Legal Panel At Federalist Society Begrudgingly Accepts Obama's Immigration Powers

Synthaholic

Diamond Member
Jul 21, 2010
71,522
51,307
3,605
*
4i6Ckte.gif


Legal Panel At Federalist Society Begrudgingly Accepts Obama's Immigration Powers


*snip*

At the Mayflower Hotel, lawyers gathered for the annual Federalist Society national convention -- one of the highest-profile conservative legal events of the year. The day’s big draws were the opening speech by Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia and an evening event featuring Justice Samuel Alito.

The talk was, well, lawyerly. Every conclusion seemed to have a qualification attached to it. But, by and large, the panelists agreed the president has wide legal latitude to prioritize and shape deportation laws, as regrettable for Republicans or the long-term balance of powers that may be.

“I think the roots of prosecutorial discretion are extremely deep,” said Christopher Schroeder, the Charles S. Murphy Professor of Law and Public Policy Studies at Duke Law School. “The practice is long and robust. The case law is robust. Let me put it this way: Suppose some president came to me and asked me in the office of legal counsel, ‘Is it okay for me to go ahead and defer the deportation proceedings of childhood arrival?’ Under the present state of the law, I think that would be an easy opinion to write. Yes.”

Schroeder was speaking specifically about the deferred action program that Obama already has put into place -- the one affecting so-called Dreamers who were brought to the U.S. as children. But later, Schroeder expanded his legal reasoning.

“I don’t know where in the Constitution there is a rule that if the president’s enactment affects too many people, he’s violating the Constitution,” Schroeder said. “There is a difference between executing the law and making the law. But in the world in which we operate, that distinction is a lot more problematic than you would think. If the Congress has enacted a statute that grants discretionary authority for the administrative agency or the president to fill in the gaps, to write the regulations that actually make the statute operative, those regulations to all intents and purposes make the law.


“I agree this can make us very uncomfortable. I just don’t see the argument for unconstitutionality at this juncture,” Schroeder added.


Legal Panel At Federalist Society Begrudgingly Accepts Obama s Immigration Powers
 
You libs won't be happy until there is NO jobs for the LEGAL citizens in the country

you should be proud
 
The Constitution says, "he shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed". That means adherence with the letter and intent of the law. Discretion is an invention of judges and lawyers, it is not a constitutional concept.
 
The Constitution says, "he shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed". That means adherence with the letter and intent of the law. Discretion is an invention of judges and lawyers, it is not a constitutional concept.


Well yes discretion is a part of it, the spirit of the law factors in and can actually over ride the letter of the law. It's some of that lawyerese stuff.
 
If the Congress has enacted a statute that grants discretionary authority for the administrative agency or the president to fill in the gaps, to write the regulations that actually make the statute operative, those regulations to all intents and purposes make the law.


“I agree this can make us very uncomfortable. I just don’t see the argument for unconstitutionality at this juncture,” Schroeder added.




Come on you Republicans. Refute that "If the Congress has enacted........" statement.

I guess Congress could take back what they gave away. But then they would lose their ready made excuse for doing nothing, couldn't hate Obama as bad (at least over immigration) and would actually have to take on the countries serious business and accomplish something.

Don't think that will be happening.

Let the fight begin.
 
They're talking about Deportation Laws. If the President or the Attorney General broke the Immigration Law, or ordered a standown at the Border, then that's another story.

Also, Executive Orders are used to Clarify Existing Law, not re-write it.

Yes I know, they're a bunch of Lawyers but you have to remember one thing: They're a bunch of Lawyers.
 
If the Congress has enacted a statute that grants discretionary authority for the administrative agency or the president to fill in the gaps, to write the regulations that actually make the statute operative, those regulations to all intents and purposes make the law.


“I agree this can make us very uncomfortable. I just don’t see the argument for unconstitutionality at this juncture,” Schroeder added.




Come on you Republicans. Refute that "If the Congress has enacted........" statement.

I guess Congress could take back what they gave away. But then they would lose their ready made excuse for doing nothing, couldn't hate Obama as bad (at least over immigration) and would actually have to take on the countries serious business and accomplish something.

Don't think that will be happening.

Let the fight begin.

A few years ago Obama said he couldn't do this exact same thing because he is the President, not the Emperor. I guess he got a recent upgrade in rank.
 
Americans wishing Ill Will on America and on other Americans. Americans cheering for it's Bankruptcy and Destruction.

And for what reason? So that "their team" can win! But Americans are SO DUMB now that they don't even realize they won't benefit in any way.

This is ANOTHER reason I tell young people not to go into the Military. It just aint worth it right now.
 
You libs won't be happy until there is NO jobs for the LEGAL citizens in the country

you should be proud

The Illegals will take jobs posting Administration propaganda on the Internet for a fraction of what they pay Greenbeard
 
These f*ckers said that Corporations are People. These f*ckers said that ObamaCare, which was presented as a Mandate not a Tax, was Constitutional because it's a Tax.

And dumb f*ckers sit at home at cheer like it's a win not understanding it's a HUGE defeat.

The American Legal System is all f*cked up because we would rather sit at home and watch Sports or Gossip. The American Legal system is run and controlled by a bunch of Mafia Legal types all the way through the United States Supreme Court. You gotta' be completely retarded not to see that.

Anyone who thinks America's Legal system works correctly and is not corrupt has never had to deal with Americas' Legal Sytem.
 
If the Congress has enacted a statute that grants discretionary authority for the administrative agency or the president to fill in the gaps, to write the regulations that actually make the statute operative, those regulations to all intents and purposes make the law.


“I agree this can make us very uncomfortable. I just don’t see the argument for unconstitutionality at this juncture,” Schroeder added.




Come on you Republicans. Refute that "If the Congress has enacted........" statement.

I guess Congress could take back what they gave away. But then they would lose their ready made excuse for doing nothing, couldn't hate Obama as bad (at least over immigration) and would actually have to take on the countries serious business and accomplish something.

Don't think that will be happening.

Let the fight begin.

A few years ago Obama said he couldn't do this exact same thing because he is the President, not the Emperor. I guess he got a recent upgrade in rank.




A few years ago I don't think Obama understood that he was dealing with a completely dysfunctional Congress.
Somebody's got to do the governments work.
 
If the Congress has enacted a statute that grants discretionary authority for the administrative agency or the president to fill in the gaps, to write the regulations that actually make the statute operative, those regulations to all intents and purposes make the law.


“I agree this can make us very uncomfortable. I just don’t see the argument for unconstitutionality at this juncture,” Schroeder added.




Come on you Republicans. Refute that "If the Congress has enacted........" statement.

I guess Congress could take back what they gave away. But then they would lose their ready made excuse for doing nothing, couldn't hate Obama as bad (at least over immigration) and would actually have to take on the countries serious business and accomplish something.

Don't think that will be happening.

Let the fight begin.

A few years ago Obama said he couldn't do this exact same thing because he is the President, not the Emperor. I guess he got a recent upgrade in rank.




A few years ago I don't think Obama understood that he was dealing with a completely dysfunctional Congress.
Somebody's got to do the governments work.

The President's job is to persuade the Congress to pass his proposed agenda. It is called leadership, and Obama apparently does not comprehend that function.
 
If the Congress has enacted a statute that grants discretionary authority for the administrative agency or the president to fill in the gaps, to write the regulations that actually make the statute operative, those regulations to all intents and purposes make the law.

This is what I have said many times on this forum. It is the crux of the biscuit. Everything hinges on the legislative verbiage and the latitude for the Executive they wrote into it.
 
A few years ago Obama said he couldn't do this exact same thing because he is the President, not the Emperor. I guess he got a recent upgrade in rank.
That's false. You are perpetuating a falsehood.
 
The Constitution says, "he shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed". That means adherence with the letter and intent of the law. Discretion is an invention of judges and lawyers, it is not a constitutional concept.
Wrong, shit for brains. I've seen the video zp FOX News at least a dozen times. He said exactly that.
A few years ago Obama said he couldn't do this exact same thing because he is the President, not the Emperor. I guess he got a recent upgrade in rank.
That's false. You are perpetuating a falsehood.
 
Where are the gaps in the law that Obama is allegedly filling? Are the Federalists talking about two different things? The president can prevent the deportation of illegal aliens if the law has gaps in it but the president can't change Constitutional law and grant citizenship status to criminals.
 

Forum List

Back
Top