thank God.

Now, having said that, Hitler, Chamberlain and Carter have done plenty of damage.


2 posted on 04/29/2013 1:03:04 PM PDT by Gen.Blather
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: virgil283

In law, treason is the crime that covers some of the more extreme acts against one’s sovereign or nation.


3 posted on 04/29/2013 1:04:02 PM PDT by Baseballguy (If we knew what we know now in Oct would we do anything different?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: virgil283

I think avoiding immigration laws through policy change is expressly forbidden by the 1986 immigration law.


4 posted on 04/29/2013 1:04:15 PM PDT by USNBandit (sarcasm engaged at all times)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: virgil283

5 posted on 04/29/2013 1:04:31 PM PDT by Travis McGee (www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: virgil283

What the hell do you do with an administration that says they can order people not to enforce the laws of the United States?


6 posted on 04/29/2013 1:09:57 PM PDT by Jeff Winston
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: virgil283

7 posted on 04/29/2013 1:13:44 PM PDT by Grampa Dave (I'm afraid to go visit any American college because of all the foreign students with bombs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: virgil283

What you will always notice in all of these cases it the absence of any congressional action to enforce the law. Because congress is in on it.


8 posted on 04/29/2013 1:21:27 PM PDT by Revel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: virgil283

How apoplectic would Dems and the “media” be if a Repub Prez announced he was going to ignore a favored liberal law (say Planned Parenthood funding)?


9 posted on 04/29/2013 1:24:17 PM PDT by jeffc (The U.S. media are our enemy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: virgil283

The current communist regime in Sodom on the Potomac has never met a law that they could not or would not break. If it is a law, their program is to break it or ignore it. Who is going to stop them? Congress won’t. Americans have no power to stop them. The Americans that would try are few. So, the law breakers continue to break laws and get away with it. Protected by the butt kissers in the MSM.


10 posted on 04/29/2013 1:24:43 PM PDT by RetiredArmy (1 Cor 15: 50-54 & 1 Thess 4: 13-17. That about covers it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Winston

There is no oversight.

There are a few Rep’s that call this crap into question, however, most seem more interested in self preservation.

Their inquiries are either ignored or marginalized by the shallow pools of popular narrators.

“What difference does it make?”

Give the people what they want.

They want to be placated with a bizarre form of righteousness in 140 characters or less.


11 posted on 04/29/2013 1:25:40 PM PDT by Zeneta (No eternal reward will forgive us now for wasting the dawn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: virgil283

“What difference does it make ?”.... Her Thighness Hillary Clinton


12 posted on 04/29/2013 2:06:51 PM PDT by clamper1797 (De-throne King Obozo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee

“If you didn’t know,”LOCKDOWN” is a prison term.”

“If you didn’t know...” aiming a weapon at anyone would be considered “brandishing” at the very least, or assault with a deadly weapon justifying self-defense on the part of the individual threatened. Since a self-defense response did not immediately take place the filing of criminal charges by the party aggrieved must be pending or the ill-informed failed to know their rights were violated. In many states the prosecutor may act on behalf of the state in pressing charges and treat the victim/witness as a hostile witness to obtain testimony. This is also an assault under color of authority which is a federal offense as well as likely a state law violation when the federal law enforcers fail to prosecute. When will the officer in the photo be identified and charged for the crime? I won’t hold my breath but clearly an assault occurred without a threat to justify it. The evidence is before our eyes. (I’ve seen the entire photograph and the girl in the window offered no threat.)

Cheers.


13 posted on 04/29/2013 2:10:26 PM PDT by chulaivn66 (Semper Fidelis in Extremis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Winston

What do you do? I dunno. I know what is being done ——Nothing.

The Congress is totally useless and Boehner is hiding in his bottle of jack.


14 posted on 04/29/2013 2:21:05 PM PDT by Venturer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: chulaivn66

Strike the remark in parenthesis.


15 posted on 04/29/2013 2:56:23 PM PDT by chulaivn66 (Semper Fidelis in Extremis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Baseballguy
How about the Non-Enforcement of DOMA? Selective Enforcement in that area, too, as in SO MANY OTHERS.

Treason abounds, and NO ONE makes the Case.....

16 posted on 04/29/2013 3:04:46 PM PDT by traditional1 (Amerika.....Providing public housing for the Mulatto Messiah)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: virgil283

that sounds about right. i’d agree with the judge. not enforcing a law is akin to the law not existing.

which makes to look at article 2 section 1...


17 posted on 04/29/2013 3:08:02 PM PDT by sten (fighting tyranny never goes out of style)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chulaivn66

Eric Holder deja Vu. Elian Gonzalez was not being threatened with a Federal Officer pointing a weapon at his face. The scrunts continue to pick and chose which laws they like. The Republicans continue to kiss their rears.


18 posted on 04/29/2013 3:12:58 PM PDT by DrDude (Governor of the 57th State)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: virgil283
There was a time that the rule of law trumped partisanship in Congress. There was a time when Congress would hold the President accountable for the misdeeds of his administration.

Not anymore.

If we had an opposition party - the GOP is not it, they would refuse to fund such lawlessness, demand that heads roll, but we don't.

This country is on a slow but inevitable slide into tyranny in a very bipartisan way.

19 posted on 04/29/2013 3:50:41 PM PDT by Mister Da (The mark of a wise man is not what he knows, but what he knows he doesn't know!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: virgil283
It sure is. The interesting thing here is that this is a Cabinet level apparatchik declaring to the Senate that this Executive has the 'authority' to selectively enforce U.S. statute. It is on record.
Watch this regime (slowly) crash and burn if they choose to argue this. Stupid on parade.
Now, just shoo people away from the pig-in-a-poke amnesty bill. Rubio, I'm talking to you.
20 posted on 04/29/2013 4:02:32 PM PDT by Seven plus One
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AdmSmith; AnonymousConservative; Berosus; bigheadfred; Bockscar; ColdOne; Convert from ECUSA; ...

Thanks virgil283.


21 posted on 05/01/2013 8:26:38 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (Romney would have been worse, if you're a dumb ass.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson