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

Skip to comments.

The Federal Government’s Immigration Showdown: SCOTUS Will Decide
LAW STREET ^ | 1/22/2016 | Ajla Glavasevic

Posted on 01/23/2016 11:15:43 AM PST by Elderberry

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-33 next last

1 posted on 01/23/2016 11:15:43 AM PST by Elderberry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Elderberry

The president did not faithfully execute the law that says Congress must have a say when its laws are changed.

Nothing hard about that.


2 posted on 01/23/2016 11:20:59 AM PST by xzins (Have YOU Donated to the Freep-a-Thon? https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Elderberry

It’s a tax! < /Roberts >


3 posted on 01/23/2016 11:24:15 AM PST by Extremely Extreme Extremist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

If you feel like it, join in the Free Republic Caucus (each day)

The more who participate, the louder the voice on Free Republic is revealed to be.

Go to the Caucus and express your support for one of the candidates.

Be sure to read the rules and follow them so your candidate will benefit from your vote.

Those who have been coming by, good job.  I appreciate your participation.

Thank you.


LINK to Caucus 01/23/2016

The results are linked there at the bottom of the top of thread post.

Folks, if you haven't already and can manage it now, please support the FReepathon.  Thank you.  LINK

We've very lucky to have this forum where we can debate the issues of the day.

4 posted on 01/23/2016 11:25:59 AM PST by DoughtyOne (Free Republic Caucus: vote daily / watch for the thread / Starts 01/20 midnight to midnight EDST)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Elderberry

When is the decision scheduled?


5 posted on 01/23/2016 11:26:50 AM PST by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Elderberry

I look forward to another condescending lecture about how the US Constitution that empowers all these guys to impose their unpopular opinions on us, doesn’t apply to them. :)


6 posted on 01/23/2016 11:27:32 AM PST by Tzimisce
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Elderberry

Does that mean the SOCUS will take the law into their own hands?


7 posted on 01/23/2016 11:28:38 AM PST by Parmy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
It’s a tax! [ /Roberts ]

Roberts should just resign after the election. He decided and authored the most cynical Supreme Court Decision since Taney's Dread Scott decision, and nothing he can do can save his reputation at this point.

8 posted on 01/23/2016 11:29:13 AM PST by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Elderberry

Obama’s executive lawlessness has been smacked down 12 times by the Supreme Court. Let’s hope this is lucky 13.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/381302/obama-suffers-12th-unanimous-defeat-supreme-court-joel-gehrk


9 posted on 01/23/2016 11:30:05 AM PST by joshua c (Please dont feed the liberals)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

\They will have it by June this year.


10 posted on 01/23/2016 11:32:19 AM PST by ColdOne (I miss my poochie... Tasha 2000~3/14/11 HillaryForPrison2016)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Elderberry

Justice Obama, coming to a Supreme Court near you - if a democrat is elected.


11 posted on 01/23/2016 11:34:38 AM PST by CMB_polarization
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xzins
SCOTUS can craft new doctrine. If a law is not enforced uniformly, that is a violation of equial protecytion, therefore Obama is well within his discretion to avoid all enforcement of the law.

I can see a Jackson moment, if it goes the other way. "SCOTUS has rendered its decision, now let's see them enforce it."

SCOTUS had a chance to rule on Obama's qualification, and denied cert. They enabled this. Courts say ... Dual Citizens are NBCs

12 posted on 01/23/2016 11:36:09 AM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: xzins

A government against the people.


13 posted on 01/23/2016 11:37:15 AM PST by conservativeimage (I won't go underground. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wema3CNqzvg)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

The provisions of current law about access to social security are extremely specific. Any change MUST go to Congress for their action. It is as clear as clear can be.


14 posted on 01/23/2016 11:39:42 AM PST by xzins (Have YOU Donated to the Freep-a-Thon? https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Elderberry

It will be SCOTUs versus the American people.

Again.


15 posted on 01/23/2016 11:39:54 AM PST by BenLurkin (The above is not a statement of fact. It is either satire or opinion. Or both.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xzins
"The president did not faithfully execute the law that says Congress must have a say when its laws are changed."

SCOTUS is going to kill this 5-4 without a lot of comment or even impacting current law. And then bobo can claim how the rule of law is against him personally because he black or whatever, while he's picking out new carpet for his Hawaii mansion...

16 posted on 01/23/2016 11:44:53 AM PST by StAnDeliver (Own it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Elderberry
It would force millions of people, subject to removal but not removal priorities, to continue living in the U.S., working off the books or not working at all, potentially creating a burden on society in the long run

It would do no such thing. They are free to leave anytime. No one is forcing them to stay.

They are not victims but rather aggressors. They came here through dint of fraud and violence.

What is unprecedented here is the hostility of the "Federal" government against the States that created it. This "administration" and its small, militant core group of operatives are simply attempting to import an alien army to do their bidding - threaten the citizenry, and ultimately aid in a takeover of the citizen's property, namely the country.

That is all that is going on here, and the individuals in the "Federal" government should be prosecuted by the Congress for their Treason.

That's what aiding and abetting Invasion is, after all.

17 posted on 01/23/2016 11:46:48 AM PST by Regulator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: StAnDeliver

They don’t rule until June, if I understand correctly.

That leaves him 7 months or so.


18 posted on 01/23/2016 11:47:35 AM PST by xzins (Have YOU Donated to the Freep-a-Thon? https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Elderberry

“A major point of contention for the states is that the President allegedly worked to circumvent Congressional authority and undermined the importance of the notice-and-comment process pursuant to administrative law. Notice-and-comment is an informal rule-making process, codified in the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) under § 553. It requires the agency proposing the rule to publish its proposal in the Federal Register and grant opponents or supporters of the proposed rule to comment, amend, present data and evidence for or against, and generally speaking, participate in the development of a newly proposed rule. “

If he’d followed the law he could have done what he wanted since congress refuses to adequately fund immigration enforcement.
But he didn’t.


19 posted on 01/23/2016 11:47:42 AM PST by mrsmith (Dumb sluts: Lifeblood of the Media, Backbone of the Democrat/RINO Party!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xzins
Nothing that goes to SCOTUS is crystal clear. They can and do make things up.

I have to admit that I don't know the nitty gritty details of this particular "take care" challenge, other than Obama is facilitating alien invasion by action and inaction. If Congress doesn't want the US to be invaded, it can remove the president, and put one in who will do the job. SCOTUS has, more than once, told Congress that the remedy is in their hands. IOW, it may find that the president isn't taking care, but it (SCOTUS) has no power to order a remedy.

20 posted on 01/23/2016 11:48:18 AM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-33 next 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