Supreme Court blocks Trump from ending DACA

That last part of limiting future administrations from undoing a prior administration's executive cuts both ways. It could help to keep good orders but hurt if you cannot undo bad ones. So legislative actions will be needed.

Of it is a matter of opinion as to wnat is a good or. bad order.

 

Muslim ban, cutting legal immigration down nearly 70% just in 2018, and even more of late. Restrictions on wealth requirements, health care requirements, forbidden from and welfare, etc.

 

Hmmm that makes no sense nor did I ever insinuate that, I said point blank I'll see what other lawyers on here say about it and you flipped into you little fit.

 

As opposed to the illegality of the creation of the DACA standard by Barack Obama?

 

You said my opinion was worthless and then implied that I would react to having my opinion called worthless by a judge by telling them to go **** off.

 

DACA is Constitutional and legal.

 

Oh I see... You believe that only rulling you agree with are valid... Hate to break it to you, but you're not that important. You also don't get to decide who's part of the 'We'. You're powerless and quite sad really.

 

It was not created through an act of congress, therefore it is illegal.

 

You said ALL immigration. I admire than you amended your claim to one closer to the truth. Being more selective and reducing immigration in times of high unemployment is not a bad idea.

 

Choosing how to enforce the law is the prerogative of the executive branch. DACA is a standard for how to enforce the law. And such does not require creation or approval from Congress.

 

nothing illegal about it - Trump could undo it if he wished, he just has to do it the right way


Trump did it the way he did as he wanted to pretend he cared about DACA and it was not him ending it

if Trump wants to end it, he has to do it himself, put himself in the history books as ending it... I think we both know he won't do that

 

The Supreme Court blocked this on a technicality. All they need to do in the White House is get a few lawyers to write out reasoning for the decision and the Administration needs to “address pressing questions”, probably preventing some people being in the limbo.
SCOTUS specifically said cancelling the program in and of itself is not unconstitutional.

This whole thing reminds me school - when you turn in your homework and teacher returns it asking to write your name on it.

 

Essentially, the court said the administration’s argument was incompetent.

It’s a lot like the Flynn issue. Trump has an avenue to utilize but doesn’t want the responsibility. So DOJ is trying to cover his rear to get the same result.

Here he used Homeland Security to throw **** against the wall so he wouldn’t have to utilize an executive order to end the DACA program.

All he needs to do is write an executive order but that requires accepting responsibility.

 

That's exactly what it is.

 

And the leftist would be in mental wards.

 

The issue is Obama did this unconstitutionally. Trump is actually trying to fix a constitution issue Obama KNOWINGLY created. This isn't about specious allegations about his motives. What Obama did is UNCONSTITUTIONAL it doesn't have to follow some administrative process SCOTUS should have done it's job agreed with Obama that is is unconstitutional and ruled in favor of the Executive Branch. Then CONGRESS can do their job and LEGISLATE a remedy which is required and neither the President or the Court has the constitutional power to do so.

 

"ALL that is required for you to be stripped of your Constitutional Rights and of your country, is for ~good men~ to do nothing.

 

True.

But since good men have refused to stop evil men, EVIL it is !!
The American people have agreed to be useful idiots for the controlling elite.

 

Do you like Citizens United? Do Historians appreciate Dred Scott and Korematsu? No, they didn't(and you don't), all of those decisions(another example, the Missouri Compromise) paved the way for dark periods in American History for some. I am "powerless", but that doesn't mean I'm not going to sit here and not speak truth to power. As Jefferson once elaborated himself, the weakness of the SCOTUS system.

This court, exists as a law unto itself, or as Hawley called it the other day: "Super legislators". The next time a ruling you don't like happens(like with the President's taxes maybe for example), you'll be on this side again. No, just abolish the SCOTUS and keep courts at a regional level.

We, the US People(including people with whom I disagree) have the right to our political decisions, right now those decisions are being made for us.

 

What's nonsensical about it. Article 1 says all legislation must take place in the Congress. Even Obama when he was issuing it said that he just couldn't wait for Congress to legislate, not that he had proposed much, so he was going to act, to legislate, on his own saying it was unconstitutional but's it's what he wanted. And the SCOTUS shirked it duty here to just declare that unconstitutionality because they feel bad about a group of people who are not even citizens. It's the Trump Executive Branch that is correct here

 

Not the way it was implemented, Presidents cannot create laws.

 

How about he write an EO making abortion illegal?

 

Who told you the majority of the American people favor illegal immigration? Let's see the survey.

 

It's nothing at all like the Flynn case. The DOJ has put forth a very sound argument that they don't want to prosecute the case due to the varying difficulties in that case. The irony is that the DOJ took the same decision with respect to the Russian troll farm, and that was accepted by the Court.

And that troll farm case actually IS or was central to the Mueller Investigation. Why can't the DOJ make the same decisions here? Because some people speculate(perhaps erronously) that the DOJ is just keeping Trump from pardoning Flynn?

And why is it that the President specifically has to write an EO to erase another EO? Isn't being directed by an agency, more then sufficient? Who are the Super legislators to interfere with the executive branch's determination of law?

The supreme court's decision here, and Sullivan's antics are proof of why I hate the gavel and "his/her" honor. he/she thinks of themselves as omnipotent, while people have to suffer the consequences of their varying decisions.

 

Here's a bit of news, Presidents don't sit down and write their own EO's, staff does that and makes those very pretty and formal documents. So why shouldn't he do like Obama and pass legislation by his decree whether it is constitutional or not?