Another unconstitutional Executive Order!

PostmodernProphet said:
just listened to Judge Nepolitano on the issue......he stated the basis of the decision was that the language of the various congressionally approved grant funding bills didn't include language that permitted funds to be cut if federal laws were being violated......all of the grant bills are renewed annually.....guess what language will be in every single funding bill starting with the next fiscal year in October if its going to be signed into law by Trump........
Click to expand...
Then they will delve into the real text of the 10th
 
Yaya said:
You haven't posted on topic yet, except for a quick blurb about Roberts.

Did the court actually say it was unconstitutional or is this just another TRO?

I think it is humorous how Jarod gets gleeful about this when it is Trump, I bet he didn't care or make any threads about it when it was Obama.

Massive hack.
Click to expand...

it is the same reasoning as hawaii vs trump. It is due unconstitutional due to public statements made by Trump.

This judge also says removing medicare , medicaid, and SS would be burdensome to the residents when no one has discussed that.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
just listened to Judge Nepolitano on the issue......he stated the basis of the decision was that the language of the various congressionally approved grant funding bills didn't include language that permitted funds to be cut if federal laws were being violated......all of the grant bills are renewed annually.....guess what language will be in every single funding bill starting with the next fiscal year in October if its going to be signed into law by Trump........
Click to expand...

Oh, the brilliant legal musings of the often incorrect and never well reasoned self appointed "Justice Nappy"!
 
so the ninth district continues to be a wing of the liberal party.

What is so wrong with the melding of politics into our judicial system will be fixed, one judge at a time, but it will be fixed.
This particular ruling will like 80% of all other 9th district rulings, be overturned in the Supreme court.
So there's that.
 
coolbreeze said:
so the ninth district continues to be a wing of the liberal party.

What is so wrong with the melding of politics into our judicial system will be fixed, one judge at a time, but it will be fixed.
This particular ruling will like 80% of all other 9th district rulings, be overturned in the Supreme court.
So there's that.
Click to expand...
Nope, not going to happen.
 
tsuke said:
note that in its decision the judge cited that the administration would withold all medicare, social security and any other entitlements. None of which was mentioned at all by the executive order. Im not sure you can even withhold SS payments if you wanted too.
Click to expand...
Is this the 9th again?
Where do these courts get off making things up, or prioritizing campaign rhetoric over text?
 
the republicans no longer seem to be interested in screaming about the founders and the constitution


too many people have learned their lies
 
Rune said:
They rule on the Constitutionality. You know that.
The EO wasn't.
Click to expand...
Judges are not above a political agenda ,and the 9th has demonstrated a willingness to turn themselves into a pretzel
with attempts to justify their 'reasoning'
 
anatta said:
Judges are not above a political agenda ,and the 9th has demonstrated a willingness to turn themselves into a pretzel
with attempts to justify their 'reasoning'
Click to expand...
No matter what, it isn't constitutional.

You will see if it gets to the Supremes.
 
The constitution says whatever trumpf says it says, & you can get your nuts crushed if you don't believe that...:)
 
There was nothing new for the "judge" to review according to law. He was just making the usual lefty political statement and ignoring the law. Also, this "judge" did not rule against the law as it stands. Trump will be following the law as it stands. He did and does not need "permission" from a dictatorial hack politician in a robe who strategically omitted a key phrase "to the extent to what is stated in the law" from his decision for Trump to enforce the law which is already in place. This hack had to invent a violation out of his own imagination calling it "pre-enforcement anxiety"...in other words, the frail little snowflakes are made nervous in San Francisco and Santa Clara.

The msm will not tell you this. They want you to think that this whole thing is some brand new idea concocted by Trump. It's already law which Trump is simply enforcing. It only seems new to the uneducated, skulls full of mush masses because Obama never bothered following the law.

Bottom line is the hack can't stop anything that hasn't happened and no law has been changed. It was originally passed Bill Clinton.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top