There’s no “let” here. Since when does the judiciary have any review authority over ending an EO? If a President can put in any EO another one can end it.
Agree. No way SCOTUS is going to prevent a President from rescinding an EO.
If they rule that President “We Like” can implement de facto legislation by fiat but prevent President “We Don’t Like” from doing the same (rescinding an EO is basically the same as implementing the opposite), they’ve pretty much put themselves out of business.
If DACA can’t be turned off, what legal difference is there from President “We Like” implementing an EO stating that any judicial ruling he doesn’t agree with is null and void?
Agree. No way SCOTUS is going to prevent a President from rescinding an EO.
If they rule that President “We Like” can implement de facto legislation by fiat but prevent President “We Don’t Like” from doing the same (rescinding an EO is basically the same as implementing the opposite), they’ve pretty much put themselves out of business.
If DACA can’t be turned off, what legal difference is there from President “We Like” implementing an EO stating that any judicial ruling he doesn’t agree with is null and void?
The Swamp Washington is pretending that it's an executive order.
Right off the bat. It wasn’t a fricking EO! It was a memo. A memo about changing enforcement by Janet Napolitano when she was head of DHS.
Not only that, Obama’s DACA was illegal.