If trump Lets DACA continue, he is guilty of a FELONY

There are laws that say illegals cannot live and work here and agencies are trying to enforce those laws. But obama gave millions of illegals a certificate saying they could break those laws!!!. That is OOJ on a multi-million count scale and trump needs to say he is ending this lawlessness and will prosecute obama for this monstrous crime.
In retaliation, Trump or some other president should give special certificates to gun owners to purchase state-of-the-art automatic weapons, like the m249 SAW. It's the same thing, right?
 
There are laws that say illegals cannot live and work here and agencies are trying to enforce those laws. But obama gave millions of illegals a certificate saying they could break those laws!!!. That is OOJ on a multi-million count scale and trump needs to say he is ending this lawlessness and will prosecute obama for this monstrous crime.
You could while away the hours
Conferring with the flowers
Consulting with the rain
And your head you'd be scratching
While your thoughts were busy hatching
If you only had a brain.
 
You could while away the hours
Conferring with the flowers
Consulting with the rain
And your head you'd be scratching
While your thoughts were busy hatching
If you only had a brain.

HAHAHA. The board notes that all you have is namecalling. Thanks for admitting i'm right.
 
You could while away the hours
Conferring with the flowers
Consulting with the rain
And your head you'd be scratching
While your thoughts were busy hatching
If you only had a brain.

HAHAHA. The board notes that all you have is namecalling. Thanks for admitting i'm right.
Not the board, just the few of your pathetic ilk that are on the board.
 
There are laws that say illegals cannot live and work here and agencies are trying to enforce those laws. But obama gave millions of illegals a certificate saying they could break those laws!!!. That is OOJ on a multi-million count scale and trump needs to say he is ending this lawlessness and will prosecute obama for this monstrous crime.

Your retarded argument got demolished the first time you started this thread. Are you a glutton for punishment?

If trump Lets DACA continue, he is guilty of a FELONY
 
That would be administrative law compared to legislative law which is both legal..


Administrative law is illegal. The constitution says only congress can write laws.
"All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a congress of the united states".
 
There are laws that say illegals cannot live and work here and agencies are trying to enforce those laws. But obama gave millions of illegals a certificate saying they could break those laws!!!. That is OOJ on a multi-million count scale and trump needs to say he is ending this lawlessness and will prosecute obama for this monstrous crime.
It was a legally executed executive order, that makes it law. It was within the presidents power to do so.
 
It was a legally executed executive order, that makes it law. It was within the presidents power to do so.

HAHAHA. Executive orders are not laws!!!! The constitution explicitly says only congress can write laws. The constitution also says the president must "take care that the laws be faithfully executed". And here is aunt barry telling criminal invaders they can break our laws!!!!

DACA is illegal as hell.
 
It was a legally executed executive order, that makes it law. It was within the presidents power to do so.

HAHAHA. Executive orders are not laws!!!! The constitution explicitly says only congress can write laws. The constitution also says the president must "take care that the laws be faithfully executed". And here is aunt barry telling criminal invaders they can break our laws!!!!

DACA is illegal as hell.
If DACA was illegal then it could have been repealed by the courts. Look at what happened to Trumps "Travel Ban" EO. It went through a process. Same thing could have happened with DACA. Your argument is weak
 
It was a legally executed executive order, that makes it law. It was within the presidents power to do so.

HAHAHA. Executive orders are not laws!!!! The constitution explicitly says only congress can write laws. The constitution also says the president must "take care that the laws be faithfully executed". And here is aunt barry telling criminal invaders they can break our laws!!!!

DACA is illegal as hell.
Executive orders have the full force of law, based on the authority derived from statute or the Constitution itself. The ability to make such orders is also based on express or implied Acts of Congress that delegate to the President some degree of discretionary power
 
I do not believe the President can make executive orders that are directly opposed to codified law
 
While researching the answer to the question I found something worse.
Take Boston, which in 2000 sought to hire 25 new firefighters. The good news is that 29 candidates scored 100 percent or better on the test. (Extra points given for education and experience make it possible to score above 100 percent.) The bad news is that none of these 29 top scorers made it into the top 200 on the hiring list.

In fact, none of the 100-percenters–including the smart but unfortunate fellow who landed at No. 1,837 on the hiring list–had any chance of getting a job. According to the “2n + 1” rule, when hiring for 25 positions, Boston is allowed to consider only the top 51 interested candidates on the Civil Service hiring list. But the top of the most recent hiring list was loaded with candidates who earned mediocre scores. The list of 51 candidates eligible for hiring included only six of the top 200 scorers; 11 of the 51 had been outscored by 2,000 or more fellow applicants. The individual in the No. 22 spot on the hiring list had a score of 72, just two points above passing–and below 3,383 of the 3,429 candidates who passed the test. So much for the Merit Principle.

Preferential treatment
If test scores don’t determine rank on the hiring list, what does? The answer is “preferences.” Certain “absolute preferences,” determined by law and court order, allow some applicants with at least a passing grade of 70 to move ahead of everyone else. In fact, there are so many folks being ushered to the front of the line it actually requires an order of preferences to sort them all out. Here is a typical list of absolute preferences used to create a Civil Service hiring list in a Massachusetts city or town:

  • minority applicants (in consent decree communities only)
  • resident children of police officers or firefighters killed in the line of duty
  • non-resident children of police officers or firefighters killed in the line of duty
  • resident disabled veterans
  • resident children of police officers or firefighters injured in the line of duty
  • non-resident children of police officers or firefighters injured in the line of duty
  • resident veterans
  • resident widows or widowed mothers of veterans killed in the line of duty or dead from service-connected disabilities incurred in wartime service
  • resident non-veterans
  • non-resident disabled veterans
  • non-resident veterans
  • non-resident widows or widowed mothers of veterans killed in the line of duty or dead from service- connected disabilities incurred in wartime service
  • non-resident non-veterans
Preferential treatment for minorities has excited the most public controversy, with white candidates for police or firefighter jobs complaining (or filing suit) when they lose out to lower-scoring minority applicants. But when it comes to undermining merit, racial preference would have limited impact were it not for the other forms of preference that apply at the same time.

Minority preferences are in force only in those communities where courts have issued a consent decree. Fifteen communities, representing 25 percent of the state’s population, are under such consent decrees for hiring police officers. Cambridge, for example, requires the first and each subsequent fourth candidate on the hiring list to be a designated minority candidate. In Boston, minority applicants are placed in the first position, third position, fifth position, etc., under a similar court consent decree.

These communities generally produce lots of high-scoring minority candidates. But these are not the ones who get the spots reserved for minorities. Because of other absolute preferences granted by statute, lower-scoring minority candidates are often the beneficiaries of these set-asides. For example, in 2003 there were 296 candidates who passed the Civil Service test and wanted to become Springfield police officers. Here are the top three candidates on the Civil Service hiring list and their test results:

Hiring List Rank ExamScore Test Score Rank
1 87% 172
2 74% 284
3 82% 241

Once again, the top candidates came from the middle of the barrel, if not the bottom. The first and third candidates were, by consent decree, minority candidates. But many minority candidates with higher scores were pushed lower on the list to make room for these two, who were veterans. Candidate No. 2, a non-minority, was a disabled veteran who nabbed the top spot on the hiring list not reserved for a minority candidate, despite a very low passing score.
Goes on and on and on. I had to cut it somewhere.
The point, You're right they aren't getting 20 bonus points. They are getting put at the head of the list without giving them any points at all. In fact it's so bad that low scoring blacks are being put on top of the list of high scoring blacks screwing them too.

Hmmmm- from an article in the Commonwealth from 2004. 13 years ago. For Massachusetts- with the consent decrees only applying to some parts of Massachusetts- then- now?
Civil service hiring rules promote mediocrity among public safety workers - CommonWealth Magazine
 
we're not paying for foreign children, and their children, and their children, etc
we pay enough taxes on crap.....if you want to give your money to foreigners--be my guest
STOP screwing over American children and Americans....no more illegals and cut immigration
 
Executive orders have the full force of law,

that is preposterous.!!! EOs are just a way for a president to explain how he will enforce a law. Aunt Barry issued an EO explaining how he will NOT enforce the law and instead will actively help illegals break the law.!!!! No president has ever done that..
 
I do not believe the President can make executive orders that are directly opposed to codified law

It makes a mockery of our system. The law says illegals cannot live or work here and obama gave them a certificate saying they can!!!! That is not prosecutorial discretion. It is lawlessness on a scale never before seen.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top