Posted on 03/16/2017 1:41:01 AM PDT by SoFloFreeper
Serious query here. I am upset with the judges who have said Trump cannot enforce his EOs.
But I just had a "flashback" that seems to raise a question. Maybe it has been expressed but I don't recall seeing it in this manner.
Here it is: Executive Orders are directions by the Chief Executive to employees and deputies of the executive BRANCH. That is, the chief executive CANNOT make rules for those working directly for the other two branches.
Question: Are these judges unconstitutionally (if my understanding of EOs is accurate) meddling in another branch of gov't?
Self ping....????...hey that felt...??..good
under circumstances where the order can be shown to violate the law. As an extreme example, you can’t order a federal employee to rob a bank. These cases turn on whether the ban is legal or illegal. The court in Hawaii says religious discrimination is more important than national security so the ban is illegal.
There is one caveat: Executive orders are subject to judicial review. Thank John Marshall and Marbury v. Madison. But really wasn’t used until the Truman era. It’s why Obama’s DACA EO’s were held up by the courts. Except in this case, the courts are wrong.
The courts do not have standing to stop the POTUS concerning immigration in any manner.
As per Mark Levin and several others.
The entrenched Democratic governing apparatus will never allow Trump to govern.
The state and national Republican majority surrender monkeys will always surrender.
That is the way it has been, is, and will always be.
The nation is fast learning for whom congress, judges, and the administrative state have always worked; they work for social justice and their own interests.
We wouldn’t know this unless the people chose the Anti-Establishment Trump.
You are right. The Establishment will never allow Trump to govern, and never allow him to get away with pen and phone diktats. If Trump is stymied, and prevented from building the border wall and keeping barbarians out of the country, I wouldn’t be surprised if he appeals to the people to support an Article V convention to reestablish free government.
1. Fill Supreme Court vacancy
2. Bring it the court.
3. EO upheld
“Question: Are these judges unconstitutionally (if my understanding of EOs is accurate) meddling in another branch of gov’t?”
My answer (note - I’m not a lawyer, just a retired pollster, but I play a lawyer on the Internet): This has never been litigated. These judges are expanding the bounds of judicial power, and technically the Supreme Court gets to decided if their overreach is constitutional. President Trump can allocate staff in a manner that slows visa approvals to zero. He doesn’t need the order to get the job done. I’m not sure he wants this to go to SCOTUS until the 9th justice is approved.
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.