I think Trump would probably spend a LOT of time negotiating with Congress and achieving support before he announced a particular initiative. He has a strong track record of that M.O.
Good response......but, lets review his plan to round up all illegal aliens and his further proposal to repatriate even babies born in the U.S. ....without stating my own opinion on that, let me just state that such a plan
IS contrary to the 14th amendment, and Trump's plan could very well be banned by the Supreme Court.
Worcester v. Georgia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In a popular quotation that is believed to be apocryphal, President
Andrew Jackson reportedly responded: "John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it!" This derives from Jackson's comments on the case in a letter to John Coffee, "...the decision of the Supreme Court has fell still born, and they find that they cannot coerce Georgia to yield to its mandate," (that is, the Court's opinion because it had no power to enforce its edict).
[1]
The ruling in
Worcester ordered that Worcester be freed, and Georgia complied after several months. In 1833, the newly elected governor,
Wilson Lumpkin, offered to pardon Worcester and Butler if they ceased their activities among the Cherokee. The two complied and were freed (under the authority of a January 14, 1833 general proclamation, not a formal pardon).
[2] They never returned to Cherokee land.
The federal government and the Cherokee were not party to the suit.
Worcester imposed no obligations on Jackson; there was nothing for him to enforce.
[3][4] The Court did not ask
federal marshals to carry out the decision, as had become standard.
[5] Worcester may be seen as a prudential decision, for avoiding the possibility of political conflict between the Court and the Executive, while still delivering what appeared to be a pro-Indian decision.
[6]
As a tribal sovereignty precedent[edit]
Marshall's language in
Worcester may have been motivated by his regret that his earlier opinions in
Fletcher and
Johnson had been used as a justification for Georgia's actions. Justice Story considered it similarly, writing in a letter to his wife dated March 4, 1832: "Thanks be to God, the Court can wash their hands clean of the iniquity of oppressing the Indians and disregarding their rights."
[7] Because Jackson proceeded with
Cherokee removal,
Worcester did not aid indigenous rights at the time.
Worcester has been cited in several later opinions on the subject of
tribal sovereignty in the United States.
lets review his plan to round up all illegal aliens and his further proposal to repatriate even babies born in the U.S. ....without stating my own opinion on that, let me just state that such a plan IS contrary to the 14th amendment.
Wow... Yeah, let's not state your opinion, okay? First of all, Trump has never said "round up all illegal aliens" ...EVER! So you've began your "non-opinionated" statement with an outright lie. If you were worth anything, Trump could sue you for slander.
Secondly... You don't know what is or isn't contrary to the 14th, you are not on the Supreme Court, you don't represent the entire Supreme Court and no such case has been presented to the Supreme Court as of this time.... So what the ****, Mr. Non-opinion.
I'm not even sure the SCOTUS has jurisdiction over this.
