Posted on 04/20/2018 7:18:21 AM PDT by Kalamata
[The judges said in the ruling that their role was not to “assess the optimal immigration policies for our country.” ]
But they will anyway.
[Instead, the panel said its ruling aims to protect “one of the bedrock principles of our nation, the protection of which transcends political party affiliation and rests at the heart of our system of government—the separation of powers.”]
What a laugh. The Judiciary runs the country.
And who checks their power?
Well, if we had an Attorney General who actually could get up in the morning and find both of his feet at the end of his legs they might not be pulling this crap.
Corrupt libspeak:
Court denies Trump’s denial of law deniers!
But it was OK to withhold federal money for highways if the Federal speed limits were not implemented or school lunch money from schools that did not adopt Michele Obama’s menus. It is time for SCOTUS to put an end to these “Resistance” judges who ignore the law and legislate from the bench.
BS! BS! BS!
It is established that the executive office EXECUTES the law and its utter BS that this same judiciary had no problem when Obama used the same threats to cajole states into accepting Obamacare or enacting his disastrous school policies. Never mind the embezzlement of funds to his pet projects.
Now, suddenly, the executive office must spend the money in the most “liberal” interpretation of the law as defined by these political judges?!
BS!
States should now file a volley of lawsuits to demand federal funds without any riders - highway speed limits, gun control, etc.
Make the judiciary stand by their word
It was AG Sessions that was behind the initiative to cut funding for sanctuary states and cities. What else would you have him do?
Its NOT a law so ignoring it is not breaking a law.
The procedure should involve the treasurer coming to the governor with the news that the money didn’t show up. The court battles then begin in very protracted earnest.
Just don’t pay and then let them worry about collecting.
Judges love a little Dictatorship
>>It is time for SCOTUS to put an end to these “Resistance” judges who ignore the law and legislate from the bench.
************************************************************
Will SCOTUS restore our Republic? Gor-Sucks lastest vote dims hope.
A nationwide injunction issued by a district court judge.
If a lowly district judge can issue a ruling that pertains outside his jurisdiction, what exactly is the rationale for district courts and circuit courts?
The judge is wrong. Yes the power of the purse belongs to Congress to appropriate money. The president is not required to spend money they appropriate
Good question.
Slow walk and audit the grants until they go away.
Prosecute every misdeed.
Honestly, the depth of thought and analysis at FR was better before the purges. It seems that we are mostly left with under informed knee jerk reactionaries.
Though I still appreciate your thoughtful postings.
Arguable. The president also cannot impound funds.
Just as the Founders envisioned...
This was actually the plan if Felonia von Pantsuit had been elected.
The little federal judge-presidents wouldn't have gainsaid Herself, of course - but "things" would have been happening in a packed Supreme Court, like overturning Heller and other unsavory stuff, and the lower courts would have been jamming all kinds of cr@p up our keesters, like wide-open borders.
However, the executition rate can be decreased administratively at the agency level.
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.