[gandalftb]

I assumed that any reader of my comments was familiar with the concepts of due process, appeals, or not, included.

Whether the Executive branch chooses to obey any law, passed by Congress, is their prerogative and their peril. Ignoring a law, even a bad law, does not make a law unconstitutional.

You claim constitutionality is based on merits.... Who ultimately determines those merits? You? Me? Jefferson? Better take a closer look at the Constitution..... That would be exclusive to the Supreme Court.

You can opine what you want about Jefferson, but his opinion about constitutionality has no legal weight, never did. As President he could choose to enforce or not any law, and possibly also have been subject to impeachment.

You refer to Jefferson, his disdain for the Judiciary branch was well known. How ironic that his effort to pidgeon-hole Marshall as a Supreme Court judge led to Marbury vs. Madison and established the Supreme Court at its present stature as the final step in judicial review.

Trump was the best choice as President. The Republican agenda is the best course.

Committed a crime? No evidence, no opinion.

Trump needs to finish his term. I never thought America wasn’t great. No need to regain something we didn’t lose.

[TexasGurl24]

"You seem . . . to consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions; a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy . . . They have, with others, the same passions for party, for power, and the privilege of their corps . . . and their power the more dangerous as they are in office for life, and not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control. The constitution has erected no such single tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruptions of time and party, its members would become despots. It has more wisely made all the departments co-equal and co-sovereign within themselves."