In Historic 6-3 Supreme Court Decision, 3 Justices Ruled To Be Morons

[Zincwarrior]

The upshot of this decision, for now, seems to be exactly the crazy patchwork scenario we were warned about:

• the lower-court injunctions continue to protect the parties (immigrant orgs, individuals and 22 states) from Trump's EO
• the EO can (and will) be enforced in the other 28 states

Which means a baby born in New York to undocumented parents will be a citizen. But a baby born to undocumented parents in Kentucky will not be a citizen.

Crazy town.

UNtil someone in Kentucky sues and gets an injunction.

 

[rightwinger]

No, they said the lower court cannot do a nationwide injunction. It can still put in an injunction related to the parties in the suit, in this case 22 states.

Does that make sense to you?

Is a child a citizen or not?
If he is moved to one of the other 28 states, is he now illegal?

 

[M14 Shooter]

And the history lesson continues.

It does: Judges are restrained by the law.

 

[Synthaholic]

So, the heart of the SCOTUS decision is that a little District Court Judge who thinks the President has exceeded his authority cannot remedy the situation by....you guessed it....exceeding his authority.

Only in Dim World would that logic make sense.

You dopes have no memory. Must be all the Fentanyl.

Look up Judge Kaczmaryk in Texas. Remember him? You were CHEERING when that little district court judge was issuing nationwide injunctions against gun bans.

They are now out the window, hypocrite! They now only effect the Texans in his district.

 

[Zincwarrior]

Does that make sense to you?

Is a child a citizen or not?
If he is moved to one of the other 28 states, is he now illegal?

The child would have to sue in that state methinks, and that state would then be bound by a court ruling. Or the child can launch a class action suit to bind all the states.

 

[WelfareQueen]

Once again, the court has ceded judicial oversight to the President.

Last year they ruled that a President is above the law for anything that can be construed as an official act

Today they ruled a President can do whatever he wishes and ignore lower courts. Then the court can rule whenever they get around to it, if ever.

No. The Court ruled Federal District Court Judges have never been granted the authority by the Congress or We the People to issue nationwide injunctions. Those District Court judges were the ones who acted Unlawfully and Unconstitutionally, not the President.

 

[Failzero]

Moar Winning , please no moar winning

 

[rightwinger]

No. The Court ruled Federal District Court Judges have never been granted the authority by the Congress or We the People to issue nationwide injunctions. Those District Court judges were the ones who acted Unlawfully and Unconstitutionally, not the President.

How do you define who is a citizen now?

 

[Failzero]

How do you define who is a citizen now?

Someone who is not deportable

 

[M14 Shooter]

No. The Court ruled Federal District Court Judges have never been granted the authority by the Congress or We the People to issue nationwide injunctions. Those District Court judges were the ones who acted Unlawfully and Unconstitutionally, not the President.

You're talking to someone who chooses to be wrong.
Respond accordingly.

 

[Rogue AI]

Once again, the court has ceded judicial oversight to the President.

Last year they ruled that a President is above the law for anything that can be construed as an official act

Today they ruled a President can do whatever he wishes and ignore lower courts. Then the court can rule whenever they get around to it, if ever.

Except that the lower courts were never granted the powers the activists were using. Try harder. Liberal impotent rage is funny.

 

[WelfareQueen]

You dopes have no memory. Must be all the Fentanyl.

Look up Judge Kaczmaryk in Texas. Remember him? You were CHEERING when that little district court judge was issuing nationwide injunctions against gun bans.

They are now out the window, hypocrite! They now only effect the Texans in his district.

That is the Law. I have no problem with it. Why do you?

 

[WelfareQueen]

How do you define who is a citizen now?

That will ultimately be decided by the Supreme Court. That is our system of Government. Why do Dims have a problem with this? Each Branch of Government has a co-equal responsibility to determine Constitutional questions. The judiciary calls balls and strikes when there is a conflict between Branches. That is all. The judiciary has no power to create, amend, or nullify Law. Ever. Only the Congress can do this.

Executive Orders have the force of Law that can only be overridden by the Congress (We the People). The judiciary has no power or authority to nullify an Executive Order. Particularly at the District Court Level.

 

[Crepitus]

Your extreme butthurt makes me so happy. Dimwinger tears.......

That's nice, kid, but not really what's being discussed here.

Wanna try again?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Executive Orders have the force of Law that can only be overridden by the Congress (We the People). The judiciary has no power or authority to nullify an Executive Order. Particularly at the District Court Level.

The courts can overturn an executive order, as it is perfectly possible for an EO to exceed the authority of the President.

 

[Concerned American]

This is very consequential.

Let the deportation flights begin!

 

[Crepitus]

You can always leave the US. Few would care.

I will continue to fight for my country.

You anti American fascist types should leave immediately though.

 

[Crepitus]

thanks for announcing your arrival ? is that also the name of your WWE walk out song ?

Don't be stupider than you have to be, kid.

 

[Frankenstein]

Cue all of the tiny violins playing for the Libturds

 

[TemplarKormac]

And here's the nail, from Barrett.

View attachment 1129583