One Of Trump's Unconstitutional EOs Is Being Raked Over the Coals By SCOTUS Tomorrow

[Clipper]

I predict you will be butthurt.

I predict the stink of Trump's ass on your face will still be there.

 

[Clipper]

What's the point of having executive orders, if judges can just strike them down?





I think he brought up a valid point. You should try and address it in a manner that is consistent with an actual human being.

How about if Trump orders you thru EO to wear your MAGA hat when you're shagging your better half? Or do you already do that?

 

[ColonelAngus]

Biden did not even sign his own EOs or pardons.

 

[MayorQuimby]

How about if Trump orders you thru EO to wear your MAGA hat when you're shagging your better half? Or do you already do that?

How about your answer my question without posing another question?

 

[Clipper]

How about your answer my question without posing another question?

You answered mine, weirdo.

 

[Billiejeens]

I'm not willing to bet the Roberts court will uphold the Constitution.

I hope they will, but I fear they won't.

They tend to defer to the Democrats whenever possible.

 

[MayorQuimby]

You answered mine, weirdo.

I didn't.

Stop hallucinating.

 

[Billiejeens]

Find the federal statute then, which allows one person to go judge shopping, file a complaint, and the judge can issue a national injunction to stop a president from executing his Constitutional powers. I'll wait. Pssst... there isn't one.

You are trying to make sense to a total idiot.

Good luck.

 

[Clipper]

I didn't.

Stop hallucinating.

Just because Trump issues an EO, that doesn't mean it's not subject to legal scrutiny. He's not a fucking King. Sorry to burst your MAGA bubble.

 

[Billiejeens]

What's the point of having executive orders, if judges can just strike them down?





I think he brought up a valid point. You should try and address it in a manner that is consistent with an actual human being.

No chance

 

[Billiejeens]

I didn't.

Stop hallucinating.

Clipy is only 12

 

[Wapasha]

First, the Constitution. Read it.

Next this:

Rule 65. Injunctions and Restraining Orders

www.law.cornell.edu

There is no exemption for the president.

You're welcome. I hope you weren't holding your breath.

LOL As I figured, you cannot find it. There is no basis in federal law for these universal injunctions. No, they are not in the Constitution.

You linking to the constitution and pretending it contains the answer you are looking for?? How lame. What's next? You going to link to Google and pretend the answer you are looking for is there?

 

[Orangecat]

Trump has put on a lot of theater for the rubes.

A lot.

One of those performances is EO 14160.

To satisfy the large crowd of bigots in the MAGA ranks, Trump signed an Executive Order on the proverbial Day One of his administration which unconstitutionally violated the 14th Amendment. Having never read the Constitution due to its big words, Trump thought he could get away with it.

So far, every court up the chain of command has slapped Trump's, Nazi Stephen Miller's, and third stringer traitor John Eastman's pointy heads down, and tomorrow the Supreme Court will do the same.

Enter your predictions here for what the score will be when the EO is struck down.

I predict 9-0 against the illegal, unconstitutional, bigoted, hateful EO.

You can listen to the sure-to-be-hilarious arguments tomorrow here:

LISTEN LIVE: Supreme Court hears arguments on Trump’s challenge to birthright citizenship

Birthright citizenship is among several issues the administration has asked the court to deal with on an emergency basis, after lower courts acted to slow Trump’s agenda.

www.pbs.org

Do you think people who illegally sneak into our country should be able to have US citizen children as a reward?

 

[MayorQuimby]

Just because Trump issues an EO, that doesn't mean it's not subject to legal scrutiny. He's not a fucking King. Sorry to burst your MAGA bubble.

Jeez, all I did was ask a question and you got all triggered. And sorry to stop you from ejaculating but I am not even American.


I will ask again: What's the point of having Executive Orders, if judges can just strike them down? You never answered this question and I think it's a valid one.

 

[pknopp]

What's the point of having executive orders, if judges can just strike them down?

No different than asking what is the point in passing laws if the courts can just strike them down?

Just because a president signs an EO or Congress passes a law, that doesn't automatically make it Constitutional.

 

[Clipper]

Jeez, all I did was ask a question and you got all triggered. And sorry to stop you from ejaculating but I am not even American.


I will ask again: What's the point of having Executive Orders, if judges can just strike them down? You never answered this question and I think it's a valid one.

I answered your question. But apparently, you're not too bright.

 

[MayorQuimby]

I answered your question. But apparently, you're not too bright.

You really need to stop hallucinating and pass some of that LSD this way.

 

[Clipper]

You really need to stop hallucinating and pass some of that LSD this way.

Running out of crack?

 

[MayorQuimby]

Running out of crack?

Yes.

Your mom was here last night.

 

[Wapasha]

They're hearing an issue about nationwide injunctions only, there is no argument over birthright citizenship tomorrow (something the Court has never dealt with - Wong Kim Ark dealt only with a child of legal resident aliens).

​

Issue: Whether the Supreme Court should stay the district courts' nationwide preliminary injunctions on the Trump administration’s Jan. 20 executive order ending birthright citizenship except as to the individual plaintiffs and identified members of the organizational plaintiffs or states.​

Trump v. CASA, Inc.

www.scotusblog.com

Bye.

Well, the SCOTUS will not find any law which supports the use of these universal injunctions, so they will bring an end to their use.

There is nothing in the U.S. Constitution which authorizes nationwide or universal injunctions by district judges.
The Constitution created courts to resolve cases and controversies between parties, not to give judges authority to issue broad public policy edicts to control the decisions and polices of the President.

There are over 650 federal district judges. If any one of them can issue a universal injunction and halt the president from implementing his Constitutionally authorized policies, our Republic will not be able to function.