Team Planning Guide for your "National Day of Reckoning" protest against Obama's Illegal Amnesty - (Internet Link)
.
Posted on 11/30/2014 10:33:55 AM PST by Steelfish
THE NEW CON: LAW PROFESSORS FOR EXECUTIVE AMNESTY A pattern of deceit from the White House.
By Jeffrey Lord – 11.25.14 Call it a White House con game. The Obama administration is rolling out a list of law professors in support of the president’s executive order giving amnesty to five million illegal immigrants. The Hill reports:
The White House worked to bolster the legal case for President Obama’s immigration action Thursday night, releasing a letter from a group of prominent legal scholars arguing that the president’s moves were within his legal authorities.
The group included three law professors from the University of Chicago — where the president taught constitutional law before his election — as well as Columbia University President Lee Bollinger and renowned Harvard constitutional scholar Laurence Tribe.
“While we differ among ourselves on many issues relating to Presidential power and immigration policy, we are all of the view that these actions are lawful,” the professors write. “They are exercises of prosecutorial discretion that are consistent with governing law and with the policies that Congress has expressed in the statutes that it has enacted.”
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
Can I ask a stupid question?
If Obama and his henchmen think it’s so clear that the president has executive authority to do this amnesty, then why the need to trot out these alleged experts to tell us that the president indeed has authority to issue amnesty?
If it’s so obvious that the president has this authority, why the need to call in reinforcements to bolster the arguments???
Every single signatory of support for illegal amnesty should be required, by law, to take in an illegal family, pay for their food, insurance, education (via raised property taxes) and post a bond to assure that no State nor Federal resources will be expended.
I had to prove I could provide for my wife from Mexico. We can ask no less from these bleeding hearts.
Shakespeare was right...
You’ve heard of the “settled science” of Gore-bull warming, well executive amnesty is trying to become “settled law.”
Megyn Kelly’s research staff found all of these legal scholars are big Dem donors, especially for Barry. Plus, keep in mind Columbia and Chicago are vying for Barry’s Presidential Library and Welfare Office.
If he’s already resorting to props, he knows he’s be caught!
Dig through these supposed experts records. Quid Pro Quo has a way of making otherwise opponents become real friendly to the viewpoint, even when it is illegal.
Tribe is 'known' not 'renowned'. He is known for Iran-Contra and for attempting to break up Microsoft in the 1990s. Both efforts were politically motivated; hardly a champion of the law and the US Constitution. His approach is one of attrition not talent or brilliance. Once his
The only things he can claim to have achieved is in making it difficult for Ronald Reagan's last two years of office and in making Bill Gates III turn from political indifference to become a liberal donor, i.e. Gates was forced to buy his 'get-out-of-jail-free-card'.
Gruber alert!
Lawyers would naturally be for amnesty, since it represents a whole load of new business, from legalization prices, to suing the DHS for all manner of violations, to defense lawyer bonanzas in criminal proceedings, to appeals lawyers, and so on. This will of course swell the coffers of the ATLA, which in turn will fill the private, secret accounts of dem politicians, from obama on down.
So this isn’t news.
obama already is on tape saying this is illegal. just keep playing obama back to obama. how can god change is mind?
As mentioned in other threads concerning immigration issues, please consider the following.
Regardless of PC interpretations of the Constitution’s Uniform Rule of Naturalization Clause (1.8.4), interpretations used to justify federal immigration laws, the states have never delegated to the feds, expressly via the Constitution, the specific power to regulate immigration, immigration therefore uniquely a 10th Amendment-protected state power issue.
In fact, the Supreme Court has clarified in general that powers not expressly delegated to the feds via the Constitution, the power to regulate immigration in this example, are prohibited to the feds.
”From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added].” —United States v. Butler, 1936.
So Obama actually has no broken federal immigration laws to pardon because the feds don’t have the constitutional authority to make such laws in the first place.
Finally, both Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, Madison generally regarded as the father of the Constitution, had written that immigration is not one of the federal government’s constitutionally delegated powers.
Here’s the related excerpt from Jefferson’s writings.
“4. _Resolved_, That alien friends are under the jurisdiction and protection of the laws of the State wherein they are: that no power over them has been delegated to the United States, nor prohibited to the individual States, distinct from their power over citizens. And it being true as a general principle, and one of the amendments to the Constitution having also declared, that “the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people,” the act of the Congress of the United States, passed on the — day of July, 1798, intituled “An Act concerning aliens,” which assumes powers over alien friends, not delegated by the Constitution, is not law, but is altogether void, and of no force [emphasis added].” —Thomas Jefferson, Draft of the Kentucky Resolutions - October 1798.
And here’s the related excerpt from Madison’s writings.
"That the General Assembly doth particularly protest against the palpable and alarming infractions of the Constitution, in the two late cases of the "Alien and Sedition Acts" passed at the last session of Congress; the first of which exercises a power no where delegated to the federal government, ...…
… the General Assembly doth solemenly appeal to the like dispositions of the other states, in confidence that they will concur with this commonwealth in declaring, as it does hereby declare, that the acts aforesaid, are unconstitutional; and that the necessary and proper measures will be taken by each, for co-operating with this state, in maintaining the Authorities, Rights, and Liberties, referred to the States respectively, or to the people [emphasis added]. ”— James Madison, Draft of the Virginia Resolutions - December 1798.
"Until the people have, by some solemn and authoritative act, annulled or changed the established form, it is binding upon them collectively, as well as individually; and no presumption or even knowledge of their sentiments, can warrant their representatives [the executive, judiciary, or legislature]; in a departure from it prior to such an act." - Alexander Hamilton
You are being Grubered ,LOL
Gee, did little bammy dress them up in white lab coats too?
Oh, right, that was bammycare...
.
Prosecutorial discretion is when a prosecutor decides not to prosecute a particular case because he doesnt think he can win, etc.
If a prosecutor said I am not going to prosecute any cases for a particular crime that is not prosecutorial discretion, it is nullification.
Watch them whine when the GOP president reverses or refuses to extend this policy.
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.