Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: Signalman
"The U.S. Constitution clearly allows the president to block any individuals from entering the country that he deems to be a threat to national security."

The Constitution has no such clause. Congress has authority over immigration, and Congress has written a law giving the President such authority.

"Where does it state, in the Constitution, that a federal judge can override the president in this matter?"

In those sections that make the Constitution the supreme law of the land, and the courts the judge of the law. The law includes the Constitution. Presidents are subject to the law too.

There are ways to change the law if we don't like the way the courts interpret it. There is no provision for ignoring the courts.

"Trump should carry on and implement the E.O. What is anyone going to do about it? Impeachment? It takes 2/3 of the Senate to convict and the Dems don't have the vote."

Yes, and that's exactly what you'd see if Trump were that foolish. Presidents do not get to defy the law. We did not elect a king. The freepers I see suggesting such nonsense need to think a little harder. What would they have done had Obama done what they say Trump should do? What would they do when the next Democratic President followed the precedent he would set?

You would see impeachment, and you'd see Republicans supporting it.

29 posted on 03/15/2017 9:36:13 PM PDT by mlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: mlo

“We did not elect a king. “

We didn’t elect this judge, either.


35 posted on 03/15/2017 9:59:37 PM PDT by Flash Bazbeaux
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies ]

To: mlo

The constitution does not make courts the sole arbiter of what the constitution means. The court usurped that power. At some point a president, perhaps this one, will have to go full Andy Jackson. Otherwise we do not have three co-equal branches of government.


39 posted on 03/15/2017 10:25:40 PM PDT by SoCal Pubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies ]

To: mlo

Why can’t Trump use a “Presidential Memorandum” instead of an EO?

That’s what Obama did...


46 posted on 03/15/2017 11:39:36 PM PDT by homegroan (New to the Beltway: The TrumpTrap - guaranteed to TRAP Fake News -AND proudly Made in the USA!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies ]

To: mlo

“In those sections that make the Constitution the supreme law of the land, and the courts the judge of the law. The law includes the Constitution. Presidents are subject to the law too.”

Right. After nine years of a bloody war the Founders set up a system that allows unelected judges to be the final arbiter of what is or is not constitutional. The founders wanted to establish the same system of arbitrary tyranny they had just beat on the battlefield, right?

Go ahead and name and quote the Founders who argued for judicial supremacy over the legislative and executive branches.


51 posted on 03/16/2017 7:33:00 AM PDT by sergeantdave (Cats are like potato chips - you can't have just one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


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