Trump to Go After States Allowing Illegal Immigrants to Obtain Driver’s Licenses

I believe his second term will be a seemingly magical reversal of Democrat societal and cultural modifications. :113:
 

The SCOTUS has not said that. Federal funding cannot be cut off without authorization by Congress. These states did not give illegals a driver's license. They are saying that you do not have to prove citizenship. There is nothing illegal about it. The laws also do not allow states to turn over personal information to the federal government. That is good as states have no business turning over personal information over to the federal government.
 

The SCOTUS has not said that. Federal funding cannot be cut off without authorization by Congress. These states did not give illegals a driver's license. They are saying that you do not have to prove citizenship. There is nothing illegal about it. The laws also do not allow states to turn over personal information to the federal government. That is good as states have no business turning over personal information over to the federal government.
Since 1801 Presidents have been doing it.

Impoundment of appropriated funds - Wikipedia
 

The SCOTUS has not said that. Federal funding cannot be cut off without authorization by Congress. These states did not give illegals a driver's license. They are saying that you do not have to prove citizenship. There is nothing illegal about it. The laws also do not allow states to turn over personal information to the federal government. That is good as states have no business turning over personal information over to the federal government.
Since 1801 Presidents have been doing it.

Impoundment of appropriated funds - Wikipedia

That practice was ended in 1974. Impoundment of funds have to be approved by Congress. You need to read your links BEFORE you post. Your link proves my point.
 

The SCOTUS has not said that. Federal funding cannot be cut off without authorization by Congress. These states did not give illegals a driver's license. They are saying that you do not have to prove citizenship. There is nothing illegal about it. The laws also do not allow states to turn over personal information to the federal government. That is good as states have no business turning over personal information over to the federal government.
Since 1801 Presidents have been doing it.

Impoundment of appropriated funds - Wikipedia

That practice was ended in 1974. Impoundment of funds have to be approved by Congress. You need to read your links BEFORE you post. Your link proves my point.
Just an EO away.
 
Not that concerned with drivers license testing. They are going to be on the roads. When I was in Europe (legally) I had an international drivers license, and having to do it was a good idea, road rules, signs, traffic patterns being foreign to me, at that time.
WHAT I DO NOT LIKE IS MOTOR/VOTER STATE LAWS. Mind you, Tennessee is a motor/voter state. My state does not always share my pesky worries of people signing up to vote as they get their license. I do not think it has had a statistical effect on illegal alien voting in my state, but I guess I don't trust other motor/voter states (yeah I guess I'm willing to go along with constitutional reciprocity among the states, but) to handle it properly may not be possible at a one stop shop. I had to go downtown many years ago, show proof of who I was and my right to vote in a specific precinct. I see no harm in everybody having go through with it.
 

The SCOTUS has not said that. Federal funding cannot be cut off without authorization by Congress. These states did not give illegals a driver's license. They are saying that you do not have to prove citizenship. There is nothing illegal about it. The laws also do not allow states to turn over personal information to the federal government. That is good as states have no business turning over personal information over to the federal government.
Since 1801 Presidents have been doing it.

Impoundment of appropriated funds - Wikipedia

That practice was ended in 1974. Impoundment of funds have to be approved by Congress. You need to read your links BEFORE you post. Your link proves my point.

It was an inherent power of the Presidency from the founding until Richard Nixon. Thomas Jefferson was the first to exercise it.

There's a 45 day gap in the Act. Plenty of time to do it anyway and revisit the matter via the SCOTUS.
 

Forum List

Back
Top