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

Skip to comments.

Judge rejects House Democrats' attempt to block border wall
CNN ^ | June 3, 2018 | Katelyn Polantz,

Posted on 06/03/2019 3:36:27 PM PDT by Innovative

A federal judge in Washington on Monday denied a request by House Democrats to block President Donald Trump from transferring funds from appropriated accounts to construct his wall.

Judge Trevor McFadden said the House lacks standing to bring the challenge and also he does not believe the court should step into the fight between the President and Congress.

"The Court declines to take sides in this fight between the House and the President," McFadden wrote.

(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...


TOPICS: Front Page News; News/Current Events; US: Washington
KEYWORDS: 2020election; aliens; birder; border; buildthefence; clintonnonnews; cnn; daca; dnctalkingpoint; dnctalkingpoints; dreamact; dreamers; election2020; federalistsociety; judiciary; katelynpolantz; mediawingofthednc; partisanmediashills; presstitutes; smearmachine; trevormcfadden; trump; wall; washington
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-53 last
To: kvanbrunt2

Thanks!


41 posted on 06/03/2019 6:49:11 PM PDT by Grampa Dave ( Frau Mueller? "What do the Clintons, Obama and their Spygate CIA/FBI/DOJ thugs have on you???????")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Innovative

So does this mean that Congress can still stop the wall, or did the judge say they could not?


42 posted on 06/03/2019 6:51:04 PM PDT by Irish Eyes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Innovative

this is a mistake. We should not recognize judicial rulings in a national emergency situations. I have said that when the decision goes the other way and i say it again when it goes our way.

The congress is the check and balance in emergency declarations and the ED Act gives no role to the judiciary.

You cannot give 200 or so judges the power to stop the response to an emergency.

it is dangerous and rife for abuse of power by a non-elected official.


43 posted on 06/03/2019 7:53:07 PM PDT by morphing libertarian ( Use Comey's Report, Indict Hillary now; build Kate's wall. --- Proud Smelly Walmart Deplorable)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Innovative

Finally!


44 posted on 06/03/2019 7:55:41 PM PDT by EdnaMode
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

Praise God (YHVH)! A judge who has courage and some actual knowledge of USConstitutional law.


45 posted on 06/03/2019 8:09:44 PM PDT by veracious (UN=OIC=Islam ; USAgov may be radically changed, just amend USConstitution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Innovative

Obviously a serious mixup on the part of the judge shopping committee.


46 posted on 06/03/2019 8:13:12 PM PDT by AustinBill (consequence is what makes our choices real)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Innovative
HE'S GOOD LOOKING,TOO!



Also a former cop and deputy sheriff!
47 posted on 06/03/2019 8:14:13 PM PDT by onyx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Innovative

Exactly!

A sane judge saves the day.


48 posted on 06/03/2019 8:22:51 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (Can I get a shout out for the person(s) who donated $2,000.00 from France? Thanks so much! Wow!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee

Excellent


49 posted on 06/04/2019 12:48:19 AM PDT by BTerclinger (MAGA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: morphing libertarian
How is this a mistake? The judge ruled there is no standing, as Congress has other methods of their own to 'remedy' the situation. Also, he said this isn't an issue the courts should be involved in! What part of his ruling do you disagree with?

and also he does not believe the court should step into the fight between the President and Congress.
50 posted on 06/04/2019 7:55:09 AM PDT by Svartalfiar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Svartalfiar

it is good ruling as I said. The problem is that it got onto the judiciary in the first place. Trump has deferred to judges too many times on immigration issues. Immigration has become national defense issue.


51 posted on 06/04/2019 8:58:43 AM PDT by morphing libertarian ( Use Comey's Report, Indict Hillary now; build Kate's wall. --- Proud Smelly Walmart Deplorable)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: TrumpisRight

I was thinking the same thing. This is not Trump’s wall. It’s a wall for all Americans, to protect us from those seeking to illegally enter our country.


52 posted on 06/04/2019 2:55:02 PM PDT by Theo (FReeping since 1998 ... drain the swamp.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Innovative

With a circuit court of appeals, a fully impaneled circuit court of appeals, and SCOTUS. Will there be an interim injunction, pending these appeals?


53 posted on 06/04/2019 6:14:27 PM PDT by Eleutheria5 (If you are not prepared to use force to defend civilization, then be prepared to accept barbarism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-53 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