Posted on 02/10/2014 1:08:50 PM PST by jazusamo
Attorney General Eric Holder couldn't explain to a Congressional Committee the constitutional basis for executive orders such as President Obama's delay of the employer mandate because he hasn't read the legal analysis -- or at least, hasn't seen it in a long time.
"I'll be honest with you, I have not seen -- I don't remember looking at or having seen the analysis in some time, so I'm not sure where along the spectrum that would come," Holder replied to Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, when Lee asked him to explain the nature of Obama's constitutional power to delay the mandate.
Sen Lee had based his question on a standard legal test, first described by US Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson, who said the president's authority to issue executive orders is strongest when he does so with the backing of Congress (category one), more dubious when he issues an order pertaining to a topic on which Congress has not passed a law (category two), and weakest when the executive order is "incompatible with a congressional command" (category three), to use Lee's paraphrase.....more at washingtonexaminer.com ...
Jesus has alot of splaining to do on this one.
This is BS!!!!they’re just saying that to get our hopes up!!!
Actually they still need 60 votes for SCOTUS nomination!!!
Really....which list of democrats are you looking at!!!
Don't forget Holder's major role in the wee hours government kidnapping in Miami and the subsequent deportation back to Cuba of little Elian Gonzalez!
I suppose Holder and the 'rats are very gung-ho about enforcing immigration laws against Cuban refugees fleeing Castro, but quite the opposite about enforcement against "undocumented" Mexican riffraff.
Holder is staying just long enough to try and FIX the 2014 Elections. Anything can still happen. These people are EVIL and BO will pardon everyone, including himself.
He has nothing to fear from republicans.
Of course it is...NEVER forget the Marxist axiom
"The ends justify the means"
This has been the the MO of this lawless administration from day one...
Not sure if your suggestion that Obama puts Holder on the SCOTUS is viable even for democrats...there is a LOT of baggage there...
But certainly, there is an agenda here...there always is...
Depends on who will replace him...that person could be 10x worse than Holder....scary thought.
Obama is arrogant and lawless enough to recess appoint Holder to SCOTUS, I wouldn’t put it past him.
I’ve little doubt that you’re right, especially being a lame duck president. It would sure tick off a lot of people and probably some DemocRats.
If it happened Holder would have a short stay at SCOTUS, he’d still have to be confirmed and can you imagine the uproar? :-)
Thanks jazusamo.
I think Holder would be a lock for confirmation.
For the same reasons Obama is a lock not to be impeached.
The criminal degenerate should be in prison.
I doubt it, especially if the filibuster rule isn’t changed to include SCOTUS nominees.
My money’s on space on SCOTUS
Imagine this:
Tommorrow Obama recess appoints Holder to replace Ginsburg, and Harry Reid refuses to hold confirmation hearings. So Holder stays on the court unconfirmed. The Republicans take the Senate in November and leave Holder in place, claiming they will hold confirmation hearings at a future date. A Republican wins the Presidency in 2016. In 2017 the Republican Senate decides to hold confirmation hearings for Holder. He is voted down and has to vacate the court. The new President nominates his replacement and the Senate confirms!
BONUS Question:
Who is the new President and who does he nominate to replace Holder?
B^)
“Get Whitey” Holder is a criminal THUG.
LOL!!
I don’t know the answer to either and shudder to think about it.
We need a Conservative in the WH.
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.