States sue to rein in Obama's illegal amnesty

[Flopper]

Shakles, I have read all of the information available. You have not. You can't compete.

The EO can't be shaken in court. Watch as your arguments are dismissed.

I figure from the evidence to the conclusions; you begin with a conclusion and then fit evidence to it. The EO is an EO. It is what it is.

That's why you always fail.

Why don't you present YOUR evidence on why you think Obama's executive order still respects those immigrants who came here legally and would treat ALL immigrants the same under this provision. Why do you think it should still stand, and where it specifically states in the Constitution that this President has the executive authority to simply change laws that he doesn't agree with? Really Jake, anyone can make a small comment over what someone else said without backing it up.

I do respect Care4all for her input in presenting an interesting argument regarding the reason for the need to address the issue, and is one of among a few here willing to have a real discussion about it through an opposing view.

Executive Orders and Presidential Memorandums carry the wait of law but they are not laws. Executive Actions are orders that are within the scope of existing law. Unlike laws congress passes, these actions by the president are temporary and last only as long as the president is in office. They are not laws nor are they changes to the law.

Every law enforcement agency, including the agencies that enforce immigration laws, has “prosecutorial discretion” — the power to decide whom to investigate, arrest, detain, charge, and prosecute. Homeland Security can legally prioritize and delay prosecution and deportation. Immigration laws gives the administration wide latitude in granting work permits.

Executive Orders and Executive Actions can be reversed by Congress.

Yep, with a 2/3 vote of both the House and Senate Republicans can pass legislation to nullifies it and overrides a presidential veto. However, since Republicans have only 56% of the House and 54% of the Senate, there is almost no chance of it happening.

Sorry --- you missed on this one.

1) A 2/3 vote in both houses is required to override a VETO.

2) Congress can override an executive order, or executive action, simply by passing a law that conflicts with it. In this case, for example, Congress can pass a law that says the President may not grant immigration rights or benefits to illegal immigrants. That would certainly be feasible in the current Congressional structure.

If congress passes a law to override an executive order, and the president veto's it, as he certainly would, then the bill must be passed by a 2/3 vote in both houses to override the veto.

Republicans would probably vote in a block to override, however they would need approximately 45 Democrats in the House and 12 Democrats in the Senate and that would be nearly impossible. Senate Democrat support for Obama's Executive order is nearly unanimous in the Senate and enjoys strong support among House Democrats.

 

[Vigilante]

 

[Spare_change]

Why don't you present YOUR evidence on why you think Obama's executive order still respects those immigrants who came here legally and would treat ALL immigrants the same under this provision. Why do you think it should still stand, and where it specifically states in the Constitution that this President has the executive authority to simply change laws that he doesn't agree with? Really Jake, anyone can make a small comment over what someone else said without backing it up.

I do respect Care4all for her input in presenting an interesting argument regarding the reason for the need to address the issue, and is one of among a few here willing to have a real discussion about it through an opposing view.

Executive Orders and Presidential Memorandums carry the wait of law but they are not laws. Executive Actions are orders that are within the scope of existing law. Unlike laws congress passes, these actions by the president are temporary and last only as long as the president is in office. They are not laws nor are they changes to the law.

Every law enforcement agency, including the agencies that enforce immigration laws, has “prosecutorial discretion” — the power to decide whom to investigate, arrest, detain, charge, and prosecute. Homeland Security can legally prioritize and delay prosecution and deportation. Immigration laws gives the administration wide latitude in granting work permits.

Executive Orders and Executive Actions can be reversed by Congress.

Yep, with a 2/3 vote of both the House and Senate Republicans can pass legislation to nullifies it and overrides a presidential veto. However, since Republicans have only 56% of the House and 54% of the Senate, there is almost no chance of it happening.

Sorry --- you missed on this one.

1) A 2/3 vote in both houses is required to override a VETO.

2) Congress can override an executive order, or executive action, simply by passing a law that conflicts with it. In this case, for example, Congress can pass a law that says the President may not grant immigration rights or benefits to illegal immigrants. That would certainly be feasible in the current Congressional structure.

If congress passes a law to override an executive order, and the president veto's it, as he certainly would, then the bill must be passed by a 2/3 vote in both houses to override the veto.

Republicans would probably vote in a block to override, however they would need approximately 45 Democrats in the House and 12 Democrats in the Senate and that would be nearly impossible. Senate Democrat support for Obama's Executive order is nearly unanimous in the Senate and enjoys strong support among House Democrats.

I would suggest that those Democrats running for re-election in 2016, and needing to distance themselves from Obama and amnesty (remember, most Americans oppose this), could easily be persuaded to vote to override.

Be interesting to find out ....

 

[Care4all]

Shut up, Shakles, with worthless false comparison fallacies.

Pass some sort of legislation that Obama can sign.

We are not going to mass deport the illegals.

A vast majority won't go for citizenship without action supported by Obama that seals up the borders. We need to take measures to prevent this problem from reoccurring, which includes going after companies who hire them and states who harbor them through sanctuary cities. The. Congress holds the purse strings through a majority of both chambers o the legislative branch, if Obama won't compromise a deal, nothing will get done.... It's on his shoulders. The Democrats lost both majorities already, are they ready to learn their lesson yet and listen to the people?

I agree, and congress needs to write this immigration reform that includes border security, and penalizing those who hire illegals etc...

along with amnesty for those parents of American citizens etc...

this is what congress should be working on right now.

Obama has NEVER spoken against border security or spoken against penalizing those who hire illegals...

a comprehensive immigration reform bill would be signed by him.

 

[TooTall]

Shut up, Shakles, with worthless false comparison fallacies.

Pass some sort of legislation that Obama can sign.

We are not going to mass deport the illegals.

A vast majority won't go for citizenship without action supported by Obama that seals up the borders. We need to take measures to prevent this problem from reoccurring, which includes going after companies who hire them and states who harbor them through sanctuary cities. The. Congress holds the purse strings through a majority of both chambers o the legislative branch, if Obama won't compromise a deal, nothing will get done.... It's on his shoulders. The Democrats lost both majorities already, are they ready to learn their lesson yet and listen to the people?

I agree, and congress needs to write this immigration reform that includes border security, and penalizing those who hire illegals etc...

along with amnesty for those parents of American citizens etc...

this is what congress should be working on right now.

Obama has NEVER spoken against border security or spoken against penalizing those who hire illegals...

a comprehensive immigration reform bill would be signed by him.

The problem is Obama would grant the amnesty and ignore closing the border. He lied about Obamacare to get it passed and cannot be trusted to enforce any law that he disagrees with. I will remind you that the word 'comprehensive' in front of any bill passed by Congress stands for a lot of bad stuff in the bill.

 

[TooTall]

Executive Orders and Presidential Memorandums carry the wait of law but they are not laws. Executive Actions are orders that are within the scope of existing law. Unlike laws congress passes, these actions by the president are temporary and last only as long as the president is in office. They are not laws nor are they changes to the law.

Every law enforcement agency, including the agencies that enforce immigration laws, has “prosecutorial discretion” — the power to decide whom to investigate, arrest, detain, charge, and prosecute. Homeland Security can legally prioritize and delay prosecution and deportation. Immigration laws gives the administration wide latitude in granting work permits.

Executive Orders and Executive Actions can be reversed by Congress.

Yep, with a 2/3 vote of both the House and Senate Republicans can pass legislation to nullifies it and overrides a presidential veto. However, since Republicans have only 56% of the House and 54% of the Senate, there is almost no chance of it happening.

Sorry --- you missed on this one.

1) A 2/3 vote in both houses is required to override a VETO.

2) Congress can override an executive order, or executive action, simply by passing a law that conflicts with it. In this case, for example, Congress can pass a law that says the President may not grant immigration rights or benefits to illegal immigrants. That would certainly be feasible in the current Congressional structure.

If congress passes a law to override an executive order, and the president veto's it, as he certainly would, then the bill must be passed by a 2/3 vote in both houses to override the veto.

Republicans would probably vote in a block to override, however they would need approximately 45 Democrats in the House and 12 Democrats in the Senate and that would be nearly impossible. Senate Democrat support for Obama's Executive order is nearly unanimous in the Senate and enjoys strong support among House Democrats.

I would suggest that those Democrats running for re-election in 2016, and needing to distance themselves from Obama and amnesty (remember, most Americans oppose this), could easily be persuaded to vote to override.

Be interesting to find out ....

You beat me to it!

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

Shut up, Shakles, with worthless false comparison fallacies.

Pass some sort of legislation that Obama can sign.

We are not going to mass deport the illegals.

A vast majority won't go for citizenship without action supported by Obama that seals up the borders. We need to take measures to prevent this problem from reoccurring, which includes going after companies who hire them and states who harbor them through sanctuary cities. The. Congress holds the purse strings through a majority of both chambers o the legislative branch, if Obama won't compromise a deal, nothing will get done.... It's on his shoulders. The Democrats lost both majorities already, are they ready to learn their lesson yet and listen to the people?

I agree, and congress needs to write this immigration reform that includes border security, and penalizing those who hire illegals etc...

along with amnesty for those parents of American citizens etc...

this is what congress should be working on right now.

Obama has NEVER spoken against border security or spoken against penalizing those who hire illegals...

a comprehensive immigration reform bill would be signed by him.

Republicans have been in favor of border security and strict enforcement of immigration laws, however Obama has always pushed for legalizing citizens who have broken the law as his greater priority.

There should be no "fast track" to legalization that treats those who break Federal Law with exception over those who must wait YEARS in choosing to obey our immigration laws. That would be a mistake, as it sends a clear message that you can avoid all those years of waiting by simply choosing to ignore our laws in the first place. What's the purpose of having laws if politicians like Obama simply choose not to enforce them? I will always side with, and have a LOT more respect for, those immigrants who must endure the long process to become a citizen over those who knowingly break the law looking for a "quick fix" in having our government look the other way.

 

[Care4all]

Shut up, Shakles, with worthless false comparison fallacies.

Pass some sort of legislation that Obama can sign.

We are not going to mass deport the illegals.

A vast majority won't go for citizenship without action supported by Obama that seals up the borders. We need to take measures to prevent this problem from reoccurring, which includes going after companies who hire them and states who harbor them through sanctuary cities. The. Congress holds the purse strings through a majority of both chambers o the legislative branch, if Obama won't compromise a deal, nothing will get done.... It's on his shoulders. The Democrats lost both majorities already, are they ready to learn their lesson yet and listen to the people?

I agree, and congress needs to write this immigration reform that includes border security, and penalizing those who hire illegals etc...

along with amnesty for those parents of American citizens etc...

this is what congress should be working on right now.

Obama has NEVER spoken against border security or spoken against penalizing those who hire illegals...

a comprehensive immigration reform bill would be signed by him.

The problem is Obama would grant the amnesty and ignore closing the border. He lied about Obamacare to get it passed and cannot be trusted to enforce any law that he disagrees with. I will remind you that the word 'comprehensive' in front of any bill passed by Congress stands for a lot of bad stuff in the bill.

There is no upside for Obama to go against border security and veto a bill for such.... he has never ever spoken out against such....

Congress repubs are copping out if they use that as an excuse to DO NOTHING, once again.

 

[TooTall]

Shut up, Shakles, with worthless false comparison fallacies.

Pass some sort of legislation that Obama can sign.

We are not going to mass deport the illegals.

A vast majority won't go for citizenship without action supported by Obama that seals up the borders. We need to take measures to prevent this problem from reoccurring, which includes going after companies who hire them and states who harbor them through sanctuary cities. The. Congress holds the purse strings through a majority of both chambers o the legislative branch, if Obama won't compromise a deal, nothing will get done.... It's on his shoulders. The Democrats lost both majorities already, are they ready to learn their lesson yet and listen to the people?

I agree, and congress needs to write this immigration reform that includes border security, and penalizing those who hire illegals etc...

along with amnesty for those parents of American citizens etc...

this is what congress should be working on right now.

Obama has NEVER spoken against border security or spoken against penalizing those who hire illegals...

a comprehensive immigration reform bill would be signed by him.

The problem is Obama would grant the amnesty and ignore closing the border. He lied about Obamacare to get it passed and cannot be trusted to enforce any law that he disagrees with. I will remind you that the word 'comprehensive' in front of any bill passed by Congress stands for a lot of bad stuff in the bill.

There is no upside for Obama to go against border security and veto a bill for such.... he has never ever spoken out against such....

Congress repubs are copping out if they use that as an excuse to DO NOTHING, once again.

They will do something next year, but I hope it won't be passing a comprehensive immigration bill. They should pass a bill to provide for border security, fund it, and see if Obama does anything. Once the border is secure they can address the fate of the millions of illegals in the US.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Obama has told our GOP he will veto any border bill that does not include immigration reform.

Tit for tat.

I think the administration, wrongly, will put business enforcement, at the the back of the bus.

 

[Flopper]

Executive Orders and Presidential Memorandums carry the wait of law but they are not laws. Executive Actions are orders that are within the scope of existing law. Unlike laws congress passes, these actions by the president are temporary and last only as long as the president is in office. They are not laws nor are they changes to the law.

Every law enforcement agency, including the agencies that enforce immigration laws, has “prosecutorial discretion” — the power to decide whom to investigate, arrest, detain, charge, and prosecute. Homeland Security can legally prioritize and delay prosecution and deportation. Immigration laws gives the administration wide latitude in granting work permits.

Executive Orders and Executive Actions can be reversed by Congress.

Yep, with a 2/3 vote of both the House and Senate Republicans can pass legislation to nullifies it and overrides a presidential veto. However, since Republicans have only 56% of the House and 54% of the Senate, there is almost no chance of it happening.

Sorry --- you missed on this one.

1) A 2/3 vote in both houses is required to override a VETO.

2) Congress can override an executive order, or executive action, simply by passing a law that conflicts with it. In this case, for example, Congress can pass a law that says the President may not grant immigration rights or benefits to illegal immigrants. That would certainly be feasible in the current Congressional structure.

If congress passes a law to override an executive order, and the president veto's it, as he certainly would, then the bill must be passed by a 2/3 vote in both houses to override the veto.

Republicans would probably vote in a block to override, however they would need approximately 45 Democrats in the House and 12 Democrats in the Senate and that would be nearly impossible. Senate Democrat support for Obama's Executive order is nearly unanimous in the Senate and enjoys strong support among House Democrats.

I would suggest that those Democrats running for re-election in 2016, and needing to distance themselves from Obama and amnesty (remember, most Americans oppose this), could easily be persuaded to vote to override.

Be interesting to find out ....

Depending on the poll, Democrat support of the Executive Order, which of course is not really an executive order runs from 67% to 91%.


Obama Surging As Second Poll Find Broad National Support For Immigration Executive Action
Only Democrats support Obama s executive order on immigration

 

[Siete]

funny, the Republicans passed the same immigration reform years past, and now they don't like it ?

 

[Flopper]

Shut up, Shakles, with worthless false comparison fallacies.

Pass some sort of legislation that Obama can sign.

We are not going to mass deport the illegals.

A vast majority won't go for citizenship without action supported by Obama that seals up the borders. We need to take measures to prevent this problem from reoccurring, which includes going after companies who hire them and states who harbor them through sanctuary cities. The. Congress holds the purse strings through a majority of both chambers o the legislative branch, if Obama won't compromise a deal, nothing will get done.... It's on his shoulders. The Democrats lost both majorities already, are they ready to learn their lesson yet and listen to the people?

I agree, and congress needs to write this immigration reform that includes border security, and penalizing those who hire illegals etc...

along with amnesty for those parents of American citizens etc...

this is what congress should be working on right now.

Obama has NEVER spoken against border security or spoken against penalizing those who hire illegals...

a comprehensive immigration reform bill would be signed by him.

The problem is Obama would grant the amnesty and ignore closing the border. He lied about Obamacare to get it passed and cannot be trusted to enforce any law that he disagrees with. I will remind you that the word 'comprehensive' in front of any bill passed by Congress stands for a lot of bad stuff in the bill.

Neither Obama nor any president is going to close the boarder. . It is the most frequently crossed international border in the world, with approximately 350 million crossings being made annually.

 

[Siete]

1986 ..... Ronald Reagan signed a sweeping immigration reform bill into law. It was sold as a crackdown: There would be tighter security at the Mexican border, and employers would face strict penalties for hiring undocumented workers.
But the bill also made any immigrant who'd entered the country before 1982 eligible for amnesty ..

same shit, different day .. not one Republican burned the town down either .

 

[Flopper]

funny, the Republicans passed the same immigration reform years past, and now they don't like it ?

Of course they don't like it. If they passed it Obama might sign it and that would be fraternizing with the enemy.

 

[TooTall]

funny, the Republicans passed the same immigration reform years past, and now they don't like it ?

Of course they don't like it. If they passed it Obama might sign it and that would be fraternizing with the enemy.

Obama is the one that called his opposition the enemy. You got it backwards.

 

[TooTall]

Shut up, Shakles, with worthless false comparison fallacies.

Pass some sort of legislation that Obama can sign.

We are not going to mass deport the illegals.

A vast majority won't go for citizenship without action supported by Obama that seals up the borders. We need to take measures to prevent this problem from reoccurring, which includes going after companies who hire them and states who harbor them through sanctuary cities. The. Congress holds the purse strings through a majority of both chambers o the legislative branch, if Obama won't compromise a deal, nothing will get done.... It's on his shoulders. The Democrats lost both majorities already, are they ready to learn their lesson yet and listen to the people?

I agree, and congress needs to write this immigration reform that includes border security, and penalizing those who hire illegals etc...

along with amnesty for those parents of American citizens etc...

this is what congress should be working on right now.

Obama has NEVER spoken against border security or spoken against penalizing those who hire illegals...

a comprehensive immigration reform bill would be signed by him.

The problem is Obama would grant the amnesty and ignore closing the border. He lied about Obamacare to get it passed and cannot be trusted to enforce any law that he disagrees with. I will remind you that the word 'comprehensive' in front of any bill passed by Congress stands for a lot of bad stuff in the bill.

Neither Obama nor any president is going to close the boarder. . It is the most frequently crossed international border in the world, with approximately 350 million crossings being made annually.

Would 'secure the border against those not using the approved entry points' make you any happier?

 

[RKMBrown]

1986 ..... Ronald Reagan signed a sweeping immigration reform bill into law. It was sold as a crackdown: There would be tighter security at the Mexican border, and employers would face strict penalties for hiring undocumented workers.
But the bill also made any immigrant who'd entered the country before 1982 eligible for amnesty ..

same shit, different day .. not one Republican burned the town down either .

Then the enforcement never happened... in fact more people than ever came across the border and the employers? ROFL they laughed.

 

[Siete]

1986 ..... Ronald Reagan signed a sweeping immigration reform bill into law. It was sold as a crackdown: There would be tighter security at the Mexican border, and employers would face strict penalties for hiring undocumented workers.
But the bill also made any immigrant who'd entered the country before 1982 eligible for amnesty ..

same shit, different day .. not one Republican burned the town down either .

Then the enforcement never happened... in fact more people than ever came across the border and the employers? ROFL they laughed.

exactly like I'm laughing now.

we need more immigration laws .. more I tell you !!

because we can't enforce the ones we have .... LMAO

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

There is no upside for Obama to go against border security and veto a bill for such.... he has never ever spoken out against such....

Congress repubs are copping out if they use that as an excuse to DO NOTHING, once again.

His actions are what the voters perceive to be true. He took a stand against Arizona and it's governor wanting to protect their own border, he spoke nothing about those states which encourage the illegal immigration problem by refusing to even acknowledge ... nevermind address ... sanctuary cities or those states issuing drivers licenses that promote acceptance of those immigrants who knowingly break the law. This President won't even address those states which simply refuse to notify ICE, but take it upon themselves to harbor and protect illegal immigrants from the knowledge of the Federal Government. Does Obama at least make a plea and address those immigrants who have waited years to see their loved ones become citizens under the law, or is all his focus only on those who have violated it? Where is the mention and need to ensure "equal protection under the law" that treats ALL immigrants the same, while being very vocal against ANY special set of rules which is perceived to only address and give attention to those who break it? All his actions are really geared towards only one particular group of immigrants, and it's found through every speech that he makes.

Yet, when you take the time to do a comparison into how President Obama chooses to address other issues of equality, suddenly the laws and issue itself become very crucial and clear. When Ferguson got media attention, this administration was quick to speak of an additional investigation over those cops who are viewed to have overstepped their enforcement authority in the death of a young man, it had the appearance that one particular race was being targeted over the need to maintain "equality under the law". Suddenly there appeared to be a concern over how different groups of people are to be treated, and the importance that everyone be viewed the same under the law.

Yet .. you just don't see that same big concern being emphasized here, between those who undergo the long lengthy process of following the Federal immigration law and those who knowingly break it to live here. So if you have millions of law breakers who live here illegally, that is grounds to promote a whole different set of rules? I mean heaven forbid we must govern all immigrants the same, and are consistent in our rhetoric of equality in the eyes of the law, regardless of where it is you come from or the effort it took for you to get here.