Ousted From Power By Voters, Dems Turn To Activist Judges To Defy Trump

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

Why elect a POTUS?
The judicial branch comprising hundreds and hundreds is the Equal Branch, not one lib lone wolf judge. Lying libs Constantly misrepresent that Fact

Exactly. All this spewing from the Democrats about democracy was just bullshit.

 

[Blisterfinger]

Exactly. All this spewing from the Democrats about democracy was just bullshit.

Looks like our democracy is under attack by democrats.

 

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

Looks like our democracy is under attack by democrats.

The Democrats are an existential threat to democracy.

 

[WEATHER53]

Exactly. All this spewing from the Democrats about democracy was just bullshit.

Once again lib loons don’t know when competition ends . They feel this is Election Overtime and the contest is still ongoing as they shoot arrows at Trump via liberal bought and paid for judges. Trump should investigate bank deposits to the interfering judges in last 9 months. Kit if USAID money there Im sure

 

[my2¢]

The birthright citizenship ruling was an easy call. Anybody with any sense could see that.

Then last week we had the Supreme Court upheld a lower court's ruling. I'm not familiar enough with the law to hold opinion on that, but if it was true that the opinion applied only to payments for work completed (which I saw noted in a couple of articles) then it makes sense to me.

Nothing wrong with using the courts to challenge the Presidency and Congress. Both parties are wise to do it, and both have done so with varying success. It's one of the better parts of living in a constitutional republic.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

This country has never operated upon the false feeling that one single unelected judge can stymie, thwart and harass POTUS
You all lost the big game and are trying to use judicial review like a replay to overturn it and Trumps on hold
I’m disappointed he’s paying one iota of attention to it. Judicial misconduct with disregard for the lawful will of 75 million based in one judge’s corrupted feelings

Calm down, munchkin. The ruling can be appealed up the chain. It is not one judge.

 

[MagicMike]

He has the power to to delete bureaus, and if they do not exist, they do not get the funding allocated for them, because
they are not there. Do you understand that?.

Actually no.
Congress has to give the POTUS this power called "Presidential Reorganization Authority."
So far Congress has not that. This is why his (probably) illegal EA's "reorganizing" congressionally authorized and funded agencies are subject to legal challenges.

Between 1932 and 1981, Congress periodically delegated authority to the President that allowed him to develop plans for reorganization of portions of the federal government and to present those plans to Congress for consideration under special parliamentary procedures. Under these procedures, the President’s plan would go into effect unless one or both houses of Congress passed a resolution rejecting the plan, a process referred to as a “legislative veto.” This process favored the President’s plan because, absent congressional action, the default was for the plan to go into effect. In contrast to the regular legislative process, the burden of action under these versions of presidential reorganization authority rested with opponents rather than supporters of the plan. In 1984, the mechanism was amended to require Congress to act affirmatively in order for a plan to go into force. This arguably shifted the balance of power to Congress. The authority expired at the end of 1984 and therefore has not been available to the President since then.

Presidential Reorganization Authority: History, Recent Initiatives, and Options for Congress

On January 13, 2012, President Barack Obama announced that he would ask Congress to reinstate so-called presidential reorganization...

www.everycrsreport.com

 

[MagicMike]

In lib loon land POTUS has less power than a judge in South Dakota

In the land of reality yes, a POTUS' actions are always subject to legal challenges.
Just a quick recap. We have 3 coequal branches of gub-mint.
Executive
Legislative
Judicial
And NO the SCOTUS is not the only court that comprises the Judicial branch of government. All the lesser federal courts below it are also parts.

 

[The Duke]

Actually no.
Congress has to give the POTUS this power called "Presidential Reorganization Authority."
So far Congress has not that. This is why his (probably) illegal EA's "reorganizing" congressionally authorized and funded agencies are subject to legal challenges.

Between 1932 and 1981, Congress periodically delegated authority to the President that allowed him to develop plans for reorganization of portions of the federal government and to present those plans to Congress for consideration under special parliamentary procedures. Under these procedures, the President’s plan would go into effect unless one or both houses of Congress passed a resolution rejecting the plan, a process referred to as a “legislative veto.” This process favored the President’s plan because, absent congressional action, the default was for the plan to go into effect. In contrast to the regular legislative process, the burden of action under these versions of presidential reorganization authority rested with opponents rather than supporters of the plan. In 1984, the mechanism was amended to require Congress to act affirmatively in order for a plan to go into force. This arguably shifted the balance of power to Congress. The authority expired at the end of 1984 and therefore has not been available to the President since then.

Presidential Reorganization Authority: History, Recent Initiatives, and Options for Congress

On January 13, 2012, President Barack Obama announced that he would ask Congress to reinstate so-called presidential reorganization...

www.everycrsreport.com

Wrong. Odd how you didn't link The Constitution.

Full Text of the U.S. Constitution | Constitution Center

Read and share the complete text of the United States Constitution.

constitutioncenter.org

Article II defines Executive duties and powers.

 

[MagicMike]

Wrong. Odd how you didn't link The Constitution.

Full Text of the U.S. Constitution | Constitution Center

Read and share the complete text of the United States Constitution.

constitutioncenter.org

Article II defines Executive duties and powers.

Yes it does. Tell me what part of this tells the convicted felon, con-man POTUS he has kingly powers and is free to break the law.
What part of Article II tells Trump (and you) he is more powerful than the courts and Congress?

Executive power

• The President has the power to enforce laws and appoint officials
• The President is the Commander in Chief of the military
  
  • The President has the power to make treaties with the Senate's consent

Other presidential duties

• • The President gives the Congress information on the state of the union
  • The President can recommend measures to Congress
  • The President can convene Congress in extraordinary circumstances
  • The President can grant pardons and reprieves for federal crimes, except in cases of impeachment
  • The President receives ambassadors and other public ministers

Impeachment

• • The House of Representatives can impeach the President
  • The Senate holds a trial to determine whether to convict the President

Term of office

• 
  
  • The President serves a four-year term

U.S. Constitution - Article II | Resources | Constitution Annotated | Congress.gov | Library of Congress

The original text of Article II of the Constitution of the United States.

constitution.congress.gov

 

[The Duke]

Yes it does. Tell me what part of this tells the convicted felon, con-man POTUS he has kingly powers and is free to break the law.
What part of Article II tells Trump (and you) he is more powerful than the courts and Congress?

Executive power

• The President has the power to enforce laws and appoint officials
  • The President has the power to make treaties with the Senate's consent

Other presidential duties

• • The President gives the Congress information on the state of the union
  • The President can recommend measures to Congress
  • The President can convene Congress in extraordinary circumstances
  • The President can grant pardons and reprieves for federal crimes, except in cases of impeachment
  • The President receives ambassadors and other public ministers

in the President aloneImpeachment

• • The House of Representatives can impeach the President
  • The Senate holds a trial to determine whether to convict the President

Term of office

• 
  
  • The President serves a four-year term

U.S. Constitution - Article II | Resources | Constitution Annotated | Congress.gov | Library of Congress

The original text of Article II of the Constitution of the United States.

constitution.congress.gov

Somehow you got the EH Constitution that I knew to avoid.

"but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments."

Full Text of the U.S. Constitution | Constitution Center

Read and share the complete text of the United States Constitution.

constitutioncenter.org

 

[MagicMike]

Somehow you got the EH Constitution that I knew to avoid.

"but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments."

Full Text of the U.S. Constitution | Constitution Center

Read and share the complete text of the United States Constitution.

constitutioncenter.org

You don't seem to understand that the very snippet of constitutional text you are providing actually proves my point, not yours.

"but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments."

Court Role and Structure

These three branches — legislative, executive, and judicial — operate within a constitutional system of “checks and balances.” This means that although each branch is formally separate from the other two, the Constitution often requires cooperation among the branches. Federal laws, for example...

www.uscourts.gov

 

[The Duke]

Court Role and Structure

These three branches — legislative, executive, and judicial — operate within a constitutional system of “checks and balances.” This means that although each branch is formally separate from the other two, the Constitution often requires cooperation among the branches. Federal laws, for example...

www.uscourts.gov

So tell us KarenBoy, how is any of what Trump is doing unConstitutional?
These judges are going to get their clocks cleaned. And how.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

So tell us KarenBoy, how is any of what Trump is doing unConstitutional?
These judges are going to get their clocks cleaned. And how.

There are already SCOTUS judgements against him this term.

 

[MagicMike]

So tell us KarenBoy, how is any of what Trump is doing unConstitutional?
These judges are going to get their clocks cleaned. And how.

And here goes The Duke......circling back to the beginning!
Rinse and repeat.
"Show me the proof"
"Ok Duke, here you go."
"B-but that's not proof!"
"Ok, how about this?"
"Nope."
"Duke, these federal judges are just doing their constitutional duty serving as a check and balance on the Executive Branch of government."
"Nuh-uh!"
"PROVE IT!"
Rinse and repeat.

 

[martybegan]

It's been that way since 1804.

This legal and moral.

This is far beyond what Maybury V. Madison entailed. District court decisions are supposed to be limited to the district in question, not blanket TRO's that override the 3 branch system.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

This is far beyond what Maybury V. Madison entailed. District court decisions are supposed to be limited to the district in question, not blanket TRO's that override the 3 branch system.

Let the authorities know. The decision of course can and should be appealed.

 

[MagicMike]

District court decisions are supposed to be limited to the district in question

Who told you that?

 

[martybegan]

Who told you that?

It's a muddy situation, one the SC has to rectify.

Do United States Federal Court district rulings apply just to the district or the entire United States?

So technically people have to follow it, but you can get another district judge to rule in your favor, and then go to the appeals circuit for another decision. Then someone can go to ANOTHER appeals circuit get an opposite decision, and each one is binding ONLY IN the circuit in question until the SC rules and applies it to the whole country.

 

[WEATHER53]

The stock market, the incessant fear headlines, the “judges” are all a part of the Tantrums we stated would occur. Some short term pain for great gain is a thinkers way to go. The rest -tantrums