Posted on 02/09/2017 4:01:56 PM PST by Jim Robinson
Vanity Discussion Question: Can the president ignore the court order and continue with his valid executive order?
It appears the president is acting in accordance to his constitutional powers and specifically in accordance to laws regarding immigration and has been challenged and overridden by an unconstitutionally political activist (liberal) court.
If so, can he can he continue with his valid orders controlling the actions of the executive branch? No doubt this would set up a "constitutional crisis" but this is going to happen soon anyway as it's the only way we will ever restore constitutional government, ie, the liberal activist courts will have to be toppled eventually. Why not now while we have a strong president and Republican majorities in both housees of congress?
Just askin'.
Great summary! You need to get this document to President Trump & his team, to implement asap! Get it to KellyAnn Conway! I’m serious. I don’t think that Trump or his team would roll over & capitulate, but nevertheless President Trump needs to do his vaunted counter-punching asap and start NOW. I want to see the libs, progressives, muuuzzies, anarchists, marxists, sh_t the fan! And I want to see their heads popping!
No, that is a trap.
He is the law and order president. He has to follow the law as messed up as it is.
You’re right, I think that President Trump blinked at this rogue Seattle federal district judge, instead of just telling him to STF up, and then ignore him. Now that Jeff Sessions is approved as AG, I hope that Trump & his team stop catering & pandering to the libs & lefties, and come back hard with Trump’s vaunted counter punches!
We know that. The courts are saying, in essence, that black is white.
I heard Jay Sekulow, ACLJ say something to that effect earlier tonight on "Hannity".
Jay Sekulow of the ACLJ said pretty much the same thing earlier tonight on "Hannity".
THIS IS A GIFT TO TRUMP NOW HE CAN IMPEACH THESE JUDGES.
THE CONSTITUTION GIVES THE PRESIDENT WIDE AUTHORITY ON WHO CAN BE BARRED FROM THE COUNTRY ON SAFETY GROUNDS, HOW LONG THE PERIOD, REGARDLESS OF CLASS.
THESE JUDGES AIN’T EQUAL TO A PRESIDENT
THEIR ACTION IS IMPEACHABLE.
Not without provoking a constitutional crisis.
***********************************************************
You appear to be saying that Judges represent the absolute final word in this country and no matter what the Constitution says, no matter past precedent the Court can as it sees fit on any given day impose it’s will on the Nation.
Is that what you believe?
There is nothing in the order regarding persons already present in the US.
Other than the Adminstrative parts, there are only a few "bans" in the whole order:
Section 3 (c) - "... pursuant to section 212(f) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182(f), I hereby proclaim that the immigrant and nonimmigrant entry into the United States of aliens from countries referred to in section 217(a)(12) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1187(a)(12), would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, and I hereby suspend entry into the United States, as immigrants and nonimmigrants, of such persons for 90 days from the date of this order (excluding those foreign nationals traveling on diplomatic visas, North Atlantic Treaty Organization visas, C-2 visas for travel to the United Nations, and G-1, G-2, G-3, and G-4 visas)." Exceptions are specifically allowed for.
Section 5 (a) "The Secretary of State shall suspend the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) for 120 days."
Section 5 (c) "Pursuant to section 212(f) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182(f), I hereby proclaim that the entry of nationals of Syria as refugees is detrimental to the interests of the United States and thus suspend any such entry until such time as I have determined that sufficient changes have been made to the USRAP to ensure that admission of Syrian refugees is consistent with the national interest."
Section 5 (d) "Pursuant to section 212(f) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182(f), I hereby proclaim that the entry of more than 50,000 refugees in fiscal year 2017 would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, and thus suspend any such entry until such time as I determine that additional admissions would be in the national interest."
Section 5(e) actually allows for exceptions.
In each and every case it bars ENTRY. Anyone already IN the US is NOT covered under the EO - IOW, these people will not lose any "right" they already possess. If they leave the country and want to return, then they are subject to the new rules.
Easy solution... put Congress in recess for 1 hour - make judge Gorsuch a “recess appointment:, the reconvene Congress and let them confirm him later through the regular process.
Also, under Congressional authority, ask Congress to expand the SC to 11 Justices, and then pack two more justices on the court. There is NO limit in the Constitution on how many (or Few) justices you can have.
“They” have “their power”, and we have ours.
As one “former president” said, “when they go LOW, We go HIGH”
I think the correct answer is...
Who needs it!!
Yeah; this IS sarcasm!
But it WAS voted on and APPROVED during Clinton's reign.
NOW we are actually going to LEGALLY do it!
Nah...
We just got it BACK!
When; in the course of human events...
Create a new US court circuit that encompasses 1 sq ft of national parkland, and assign misbehaving judges to that circuit. Circuit 13 call it, kind of like file 13...the trash can.
What?
What harm could only 1,000 of these folks per state DO??
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.