Biden issues pre-emptive pardons in final hours for Anthony Fauci, Liz Cheney, Milley and others
- Thread starter Mr.Gr33k
- Start date
Actually, the interpretation being brought about by an administrative act probably doesn't bother them.It is true. Like my ex's Great Dane puppy liked eating dog turds. Or like Mitch.
OTOH, I DO know how judges think. And 125 years of consistent interpretation meets the judicial objectives of predictability and reliability - good things for a law to be.
So that's a massive impetus to simply uphold the current interpretation of the 14A - unless that panel is EXTREMELY ideologically motivated to change that interpretation - as with Roe.
And even if so - again - do they want the new interpretation to be brought about by an administrative act, rather than legislation with the attendant public debate and argument of the latter???
Because then it gets injected retroactively into legislation later.
The importance is the ideology and the practical application.
For me, the real question is whether they want to slow walk responding to this or not.
I think it probably depends on how many votes they have.
Sure, the play here isn't the executive order itself - it's the interpretation of the 14th amendment.I came across this commentary from an appellate law firm. The firm itself is not important to this conversation. I just think they sum things up nicely.
"Ultimately, cries of “unprecedented” executive action on both sides are more histrionic than historical. Yet because they are so easily overturned, repealed, or limited by law, presidents have wisely preferred legislation to executive actions when crafting policy. Accordingly, the ultimate impact of Trump’s executive actions thus far (and to come) remains to be seen. Some will surely affect the lives of hundreds or thousands or more, for better or for worse, while others may serve as little more than symbolic point-scoring with partisan constituencies in the next election."
The Surprisingly Contentious History of Executive Orders
This article originally appeared in The Huffington Post on February 2, 2017. Recently, USA Today savaged President Trump’s executive orders since taking office, from encouraging Keystone XL […]calg.com
The EO is just "we will process requests in this manner" and can be revoked in the future.
Getting the court to rule that "the interpretation we are using is correct" can't be revoked by an executive order.
Except every person who is made subject to deportation enforcement under the novel interpretation of the 14A sues the living shit out of the administration and wins now.
And that blocks it for two weeks.And - as I predicted - a judge has blocked Trumpo's attack on the 14A....
x.com
x.com
BREAKING: U.S. Judge Blocks President Trump's Order Limiting Birthright Citizenship, Calling It "Blatantly Unconstitutional"
Another loss for those who don't understand the Constitution!
We will have to see what the other judges decide and what part of "it is blocked while this gets decided" goes into play for the long haul.
It is, if I recall.x.com
Illinois Secretary of State Alexi Giannoulias announces he Will NOT COMPLY to Donald Trump’s demands for the DMV to turn over data about undocumented immigrants without due process. It gets even better. Giannoulias has also created a safe haven for women seeking an abortion, after he championed legislation that limits law enforcement’s ability to track license plates to track women driving into the state for the procedure. Giannoulias was also behind legislation that allows non-citizen residents, including undocumented immigrants, to obtain a standard driver's license or state ID — that ensures all drivers pass a test and do so safely.
I believe that the Feds forcing states to cooperate in law enforcement is actually another constitutional issue. I will try to find out more.
Jurisdictions and defending them is a big deal, but I think that's a thing where the lines have fluctuated often over time.
I think you're missing several key points, but most importantly Hunter was going to be sentenced soon and it could have involved prison time. I'm not sure the cases that involved Trump would have resulted in prison time.
You should try to keep an open mind, follow some conservative American media for informational purposes and try not to frame everything within the narrow confines of partisan politics. The amount of money at stake in Washington D.C. is disgusting. As someone smarter than me as surely said, as the stakes get higher the uglier things get.
As I said earlier, we are lucky to have an esteemed U.S. Constitutional legal expert such as yourself on the forum.And - as I predicted - a judge has blocked Trumpo's attack on the 14A....
x.com
BREAKING: U.S. Judge Blocks President Trump's Order Limiting Birthright Citizenship, Calling It "Blatantly Unconstitutional"
Another loss for those who don't understand the Constitution!
The Executive Order was clearly too broad and much of it was in direct violation of the 14th amendment. We might expect another EO that more narrowly tests the limits of the 14th amendment. Biden was continuously testing the boundaries of Executive action. It's not unusual.
The J6 stuff was pretty serious.
The other stuff could be played off as technical violations / silly old man didn't realize confidential papers could be kept in his storage room, etc.
I don't think anyone here is being particularly partisan on the left. Launching a tariff war with your 2 closest neighbours / allies; threatening to invade the territories of 2 other allies; drafting an EO that ignores a basic long-standing USSC constitutional ruling; mass pardoning your lackey thugs who invaded the Capitol and terrorized lawmakers; pardoning a sociopath who ran the Dark Web.....
This is all highly fucked up and not "politics as normal". Playing it off as "well, everyone does this. Don't take it seriously" is a weird spin on your part.
You've been whatabout-ing consistently since you started posting on this board. And this time, it's different.
No one will be subject to deportation under this executive order.
It only applies to babies born after Feb 19th.
No one will come up for deportation only due to this concept until years after it is settled in court.
I'm not remotely sure of that.
Multiple judge in multiple circuits are looking at it due to cases submitted.
They will have conflicting rulings.
It is possible there will be a nationwide ban on applying it until that is settled, but that isn't a certainty.
