Posted on 01/23/2024 2:20:00 PM PST by blueyon
BREAKING REPORT: ⚠️ Texas National Guard DEFIES SUPREME COURT RULING, installs more razor wire and barriers at Shelby Park in Eagle Pass Texas..
DEVELOPING..(video at link)
Biden has defied their ruling on forgiving student loans.
No, you don't! Few will really come to their aid should it get ugly for real.
If the FBI can ignore a court order to turn over Seth Rich’s laptop. If Biden can ignore the Supremes on Student loans. If Colorado can ignore the Supremes on the “bake the cake” rulings....
Then Texas is allowed to ignore a court also.
As reported by fake news media, the “emergency order” allowed the Feds to remove wire. I did not see any mention of an order not to emplace any more wire.
Way to go Texas!
_________________
An obvious reality regarding the SC ruling is that it doesn’t order the Feds to cut the razor wire and quite frankly it would be imbecilic for the Feds to do so, but such is the Biden Administration.
They are barred from the entire park. The wire is along the river. They cannot approach it except from water.
I hope the FBI rolls into Texas so the Texas National Guard can show them some Texas toughness and kick them out of Texas.
1. Article IV Section 4
ArtIV.S4.1 Historical Background on Guarantee of Republican Form of Government
Article IV, Section 4: The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of , and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence. Article IV, Section 4 is generally. . .
Article IV, Section 4: The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.
Article IV, Section 4 is generally known as the Guarantee Clause.1 Through its terms, the United States makes three related assurances to the states: (1) a guarantee of a republican form of government; (2) protection against foreign invasion; and (3) upon request by the state, protection against internal insurrection or rebellion.2 An early version of the Guarantee Clause was among the resolutions of the Virginia Plan introduced at the Constitutional Convention by Edmund Randolph and attributed to James Madison.3 The resolution went through several formulations during the debates at the Convention.4 During a key debate, Gouverneur Morris objected to the resolution because [h]e should be very unwilling that such laws as exist in R[hode] Island ought to be guarantied.5 Randolph explained that, rather than cementing the existing laws of the states, the resolution had two objects: 1. to secure Republican Government[;] 2. to suppress domestic commotions.6 Along with concerns about rebellions, delegates expressed fears that a monarchy might arise in a particular state and establish a tyranny over the whole [United States].7
Answering Morris’s objection, Madison moved to substitute language that the Constitutional authority of the States shall be guarant[eed] to them respectively [against] domestic as well as foreign violence,8 with Randolph then moving to add language that no State shall be at liberty to form any other than a Republican [Government].9 James Wilson then introduced, as a better expression of the idea, language substantially similar to the final form of the Guarantee Clause, which the Convention approved unanimously.10
In light of its text and framing, the Guarantee Clause was intended to be more than an authorization for the federal government to protect states against foreign invasion or internal insurrection,11 a power already conferred elsewhere in the Constitution.12 While the precise contours of what constitutes a republican form of government are debatable,13 an additional object of the Guarantee Clause was to prevent states from establishing monarchical or despotic governments.14
Except for a brief period during Reconstruction, the authority granted by the Guarantee Clause has been largely unexplored.15 The Supreme Court and other federal courts have largely declined to hear legal challenges based on the Guarantee Clause because they present nonjusticiable political questions.16
Let the States enforce the Constitution, if the USSC won't do it's job.
Tired of the politicians trying to appease their donors, and the New World Order violating National Sovereignty.
In addition, I would hope Texas starts arresting illegals at the border, and busing them back to the gates at the BP sites.
What kind of insane government would go to court to OPEN their border , D’oh
The reason cony barret voted to allow the feds to remove the razor wire is that she thot that it was being used to shave with.
How would you know he hasn’t?
Send more to New Yawk. Give the media some poop to write about.
“The feds should just stand down at this point. Bad optics for them if they go totalitarian on the local jurisdiction.”
That’s not how they see it. The Supremes ruled with them. Dems control the WH, the Senate and almost the House.
They will view this as another Jan 6 like uprising like event and use this as another talking point against so-called extremists in Texas and with Trump. Biden wants this. Actually - Biden needs this.
We can say they’re nuts but in the end it all comes down to who has more power. We will see.
If Texas calls for help I am sure 10 million rednecks will be there within 3 days! Me included!
“Who can I send a check to?”
The IRS because your are about to be audited.
The easiest of the three to defy is Court decisions because the Court has no enforcement power.
THE CONSTITUTION:
The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion.U.S.Const., Art. IV, Sec. 4.
The federal government is directly defying the Constitutional mandate!!! Defy the defiers!!!
That headline seems wrong. Was not the ruling only that the court stay against CBP cutting it was removed? There was no stay against putting more wire up.
I agree with scotus that it is a federal issue, but it should NOT BE ALLOWED for them to cut down border barriers TX constructed.
How is that ‘doing their job’ ...????
God’s speed to them.
I figure Biden will play this out like he is JFK and Abbott is George Wallace 1963. In otherwords they’ll play tye race card again.
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.