Judge temporarily blocks Trumps national emergency wall

Yet another example of Trump supporters in this thread trying to sling accusations of hypocrisy to justify their own.

 

I own guns myself. Sooooooooo, I'm not sure what point you are trying to make.

 

That leftist judge gave $20,000 in donations to Obama...so much for a judge being non partisan. He wasn't elected.

 

Yeah, it's too bad for Trump and you he couldn't find a judge that hates the constitution as much as you all do, huh?

 

Look who's suddenly against the constit..

Oh... wait. I just remembered. You have always been against everything in the constitution that is not in the 2nd amendment. I forgot there for a minute...

 

I don't see how it's necessarily against the Constitution.

It might be a stretched interpretation of the law, but if Congress really had a problem with that they could pass a resolution censoring the President, and that would most likely be enough to result in policy change.
Certainly if they had a 2/3 majority to pass a resolution, that would almost certainly necessarily result in policy change, though they probably don't have that.

It was past Democratic controlled congresses who invested all these legal powers into the hands of the office of President.
Maybe Democrats will learn a little lesson about avoiding excessive centralization of power, or having checks and balances.
But I doubt they will.

 

Building a wall is not against our Constitution.

 

Conflating illegal aliens with legal immigrants is an insult to immigrants.

 

There are many who use free speech to advocate for censorship.

Soooooo.

 

Lol ... What are ya going to say next? "Nyah, nyah, nyah"? Maybe stick your tongue out at me?

 

Oh my … the republican toddler-in-chief will be extra cranky when he returns from Japan...

 

Well, when a Dem POTUS enacts a national emergency for health care or gun control reform, you will all know who to thank.

 

Unfortunately for you and Trump, the way he wants to build it is. Too bad, so sad.

 

There are no specific laws for that, so it's not a comparable analogy.

 

I am going to laugh my ass off when a Dem POTUS does the exact same thing your messiah is trying to do when he/she becomes President.

 

It's common for very high up officials to be given some latitude in how they interrpret some laws, as long as what they're doing doesn't take things too far.

 

It absolutely is comparable. All he/she has to do is declare it a national emergency according to you and Trump.

 

If it's a matter of money, Trump could probably raise the money from private donations, or treat them as temporary loans, if Congress ever authorized spending specifically for the wall and to pay back past donors.

 

It's obvious you don't understand Trump's legal basis for doing this.

The current law says he can do it, but only under certain situations. Obviously the law is a little broad in describing exactly what those situations are.

 

I don't care how he wants to build it, as long as it doesn't violate the Constitution. But this charade of a national emergency is just a plain lie and a clear violation. Everyone but Trumpies can see this.

 

Trump declaring a national emergency to steal money from the military after being denied by Congress is a dangerous precedent

cause dems could then use it to steal money from the military to save social security, medicare for all, ect....

so I am not sure the party of the judge, many on both sides understand this

 

What part of the Constitution does it violate?

He's doing this under a law passed by Congress.

 

But Congress hasn't passed a resolution to censor him for this act.

That would be the proper role of Congress if they think he has violated the law and they do not find it acceptable.

 

Yeah, I'll bet you'll laugh your ass off when some Dem POTUS tears down the wall declares open borders for all. Won't that be great?

 

The Judge clearly defined how it violated the constitution. Did you not read his ruling?