Couchpotato
Platinum Member
- Mar 2, 2021
- 11,653
- 5,588
- 938
- Thread starter
- #21
The court ruling said the admin couldn't terminate the program without "reasoned explanation" for the action. (Though I've never quite understood why an action/policy taken via EO/memo cant be then overturned/changed by EO/memo.) It didn't say the Admin couldn't administer the program as it saw fit. This is the problem with Executive branch doing the work of the Legislature. The next executive can do the same thing. If I recall correctly Trumps issue with DACA centered around the fact that it was done via EO instead of passing a law, and the actions taken were a forcing function to get Congress off it's ass and do it job. More to the point because the Legislature never passed a law setting forth guide lines on how to administer the program it allowed the Executive to do as it pleased in this regard. Kind of like each subsequent admin has picked and chosen how to handle the problem with illegal immigration. The CONGRESS has allowed this to happen by abdicating their responsibility to legislate.You are terminally ill-informed
The Trump administration has blatantly ignored a Supreme Court ruling telling it to stop dismantling the federal program to protect undocumented immigrants brought here as children. Now — perhaps inevitably — a federal judge says the administration is ignoring another Supreme Court ruling that extends civil rights protections to gay, lesbian and transgender Americans.This emerging pattern of a White House simply ignoring the high court is dangerous in ways that even congressional Republicans should understand. Yet they persist in their silence.The Supreme Court in June ruled that the administration hadn’t justified its moves to dismantle the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program and ordered it to stop. The program provides two-year renewable reprieves from deportation for undocumented immigrants who were brought to the U.S. as children through no fault of their own, and who meet conditions including finishing school and having no criminal record. Some 650,000 young people are protected under the program, which is strongly supported by both parties.Despite the court’s ruling, the administration has continued undermining the program, rejecting all new applications and cutting the reprieve period to one year. Whatever position Americans take on the immigration issue, they should be uniformly outraged at any president who simply ignores a Supreme Court ruling. The implications are staggering.
Editorial: Once again, Trump thumbs his nose at the Supreme Court. Where does it end?
Republicans in Congress, as usual, haven’t raised a peep in opposition to this latest degradation of the constitutional separation of powers.www.stltoday.com
Justice Thomas says it better than I can (I know, shocker)
“Under the auspices of today’s decision, administrations can bind their successors by unlawfully adopting significant legal changes through Executive Branch agency memoranda. Even if the agency lacked authority to effectuate the changes, the changes cannot be undone by the same agency in a successor administration unless the successor provides sufficient policy justifications to the satisfaction of this Court. In other words, the majority erroneously holds that the agency is not only permitted, but required, to continue administering unlawful programs that it inherited from a previous administration.”
But we are far afield from the original point. The SCOTUS has directly said the CDC does not possess the authority to enact a moratorium on eviction.
"I agree with the District Court and the applicants that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention exceeded its existing statutory authority by issuing a nationwide eviction moratorium. See Utility Air Regulatory Group v. EPA, 573 U. S. 302, 324 (2014). Because the CDC plans to end the moratorium in only a few weeks, on July 31, and because those few weeks will allow for additional and more orderly distribution of the congressionally appropriated rental assistance funds"
.
