Vanity: Can the president ignore the court and continue with his valid executive order?

February 9, 2017 | Jim Robinson

[Republican Wildcat]

I think he’s been playing checkers with this instead of chess. After the initial ruling issuing the stay, instead of appealing, he should have had a trusted team of lawyers study the ruling and the logic (or illogic) used to justify it. Craft a new order in direct response to the logic of the ruling (without directly mentioning it, of course) doing the same thing, specifically site the law that authorizes it, including a full quotation of the same (which should not be necessary), and perhaps review and address any of the criticisms of the original order that may have valid application - for example, someone briefly out of the country legally within the United States where there families still here could be permitted back in after being debriefed as to why they were gone, etc. - that would limit the original order only very narrowly and that was one of the things used as an excuse to block the entire order and all of its applications (that’s absurd, but they did it). Simultaneously instate that new order while fully cancelling the prior order - that would invalidate the pending case and the stay, as that order would no longer exist. They would then be forced to start over again and have to confront a very detailed document invalidated the prior criticisms and demonstrating how flawed the prior ruling was, no news reports showing mothers who would “stranded” away from their families worried they would never see their mother again, etc., and still accomplish exactly the same thing. If another stay is issued, do it all over again. It shouldn’t be necessary, but we’re playing with people who want to play games - it’s time to play some of our own - only ours will actually make sense.

[DiogenesLamp]

Great idea. Then let me ask. Why in the hell has President Trump NOT done it? If this is a solution and he is such a stupendous deal maker with great ideas why has he not stopped the 10,000 current eligible VISA holders in these 7 countries from coming with this order yawl talk about. Sounds simple and a great way to protect the people of America which President Trump has vowed to do.

My guess is this is his reserve option. I think he believes he will win in court, and he knows that if he does this without going through the current process, the left wing media will set up a caterwaul about him ignoring the rule of law, being a dictator, yada yada yada...

I think if it comes down to it, he will exercise this option, but I think he's going to play it out in the courts first. If the Supreme Court shoots him down, then he will probably exercise this nuclear option.

Tell you what my suspicions are. Another deal has been struck. A deal about confirmation of appointees. If President Trump does not put up a good fight against this political hack judge, his confirmations will slide right through. So far since Friday, 5 confirmations have succeeded with Sessions being the biggest.

Could be, but the "deal makers" are probably Republicans. The Democrats will drag their feet no matter what. You are probably right. It is probably our own congressmen imploring him not to push hard on this.

So he gets what he wants in the way of confirmations, and *THEN* he drops the hammer in the foreign embassies!

Win. Win. Consummate Trump.

[fortes fortuna juvat]

Don’t appeal any of these orders until Gorsuch is sworn in.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Gorsuch is a liberal masquerading as another Scalia. Phony as a three dollar bill.

[itsahoot]

Obozo and his group ignored rulings all the time

I remember an announcement after one of those edicts were shut down by the court and the next the press secretary was on TV saying it would not effect what they were doing. I don't recall the issue.

[itsahoot]

It would trigger an impeachment.

B$. It might trigger a call from the loonies on the left for impeachment, but there will be no impeachment.

[Nifster]

They said that about an immigration EO that obozo had issued

[itsahoot]

Time to dust off that old document, the Constitution that is, and abide by its provisions. Simple enough. Case closed.

If only you could get them to read it and have some explain to them what they read.

Remember when Michele Bachman tried to require all incoming house members to the a course on the Constitution. har, har.

[AnotherUnixGeek]

If a president defied a court order, it would lead to contempt of court charges, impeachment, and a full-blown Constitutional crisis. If you think Congressional Republicans will back Trump against a federal court, you’re badly mistaken. Trump will deal with it intelligently, by writing a new EO that will stand up to legal challenge, and he’ll continue to pursue an appeal on the original EO (the ruling by the 9th was nonsense). He will not break the law.

[Almondjoy]

So congress has no power at all? Congress makes the law the Executive Branch enforces it. The Judicial branch interrupts any disputes and where or not it’s constitutional.

If you are arguing standing that’s a different issue. But the Judicial branch has authority over any and all laws that Congress passes.

[HKMk23]

I’ve read the text of the Law, and it seems crystal clear that Congress, in passing this Law, gave The Executive broad discretion and there is NO TRACE in that Law of ANY intent on the part of Congress that the decisions made by The President under the Law should be subject to judicial review.

That whack-job Federal judge in Washington is — and ought to be fully ignored as — legally impotent to rule in this matter. AND, because that is so, the 9th Circuit has no case to rule upon, and Trump is as free as a bird to do as he pleases.

AND it would be BLOODY GOOD if SOMEONE in this Administration would strap on their gonads in time for one of the Sunday shows and THOROUGHLY explain this to the American people.

BUT, whether that happens or not, Trump ought to carry on just as he pleases come Monday morning.

[itsahoot]

If you think Congressional Republicans will back Trump against a federal court, you’re badly mistaken.

I am a little more that skeptical of their motives here myself, but I doubt they would risk it. In any case The President can pardon himself unless we have forgotten all that cr@p that was bandied about with Obama.

He will not break the law.

Why do you think he would be breaking the law? The Judge is the one that broke the law, him and his fellow travelers.

Maybe you would be happier if he just ceased all entries, which he is empowered to do and let them gripe about that.

William Bennett Said it best. He can't win this in the court the court is the problem. He needs to have a different strategy than Jeb did when he let that senile old family court judge kill Terry Schiavo while he just threw his hands up and declared, the court had ruled.

[itsahoot]

It’s only for 90 days

There have already been a few hundred Syrians brought in and the people South of the boarder get news too.

[Elsie]

The federal courts will dictate that it unconstitutional to build it.

I'd forgotten that the wall IS mentioned in the Constitution; right after the paragraph about abortion.

[Elsie]

The other two branches of government have not fought back in any significant way in my lifetime.

One of them has NOW!

[Elsie]

Let us just post a picture without knowing HTML.

Until then; you'll have to do it THIS way....

---

---

<img src=""> ain't all that hard!

 

 

---

---

 

Merely paste the address ( like THIS one) http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc70/tpjdmm/knock-knock.gif

 

between the QUOTES, and you're good to go!

 

 

<img src="">

 

Here's how it works:  <img src="http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc70/tpjdmm/knock-knock.gif">

 

giving you...

 

 

 

 

 

If you want your cursor to display a message when on the picture, than add THIS

 title="" between the img and the src text with your messge inside the quotes like this:

 

<img  title="Here's Johnny!" src="http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc70/tpjdmm/knock-knock.gif">

 

...or at the end....

 

<img  src="http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc70/tpjdmm/knock-knock.gif" title="Here's Johnny!">

 

 

[Elsie]

We should all hate Facebook for their censorship.

Why?

It's their toy and we merely get to play with it the way they will let us.

[eartick]

So he gets what he wants in the way of confirmations, and *THEN* he drops the hammer in the foreign embassies! Win. Win. Consummate Trump.

WHAT??? And another possible terrorist that poison the water supply to your city sneaks in or blows up the main power station to your grid.

Yea, Consummate President Trump and the People lose as always.

Some things never change. Different turd in the shitter

[Nuc 1.1]

The real evil of the TRO is granting illegitimate standing to states so the federal courts can become involved protecting illegal democrat invaders. The illegal aliens and their dimocrat supporters intend to stop enforcement of immigration law using the marxist judges they put in place.

[Diggity]

He could ignore it. He could also detain anyone coming into the country from those countries until they were vetted, assuming we had the facilities to hold them for the month or so it would take.

If vetted he could allow entry, if not then simply send them back.

[JerseyDvl]

My point is that it will take far longer to get through the courts than to develop a vetting system. Fast track the vetting guidelines and make them extra stringent, going into affect...NOW!