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


1 posted on 02/09/2014 8:16:49 AM PST by Rusty0604
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-23 next last
To: Rusty0604

The three branches, any more, are in collusion in seeking vastly expanded federal powers. Which leaves it to We the People to vote out those who pursue such.


2 posted on 02/09/2014 8:20:25 AM PST by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Rusty0604

“When a president delays or exempts people from a law — so-called benevolent suspensions — who has standing to sue him? Generally, no one”

How about the people who must follow that law when others subject to its verbage are simple excused from following it? This troglodyte argues that the president can simply wave his hand and exempt his friends from income taxes,, and that those who must still pay cannot sue?


3 posted on 02/09/2014 8:21:54 AM PST by DesertRhino (I was standing with a rifle, waiting for soviet paratroopers, but communists just ran for office.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Rusty0604

Partisanship trumps constitutional principles.

No kidding it’s been going on for years now time to change it by the vote.


4 posted on 02/09/2014 8:22:07 AM PST by Vaduz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Rusty0604
Richard Nixon resigned after being impeached for obstructing an investigation into the Watergate break-in, and using the IRS and other executive agencies to target political opponents.

HUH?

5 posted on 02/09/2014 8:24:04 AM PST by missnry (The truth will set you free ... and drive liberals crazy!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Rusty0604
There is only one remedy for a lawless occupant of our White House, and it's in the hands of an equally lawless group:

The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.

9 posted on 02/09/2014 8:29:45 AM PST by Pollster1 ("Shall not be infringed" is unambiguous.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Rusty0604
Citizens can’t file generic lawsuits to enforce the Constitution;

Yes, they can.

Writ of Mandamus: (Latin: "we command") -- A writ or order that is issued from a court of superior jurisdiction that commands an inferior tribunal, corporation, Municipal Corporation, or individual to perform, or refrain from performing, a particular act, the performance or omission of which is required by law as an obligation.

The Supreme Court can issue a writ compelling the chief executive to carry out the duties for which he was elected. The citizens would first have to petition the Court, then the Court would have to agree to issue the writ.

But if this is a nation of laws, then the highest authority in the land (second only to The People) is the Judiciary. In the instance of an administration as lawless as this one, it falls on the Supreme Court to act as the check against untrammeled executive authority. If that fails, we are forced to our final resort.

11 posted on 02/09/2014 8:35:28 AM PST by IronJack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Rusty0604

12 posted on 02/09/2014 8:36:43 AM PST by Travis McGee (www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Rusty0604
When it comes to the law; we have jury nullification.
It looks now like we have Presidential nullification. -Tom
14 posted on 02/09/2014 8:41:52 AM PST by Capt. Tom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Rusty0604

There is the Federal Family, then there is the rest of us great unwashed.


15 posted on 02/09/2014 8:42:25 AM PST by TADSLOS (The Event Horizon has come and gone. Buckle up and hang on.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Rusty0604
impeach or utilize the 2nd amendment, our founders were clear on why and when either should be exercised
18 posted on 02/09/2014 8:59:57 AM PST by drypowder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Rusty0604

The House of Representatives, which is within the Legislative Branch, constitutionally controls the purse strings of government. That’s how the Executive and Judicial Branches can be kept in check. Unfortunately, a majority of the current crop of representatives don’t seem to have the gravitas or desire to use the power granted them by the Constitution.


19 posted on 02/09/2014 9:10:56 AM PST by lakecumberlandvet (Appeasement never works.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Rusty0604

.


20 posted on 02/09/2014 9:14:33 AM PST by skinkinthegrass (The end move in politics is always to pick up a gun..0'Caligula / 0'Reid / 0'Pelosi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Rusty0604

Impeach the little islamist and get it over with.


21 posted on 02/09/2014 9:20:16 AM PST by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Rusty0604

As usual, the thread is lost in the weeds pontificating over tangential issues.

The cure to executive orders not allowed under the Constitution and to executive orders plainly in defiance of laws passed by the congress, is for the house to get some guts and deny or withdraw funding.

That simple.

Except that it requires the ruling class to put country over personal gain. That is the really hard part.


22 posted on 02/09/2014 9:21:25 AM PST by old curmudgeon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Rusty0604; Jacquerie

From the article:
Even when a congressional majority agrees with the president and passes a law the president signs, there’s little confidence he will faithfully execute the law as written. Why pass comprehensive immigration reform, for example, if it includes tight border security or deportation measures with which the president disagrees and may ignore?

LIMBAUGH: Constitutional Crisis Is VERY REAL
http://dailyrushbo.com/limbaugh-constitutional-crisis-is-very-real/

Video – 7 Minutes
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pipAPPvzS3E

If the chartered body in our government that makes the law decides not to because they don’t think that it’ll matter because the executive branch will just ignore it, I mean that’s a breach of serious proportion. That is a constitutional challenge and crisis that is very real, that nobody apparently has the courage to do anything about, because of the president’s race.


24 posted on 02/09/2014 9:24:18 AM PST by Whenifhow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Rusty0604

The power of the purse is the biggest power of government and it resides largely in the House. Unfortunately, the House has abrogated much of their power through entitlements language that prohibits the Congress from unfunding this vote buying. But, the House still has power of discretionary spending and this money is used to fund the Executive Branch. The House can and should attack these criminals where it hurts most, in the accounts that they use to enjoy their many perks at public expense. Airplanes - gone. Limousines - gone. White House entertainments - gone.

The list of possibilities is endless. Reduce the budgets of the EPA, HHS, DOL, the IRS, DOJ, and all of the other Obama Crime Family operations. They will squeal like stuck pigs of course, but it will be such a sweet sound.


27 posted on 02/09/2014 9:36:17 AM PST by centurion316
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Rusty0604

I suspect this was first discussed by nobama’s goons and handlers two years ago.

They would not have tried this if they thought Congress or the courts could prevail.

Impeachment is a remedy. But:

- Probably won’t happen because of the race card.

- The House could impeach nobama but the Senate, as presently constructed, would not convict, leaving nobama to continue his lawless ways.


28 posted on 02/09/2014 9:38:02 AM PST by upchuck (Stop this abuse now! Get behind Convention of States: http://bit.ly/1ak1Iz9)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Rusty0604
Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes...

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future

29 posted on 02/09/2014 9:47:24 AM PST by Focault's Pendulum (I live in NJ....' Nuff said!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Rusty0604

Impeach and remove


31 posted on 02/09/2014 9:49:35 AM PST by morphing libertarian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Rusty0604
James Iredell was instrumental in ratification efforts in the State of North Carolina on behalf of the 1787 Constitution. President Washington appointed him to the first Supreme Court, where he served for a decade.
"The only real security of liberty, in any country, is the jealousy and circumspection of the people themselves. Let them be watchful over their rulers. Should they find a combination against their liberties, and all other methods appear insufficient to preserve them, they have, thank God, an ultimate remedy. That power which created the government can destroy it. Should the government, on trial, be found to want amendments, those amendments can be made in a regular method, in a mode prescribed by the Constitution itself [...]. We have [this] watchfulness of the people, which I hope will never be found wanting." - James Iredell - Elliot, 4:130

His is an interesting story, available here.

(Excerpted portions below)
"When the Philadelphia Convention of 1787 proposed the federal Constitution, Iredell was its foremost advocate in North Carolina. He inaugurated the first public movement in the state in favor of the document and wrote extensively in hopes of creating a new government.

"In particular, he responded to Virginia’s George Mason’s eleven objections to the Constitution and gained national attention in doing so. A Norfolk printer, for example, shelved other political tracts in 1788 to publish Iredell’s “Answers.” The essay preceded 49 of the 85 essays that constitute the Federalist Papers and appears to have been widely distributed.

. . . .

"When North Carolina finally ratified the document at its second convention (1789), Iredell was widely considered the intellectual general of the Federalists’ victory.

"For Iredell’s ratification efforts, President George Washington rewarded the North Carolinian with an appointment to the original U.S. Supreme Court, where he served for almost a decade. . . . During his tenure on the Supreme Court, Iredell closely dealt with Presidents Washington and John Adams and offered vigorous and partisan support for their administrations. He also chronicled important events and personalities."

Sources:
Donna Kelly and Lang Baradell, The Papers of James Iredell, Vol. III, 1784-1789 (Raleigh, 2003); Don Higginbothom, ed., The Papers of James Iredell 2 Vols. (Raleigh, 1976); Griffith J. McRee, ed., Life and Correspondence of James Iredell, 2 Vols. (New York, 1857-58); Willis P. Whichard, Justice James Iredell (Durham, 2000).
By Willis P. Whichard, Former Associate Justice of the North Carolina Supreme Court (1986-1998) and former Dean of Campbell University School of Law (1999-2006)


32 posted on 02/09/2014 10:13:07 AM PST by loveliberty2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-23 next last

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