OT Ninth Circuit Again
- Thread starter rgc7
- Start date
All lawyers forum shop. This is not a surprise to anyone who practices, or is involved in, law.
Yes , Lawyers will be Lawyers,( I have two Lawyers and two Judges in my family, we have some great debates at family gatherings ) ) but our Presidents , all Presidents , have the authority under the Constitution
To defend and protect our country and that includes our borders !
The voters did not elect the Ninth Circuit to make those decisions or any other courts.
This will eventually go to the Supreme Court, where there are 4 justices who will vote on ideological grounds.
There are 4 justices who will vote on Constitutional grounds.
Then there is also Justice Roberts who tends to go with the ideological left rather than with the Constitution.
How President Bush ever selected Roberts is certainly a mystery , but I do agree with the critics that Bush was not one of our smartest Presidents.
While I disagree with the tactics and the unconstitutionality of this whole process, I believe that the Democrats may actually win this case !
Last edited:
LMBO... Yes only the judges who vote in line with GOP vote on constitutional grounds...
No, they actually read the Constitution and respect the separation of powers ! The power to protect our borders rest with the executive branch !
I thought of you this week. I may need a lawyer ! Especially since I am innocent ! I have been opening up my curtains just a little bit to peer out to see if any coppers are outside ! Stress !
What you mean to say is that there are four justices who vote on “constitutional” grounds based on how you view the constitution.
the NEA act of 1979 gives the President the power to declare a National Emergency at his sole discretion !
Congress can terminate an NEA but that would take a 2/3 vote.
President Obama declared a NEA on March 6, 2014 by Executive Order !
The law gives the President the power to declare and Congress to to over turn that Executive Order !
That is what the law states and that is the only way the SC should rule on it ! That is also how the Ninth Circuit should rule on it. In fact, they will not because they are idealogs first and Judges second.
The constitution is pretty clear but judges like RBG get themselves deep into the weeds to bend the founders meaning
Be me leftist
Being a lifelong aclu member then a judge is okay
Being a Catholic then a judge is not
I agree, but the INTENT of the act when passed was to let the president act in emergency when time was of the essence. It was not to let the president defy congress when they vote against him. Be interesting how it all comes out.
Great post. "When time is of the essence" -- here, Trump waited more than two years to declare his "emergency," waiting until Dems had taken the House so he'd have someone to blame. He declared his "emergency" only after putting the country through the longest government shutdown in history.
This is not an "emergency." Trump's own actions (waiting for years to declare) tell you that. The facts tell you that -- illegal border crossings are a fraction of what they were. The only "emergency" is that Trump repeatedly promised his people a Wall, but couldn't persuade Congress it was a good idea. He doesn't want to look weak, plain and simple.
The National Emergencies Act wasn't intended to allow a president to push through a spending initiative that he couldn't persuade Congress to pass. No other president has ever used the Act in this fashion.
How many times did Obama, knowing Congress would not approve of what he was asking, wait until they were out of session and sign an executive order? That's how we got a bunch of these inane business regulations that are now thankfully being repealed. I recall a little grumbling from the right, but no feigning of national indignation in the media, no lawsuits by Republican governors or Attorneys-general.
If I'm correct, I think a number of Republican AGs sued the Obama administration over certain immigration or environmental-related actions.
Very misleading graphGreat post. "When time is of the essence" -- here, Trump waited more than two years to declare his "emergency," waiting until Dems had taken the House so he'd have someone to blame. He declared his "emergency" only after putting the country through the longest government shutdown in history.
This is not an "emergency." Trump's own actions (waiting for years to declare) tell you that. The facts tell you that -- illegal border crossings are a fraction of what they were. The only "emergency" is that Trump repeatedly promised his people a Wall, but couldn't persuade Congress it was a good idea. He doesn't want to look weak, plain and simple.
The National Emergencies Act wasn't intended to allow a president to push through a spending initiative that he couldn't persuade Congress to pass. No other president has ever used the Act in this fashion.
Catch and release figures are not figured in
And the supreme court ruled in favor of the Republicans with regards to daca/"dreamers" totally unrelated to the declaration of an emergency
The National Emergencies Act wasn't intended to allow a president to push through a spending initiative that he couldn't persuade Congress to pass. No other president has ever used the Act in this fashion
False
According to the Federal Register, 58 national emergencies have been declaredsince the National Emergency Act of 1976 was signed into law by President Gerald Ford.
And 31 have been annually renewed and are currently still in effect, as listed in the Federal Register.
False
According to the Federal Register, 58 national emergencies have been declaredsince the National Emergency Act of 1976 was signed into law by President Gerald Ford.
And 31 have been annually renewed and are currently still in effect, as listed in the Federal Register.
Misty,
You may disagree, but “ Time is of the Essence “ because we have an invading asymmetric
Army of 10’s of thousands of people invading our country illegally. Drugs, sex trafficking, gangs of criminals.
As well as people who certainly want to seek a better life here in our country.
However, even the good people if allowed into our country will put a Hugh burden on our communities, schools, hospitals, social programs, etc.
We just can not accept and allow this “ This type of “ invasion “ of our country !
Presidents did a lot of things , lawful and unlawful, to get around congress.
Harry Truman got us into a very bloody war, but declaring it a “ Police Action “ !
What Trump is doing is perfectly both legal and necessary to protect our sovereignty as a Nation.
You may disagree, but “ Time is of the Essence “ because we have an invading asymmetric
Army of 10’s of thousands of people invading our country illegally. Drugs, sex trafficking, gangs of criminals.
As well as people who certainly want to seek a better life here in our country.
However, even the good people if allowed into our country will put a Hugh burden on our communities, schools, hospitals, social programs, etc.
We just can not accept and allow this “ This type of “ invasion “ of our country !
Presidents did a lot of things , lawful and unlawful, to get around congress.
Harry Truman got us into a very bloody war, but declaring it a “ Police Action “ !
What Trump is doing is perfectly both legal and necessary to protect our sovereignty as a Nation.
rgc7, you know I like you and respect you but you need to be more honest with your views. On the SC, 8 justices will vote on ideological grounds - 4 as strict constructionists and 4 as judicial activists. All believe they are ruling on Constitutional grounds. Even the terms, strict construction has various sub-groups, i.e., strict construction through textualism and strict construction through literalism.
I guarantee that none of the SC justices believe that they are acting in any way other than is permitted/mandated under the Constitution. The problem is that the Constitution is a written document that is subject to alternate interpretations, just like every other document I've ever read.
While I was not in favor of Justice Roberts when he was appointed Chief Justice, I have been very impressed to see that he is his own man and not subject to the political whims of the public and the politicians. He may well end up being one of our greatest Chief Justices and that is not a statement that I make lightly.
"Army of 10's of thousands are invading our country illegally"? Data shows that the number of illegal immigration is actually decreasing. Also, these aren't armed militants. They are mostly unarmed, poor, and desperate people looking, not to overthrow our government, but for a better life for themselves and their children.
Drugs - this is a problem not because there is a supply but because there is a demand. If you really want to stop illegal drug trafficking, legalize it and have the government supervise it, as it does with prescription drugs.
Sex trafficking - there is an obvious demand and a distinction needs to be made between those who choose to work in the sex trade and those that are forced into it. The women who work in the brothels in Nevada are not forced into those jobs - they choose to work there for a variety of reasons. Why shouldn't a person be allowed to use their body as they want to?
Finally, yes Truman got us into a police action but it was Congress that funded it. The same thing happened with Johnson and Nixon for the Vietnam War.
If you support Trump declaring an national emergency so that he take money allocated by Congress and apply it as he deems fit, just remember that there will eventually be a liberal POTUS and s/he will do the same thing because of the precedent that has been set. Will you be supportive of that President on that issue?
Duck, my friend !
You may disagree with my views, but one thing I can assure you , I am always honest in my views !
I fully believe that Liberal Justices believe that the “ Constitution is a living document “ no doubt about that ,
And that is a very “progressive point of view. The four judges in question , to my knowledge , and I may well
Be wrong, but the Progressives never break ranks and airways vote as a solid block !
You seem to be of the opinion of the Living Constitution, I am not ! So I agree with the four
Justices that are strict Constitutionalists!
As far as Justice Roberts goes, we are on opposite sides of the spectrum on that !
Also I remember when FDR tried to stack the SC , and he certainly did not want to do it with Conservative
Justices !
You may disagree with my views, but one thing I can assure you , I am always honest in my views !
I fully believe that Liberal Justices believe that the “ Constitution is a living document “ no doubt about that ,
And that is a very “progressive point of view. The four judges in question , to my knowledge , and I may well
Be wrong, but the Progressives never break ranks and airways vote as a solid block !
You seem to be of the opinion of the Living Constitution, I am not ! So I agree with the four
Justices that are strict Constitutionalists!
As far as Justice Roberts goes, we are on opposite sides of the spectrum on that !
Also I remember when FDR tried to stack the SC , and he certainly did not want to do it with Conservative
Justices !
FDR was a progressive and did try and stack the SC. He lost that battle but still did a lot of great things (despite being a racist and mysoginist). Out of curiosity, what kind of Strict Constructionist are you? Even Antonin Scalia didn't consider himself to be a Strict Constructionist and believed that no one should be. He considered himself a Texturalist or an Originalist in that SC should interpret the Constitution in terms of "theoretically" what it meant to those who ratified it back in the 18th Century.
In other words, what, theoretically, would the Constitutional Congress have done about machine guns, abortion, the proliferation of drugs, the internet, and other issues that they could not have conceived of back then. To me, Originalism is just another way of interpreting the Constitution, no more or less legitimate than those who want to interpret the Constitution in light of the realities of the modern day.
Duck,
Please read what I write a little more carefully before commenting.
I stated ASYMMETRIC = “ unconventional. “ not a regular Army .
Yes there is a demand for illegal drugs, and they is why we must keep those drugs out of our country.
Illegal is the key word and we must inforce our laws. You think drugs should be legalized, I do not.
Prostitution, yes some women choose to enter into it, no doubt!
Others are trafficked and forced into it.
What the percentages are I have no idea ?
Truman got us into a war because Congress May or may not have Declared war,
So he bypassed Congress. Once we were involved in that war, you are correct, congrees did fund it.
Liberal as well as Conservative Presidents have done many things and will certainly continue to
Do them ! Trump has every right to do what he is attempting to do to protect our country !
Please read what I write a little more carefully before commenting.
I stated ASYMMETRIC = “ unconventional. “ not a regular Army .
Yes there is a demand for illegal drugs, and they is why we must keep those drugs out of our country.
Illegal is the key word and we must inforce our laws. You think drugs should be legalized, I do not.
Prostitution, yes some women choose to enter into it, no doubt!
Others are trafficked and forced into it.
What the percentages are I have no idea ?
Truman got us into a war because Congress May or may not have Declared war,
So he bypassed Congress. Once we were involved in that war, you are correct, congrees did fund it.
Liberal as well as Conservative Presidents have done many things and will certainly continue to
Do them ! Trump has every right to do what he is attempting to do to protect our country !
rgc7, it is not an army of any type. It is a group of desperate people seeking a better life for them and their children. They are not combatants. They are not a militia. They are just desperate people who need help. How sad it is that so many of our countrymen see them as a threat rather than people who should be the subjects of our compassion and generosity.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
Recruiting West Spotlight: Prediction for LB Madden Faraimo
- Latest: mcculloughsocal