Posted on 02/16/2018 7:46:10 AM PST by Helicondelta
The Supreme Court will hold a closed-door meeting to decide whether to take up a lower court opinion that blocked the White House plan to end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, a program at the forefront of the debate on illegal immigration.
In an unusual move, the nation's highest court will consider the possibility of reviewing the opinion without a ruling from a federal appeals court
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
Aren’t all their meetings closed door?
With John Roberts on that court I’m not optimistic.
Yes.
I think the meeting is about stopping these Federal Judges from playing their games with immigration.....forever. In other words, once the USSC rules, they cannot challenge it again and again which is what they have done.
Amnesty is a Tax, after all.
“With John Roberts on that court I’m not optimistic.”
I must agree. Kennedy too. They smacked down AZ for enforcing fed law and have shown sympathy for the illegals.
It is NOT the role of the court to jump into a passionate matter like Superman and render an emotional result. Courts are intended to be rational, well thought out matters that follow procedure and reflect on the arguments at hand. Not take a political side. Not kowtow to the emotional whims of the public.
If the court intervenes - they’re taking a political action and declaring their bias.
An illegal obama EO + ONE liberal Federal Judge ruling = NATIONAL IMMIGRATION LAW
I learned that in publik education
I am.
If statements by Trump during the campaign can be used.
Statements from RBG and Sotomayor can be used to compel recusal.
Sotomayer & Pagan & Ginsburg should recluse themselves.
I guess we’ll see if the Deep State feels so strongly about the DACA issue that they’ll play their Roberts BLACKMAIL CARD yet again.
DACA was never legal.
However, the Supreme Court is not above making illegal things legal.
The problem is a couple thousand little generals out there each of whom has the power to shut down the government.
We don’t give that power to Congress or to POTUS.
Why should some tin horn, dictatorial, unelected black robe out in true believer la la land get to shut down anything without the real constitutional powers having to first sign off on it?
Yeah, not a sure thing. Only Thomas, Alito, and Gorsuch can be counted on. I will be surprised if this mess does not have to wind through the lower appellate courts.
NO, IT’S A FINE.....................
Rats never recuse. Rats never resign. Never.
Probably need to see whether to stop or endorse judicial activism. Hopefully the see the problem and stay both rulings.
Activist Judges have created a constitutional crisis that is on the verge of creating a direct threat to the power of the Supreme Court. In other words, the whole game of judicial review is in danger of being permanently exposed. Judicial Review is not a power expressly set forth in the Constitution. The power was grabbed by Justice Marshall in Marbury v. Madison and is allegedly derived by the Court’s sworn duty to uphold the Constitution in Article Six of the Constitution. That would include upholding powers granted to the Executive by the Constitution. Flop sweat time.
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.