Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

POTUS says he’ll have a ‘scary’ amount of power if Supreme Court doesn’t overturn DACA
The National Sentinel ^ | 1/2/19 | USA Features

Posted on 01/02/2019 12:28:18 PM PST by SleeperCatcher

President Donald Trump on Wednesday said that should the U.S. Supreme Court rule that the Obama-era Deferred Action on Childhood Arrivals (DACA) is legal and can’t be dismantled by executive order, then he will have inherited a “scary” amount of power.

“If the Supreme Court rules that President Obama was wrong, which they should because… by the way, if he was right, then I’ve been given tremendous power,” Trump told reporters at the White House. “Can you imagine me having that power? Wouldn’t that be scary?”

(Excerpt) Read more at thenationalsentinel.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: daca; donaldtrump; dsj02; obama; potus; supremecourt; trump; trumpillegals
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-32 last
To: SleeperCatcher

I think all Americans should have at least 85 years to decide if they actually want to pay income tax.

Perhaps Trump might agree with me.


21 posted on 01/02/2019 1:15:15 PM PST by Brian Griffin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lurkinanloomin

It gets worse. DACA wasn’t even an EO, it was just a memo.


22 posted on 01/02/2019 1:15:42 PM PST by erkelly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: erkelly

That’s right. It was a memo to Jeh Johnson at DHS. I don’t think Obama even signed the memo.


23 posted on 01/02/2019 1:21:05 PM PST by Gahanna Bob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMind

“Originally, he repealed it and that was undone.”

That didn’t happen: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/search?conditions%5Bpublication_date%5D%5Bgte%5D=01%2F01%2F2017&conditions%5Bterm%5D=DACA


24 posted on 01/02/2019 1:23:40 PM PST by NobleFree ("law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Hemingway's Ghost

“If you’re frighted of what any POTUS may do, maybe think of how much power should be invested in the Executive branch in the first place?”


Long ago I heard someone state wisdom that is both succinct and utterly true regarding this matter:

“Think about the power that you want vested in someone you like and admire...and then think of that exact same power vested in your worst political enemy. If you’re still comfortable with it, then vest that power. If not, then you shouldn’t be vesting that power in the first place.”


25 posted on 01/02/2019 1:31:28 PM PST by Ancesthntr ("The right to buy weapons is the right to be free." A. E. van Vogt, The Weapons Shops of Isher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Trump20162020

Roberts is a full blown lawless liberal. He orders his toilet paper with the constitution printed on it.


26 posted on 01/02/2019 1:35:21 PM PST by Revel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Pete Dovgan
this demonstrates how badly the Democrats were willing to subvert the Republic for their own purposes, and how dangerous that activity was.

They are no longer "Democrats". They are MARXISTS and should be identified as such, always.

27 posted on 01/02/2019 1:42:23 PM PST by Don Corleone (Nothing makes the delusional more furious than truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: SleeperCatcher

There he goes - threatening the Obama Judges again!


28 posted on 01/02/2019 2:04:50 PM PST by Gritty (Illegals voting and Democrat voter fraud are not problems to liberals.They are solutions.-KSchlicter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SleeperCatcher

I’m on the side our government gave DACA to the folks, allowed them to attend our schools and join our military. It would be wrong now to take rhat away. I promote a pathway to citizenship for DACA but end all the other liberal policies affecting imigration. PDJT needs to get on TV and promote this with the deal of $25 billion over the next 5 years for border security. The people would support that.


29 posted on 01/02/2019 2:50:00 PM PST by Java4Jay (The evils of government are directly proportional to the tolerance of the people.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Revel
Roberts is a full blown lawless liberal. He orders his toilet paper with the constitution printed on it.

Ah yes, along with a little lilac vegetal, does Precious John.

30 posted on 01/02/2019 9:09:55 PM PST by Bedford Forrest (Roger, Contact, Judy, Out. Fox One. Splash one.<I>)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: SleeperCatcher

One of the reasons I love Trump - he points out that which the enemy wants to keep hidden and tells them if they win, he wins even bigger....


31 posted on 01/03/2019 2:55:10 AM PST by trebb (Put your money where your mouth is - or be deemed "empty hot air worthless")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SleeperCatcher
Four courts have stated that President Trump has the authority to end DACA as a policy decision ... the ball's in his court.

Regents of the University of California v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security : "To be clear: we do not hold that DACA could not be rescinded as an exercise of Executive Branch discretion. We hold only that here, where the Executive did not make a discretionary choice to end DACA—but rather acted based on an erroneous view of what the law required—the rescission was arbitrary and capricious under settled law. The government is, as always, free to reexamine its policy choices"

Napolitano v DHS: "All agree that a new administration is entitled to replace old policies with new policies [...] the new administration didn’t terminate DACA on policy grounds. It terminated DACA over a point of law, a pithy conclusion that the agency had exceeded its statutory and constitutional authority."

Batalla Vidal v. Nielsen: "Defendants indisputably can end the DACA program. [...] The question before the court is thus not whether Defendants could end the DACA program, but whether they offered legally adequate reasons for doing so. Based on its review of the record before it, the court concludes that Defendants have not done so. First, the decision to end the DACA program appears to rest exclusively on a legal conclusion that the program was unconstitutional and violated the APA and INA."

NAACP v. Trump: "while immigration policies are generally “so exclusively entrusted to the political branches of government as to be largely immune from judicial inquiry or interference,” there are good reasons to scrutinize a policy more carefully when it is based solely on an agency’s reading of domestic statutory law."

32 posted on 01/04/2019 12:14:29 PM PST by NobleFree ("law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-32 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson