We re in a Constitutional Crisis By Judges

[KissMy]

If the parents abandon their child, then we'll take care of it. The parents have no right to stay, both would be illegal immigrants. They are welcome to take their offspring with them. The argument will be moot when anchor babies are ruled citizens of the parent's native country.

Attempting to orphan children will bring serious condemnation down on your heads. Stupid crap like that cost the South to lose the Civil War, addition of 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments to our US Constitution & the World to defeat Germany in WWII.

Currently there is major opposition to deportation of good people. The Pope has already summoned Trump & Vance to the Vatican where he privately & publicly chastised them for the deportations.

Keep up this stupidity if you want to see more laws where we lose even more rights & have to pay them reparations.

 

[Delldude]

Trump and his cult want a king.........Their king.

View attachment 1105678

The man who would be King.

 

[scruffy]

Attempting to orphan children will bring serious condemnation down on your heads. Stupid crap like that cost the South to lose the Civil War, addition of 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments to our US Constitution & the World to defeat Germany in WWII.

Really? I thought it was Sherman

Currently there is major opposition to deportation of good people. The Pope has already summoned Trump & Vance to the Vatican where he privately & publicly chastised them for the deportations.

Who cares.

Keep up this stupidity if you want to see more laws where Whites lose even more rights & have to pay them reparations.

Whites?

Are you racist?

What does this have to do with whites?

 

[kyzr]

Then SCOTUS will say he has to listen to inferior courts.
You get nothing, but look foolish.

At least Trump would make the supremes earn their pay and make decisions, case by case, they would never say that district judges can order the president around at their whims.

 

[Marener]

At least Trump would make the supremes earn their pay and make decisions, case by case, they would never say that district judges can order the president around at their whims.

Once SCOTUS says Trump has to listen to lower courts, which is obviously how the constitution works, then they don’t have to make decisions “case by case”.

 

[kyzr]

He shouldn't have to tell them that--- put another way, they have to already know that (but don't care).

To be clear:

• A president is elected by the collective wills of many tens of millions of people supporting whatever his platform is.
• A district court judge is not only elected by no one, but his opinion and position is that of exactly ONE person--- HIS.
• To make matters worse, there are 670 of these judges.

So, you see, the wheels of Congress turn slowly, but either they and/or the SCOTUS MUST respond to this situation and resolve it because if they don't, elections will be meaningless. Unless someone puts their foot down, from here on out, there will be district court judges somewhere to interdict themselves into /every/ presidential policy and action.

Agreed. Which is why Trump needs to ignore the district judges to force congress or the USSC to rule on the matter.

 

[kyzr]

Once SCOTUS says Trump has to listen to lower courts, which is obviously how the constitution works, then they don’t have to make decisions “case by case”.

Never happen. That would be blatantly unconstitutional, in violation of Article 2.

 

[Marener]

Never happen. That would be blatantly unconstitutional, in violation of Article 2.

Not at all. It’s how the courts have always worked. When SCOTUS says it’s constitutional, then Trump will have to comply since you said he will listen to SCOTUS.

 

[kyzr]

Not at all. It’s how the courts have always worked. When SCOTUS says it’s constitutional, then Trump will have to comply since you said he will listen to SCOTUS.

We'll need to wait and see how the SCOTUS rules on the president's Article 2 powers vs district judges. Seems like a no-brainer to me. One other option is for congress to take action and defund district courts.

SCOTUS already said that district courts only decide for their districts and no "judge shopping" allowed, cases MUST be brought in the specific district that the case is in. So district judges have already been muzzled.

 

[Marener]

We'll need to wait and see how the SCOTUS rules on the president's Article 2 powers vs district judges. Seems like a no-brainer to me. One other option is for congress to take action and defund district courts.

SCOTUS already said that district courts only decide for their districts and no "judge shopping" allowed, cases MUST be brought in the specific district that the case is in. So district judges have already been muzzled.

I mean, every time SCOTUS upholds a lower court ruling, they’re saying that lower courts have authority over the president. This idea makes no sense.

 

[Delldude]

We'll need to wait and see how the SCOTUS rules on the president's Article 2 powers vs district judges.

May 15th I think.
Notice the dems are tossing out 'constitutional crisis' verbage for the uninformed?

I mean, every time SCOTUS upholds a lower court ruling, they’re saying that lower courts have authority over the president. This idea makes no sense.

Uphold or deferred while other cases work their way through the lower courts?

 

[White 6]

and exactly what rule has he broken by deporting illegal migrants .. should we just throw open the door and let them flood in ?

What laws has he broken?

Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965​

INA §§ 239, 240, 8 C.F.R. §§ 1003.12 et seq., 1240.1 et seq.
INA § 242B(a)(1), 8 C.F.R. § 1240.40 et seq.
https://www.justice.gov/eoir/reference-materials/ic/chapter-7/2
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_Nationality_Act_of_1965
See due process clause of the 5th Amendment, US Constitution, for requirement of due process.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_Nationality_Act_of_1965

 

[Blaster]

Agreed. Which is why Trump needs to ignore the district judges to force congress or the USSC to rule on the matter.

These district judges need to be slapped down.

 

[Independent thinker]

We are now in a Constitutional crisis. The makings of which are Federal judges, almost all Clinton, Obama, or Biden appointees, with a few Trump appointees but only by the necessity of where they are seated.

Yes, this is a Constitutional crisis.

Where is John Roberts? The times den a strong Chief Justice not a wishy-washy one whose wife loves the fancy parties in Washington, D.C. The times need a Rehnquist, a real Chief Justice, which we sadly are lacking.

Usually when you accuse the other side of something it is because you are doing it yourself. The left have cried nonstop for years about Constitutional crisis and yet they are the ones who keep on putting us there.

 

[Godboy]

Then SCOTUS will say he has to listen to inferior courts.

Im sure that they will, but they will also limit what the inferior courts can say. They will NOT allow these district courts to make rules for an entire nation. They will be limited to ruling only on cases for individuals, not the entire population.

 

[Marener]

Im sure that they will, but they will also limit what the inferior courts can say. Tbey will NOT allow these district courts to make rules for an entire nation. They will be limited to ruling only on cases for individuals, not the entire population.

You guys had no problem with it when district courts did it to Biden, in fact conservatives celebrated it. Especially when some particular lunatics in Texas did so.

 

[Godboy]

You guys had no problem with it when district courts did it to Biden, in fact conservatives celebrated it. Especially when some particular lunatics in Texas did so.

I have a problem with it anytime its done. Both sides of Congress should agree to make a law to prohibit this. Or not even prohibit it, just make it so these cases have to go to a panel of judges before they actually put their rulings into effect.

 

[Marener]

I have a problem with it anytime its done. Both sides of Congress should agree to make a law to prohibit this. Or not even prohibit it, just make it so these cases have to go to a panel of judges before they actually put their rulings into effect.

So did you have a problem when a district court judge in Louisiana ordered the Biden administration to limit contact with social media companies?

US judge restricts Biden officials from contact with social media firms

A U.S. federal judge on Tuesday restricted some agencies and officials of the administration of President Joe Biden from meeting and communicating with social media companies to moderate their content, according to a court filing.

www.reuters.com

 

[otto105]

We are now in a Constitutional crisis. The makings of which are Federal judges, almost all Clinton, Obama, or Biden appointees, with a few Trump appointees but only by the necessity of where they are seated.

Yes, this is a Constitutional crisis.

Where is John Roberts? The times den a strong Chief Justice not a wishy-washy one whose wife loves the fancy parties in Washington, D.C. The times need a Rehnquist, a real Chief Justice, which we sadly are lacking.

The cause has been unconstitutional actions of a fat orange clown.

 

[Godboy]

So did you have a problem when a district court judge in Louisiana ordered the Biden administration to limit contact with social media companies?

US judge restricts Biden officials from contact with social media firms

A U.S. federal judge on Tuesday restricted some agencies and officials of the administration of President Joe Biden from meeting and communicating with social media companies to moderate their content, according to a court filing.

www.reuters.com

No, i want to have the ability to challenge a president when he does something i dont like, but what i dont want is a system where any biased judge can just wave a wand and make judgements for the entire nation on a whim. There needs to be a panel that looks at these cases to decide whether or not they are legitimate rulings.