Posted on 05/28/2015 6:13:10 PM PDT by cotton1706
Barack Obama’s bad week just got even worse, with a one-two gut-punch against the president’s executive amnesty for illegal immigrants. Tuesday’s federal appeals court ruling upholding the temporary block of Obama’s executive order has now been followed by a new poll showing an increasing number of Americans lining up against an overreaching president’s unilateral action.
As Western Journalism reported yesterday, Obama’s effort to defer deportation and grant certain citizenship rights to millions of illegal immigrants was dealt a stunning setback. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit kept in place a Texas judge’s block on the executive order, marking the second major legal setback for an administration that was bypassing the Congress and charging ahead on its highly controversial program to make sure as many as 5 million illegals are allowed to stay in the U.S. legally.
snip
Now, on top of the judicial problems for Obama’s plan to welcome millions of illegals to America with rights that could see them become a powerful Democrat voting bloc, there’s a big popularity problem for the president and his insistence on pushing forward with amnesty. Results of a new poll just released by Rasmussen Reports pile worse news on top of bad for Obama. More and more likely voters say they oppose Obama’s executive action on amnesty and believe that he has exceeded his authority in trying to impose his will on the American people.
(Excerpt) Read more at westernjournalism.com ...
Poor Republican Establishment! Their talking points are crumbling!
In fairness many people think these rulings have been on the merits and that the courts have ruled against his amnesty-which isn’t the case.
But he who lives by the low-information-voter... LOL!
Couldn’t happen to a more deserving fellow.
That's not completely true here. In order to obtain a preliminary injunction one must show "a substantial probability of success on the merits". For a preliminary injunction on a question of constitutionality this essentially amounts to a ruling on the merits. Since at a trial there will be no new factual evidence to change the analysis and the law won't change between now and then, there would be no basis to change the ruling. A District Court and a Circuit (appellate) Court have found, after the issue was fully briefed, that there's a substantial probability the plaintiff's will prevail on their claim that Obama's acts are unconstitutional. I don't envision any scenario where that ruling will change after a trial. Neither does Obama which is why he's now slow walking the case to save some face. He sees the writing on the wall.
He don’t care. he’s more flexible now.
He will continue to do what he wants, thumbing his nose as those who try to use the courts to stop him. You will have to haul him out in handcuffs to get him to stop.
Unfortunately for us all SCOTUS has no ability to force the president to do anything.....it is the old ‘you and what army?” dilemmma
It doesn’t matter. They’re coming in droves, and they will continue top come, court battle be damned.
The court battle is a deceptive sham, and he knows it.
IMO, the best strategy the Republican nominee and Republican Party can use in 2016 is to tie Barack Obama around Hillary’s neck. See my tagline.
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.