Would an Executive Order for Amnesty Create a Constitutional Showdown?

[Borillar]

The Congress of "No" deserves a fair share of the blame for gridlock as well. If they're still not willing to compromise, nothing will get done.

Now that Reid can no longer ignore bills send over from the house, it's a good bet that Congress will get a lot more done.

Now that the shoe is on the other foot, Reid can filibuster every bill to come over including when to break for lunch.

 

[Syriusly]

Looks like now that we're going to control Congress a few amendments will have to be made. Repealing the 14th amendment for one. Passing an amendment that makes the DACA illegal.

Repealing the 14th Amendment.....wow.....

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

I can see why the far right would object to the 14th Amendment.

Imagine- telling States that they can't deprive Americans of their civil rights.....

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

This is the REAL scenario that will unfold, based on recent turmoil in the Arab Spring uprisings (most modern example of revolutions).

1: Obama uses EO to usurp the power of the elected general assembly (Congress). All power is hereby vested in Congress...

2: The General Congress starts the impeachment process.

3: Obama disbands Congress (history is full of over 100+ legendary examples of executives becoming dictators by suspending/abolishing the popular assembly).

4: House and Senate Democrats obey Obama's order to disband. A handful of RHINOS give some lip service against Obama, but also obey his order.

5: A House and Senate being composed only of real conservatives (since the liberals left), votes to impeach and remove Obama.

6: Obama says their vote is illegitimate, since he disbanded them. Lots of "Constitution was written by rich white slaver owners" propaganda "Time for the Change I promised" and Constitution is disbanded.

7: Civil War erupts between liberals and conservatives. Oathkeepers and Oathbreakers start the confrontation. "Ex-Pro-Constitutional Law Enforcement" now branded as "traitors" vs "Current/Pro-Obama Law Enforcement."

8: The liberal masses hide in their houses and cheer on the mass death wrought upon the Pro-Constitution terrorists.

9: The armed pro-Constitution population joins Oathkeepers.

10: Foreign nations come in to "save America from the terrorists."

11: Many "current Pro-Obama" forces abandon Obama and help resist foreign invaders, realizing what fuckups they were.

Now, for speculation.
12: In desperation, pro-Constitution forces use nukes against foreign invaders. Launching only two or three. They hit small cities, sending a message to China and Russia to **** off and leave us alone.

That is the fantasy that the far right wing whackos so desperately want to happen.

Why any Americans would fantasize about a Civil War, I don't understand.

Because they're desperate rightwing wackos.

 

[Katzndogz]

obola intends that the republicans stop him. He imagines that democrats can use that in the 2016 election.

 

[Syriusly]

Looks like now that we're going to control Congress a few amendments will have to be made. Repealing the 14th amendment for one. Passing an amendment that makes the DACA illegal.

Repealing the 14th Amendment.....wow.....

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

I can see why the far right would object to the 14th Amendment.

Imagine- telling States that they can't deprive Americans of their civil rights.....

Really the simple answer is- if Congress really believes that an Executive Order violates the Constitution, then they have the authority under the Constitution to remove the President from office- they can impeach and leave the Supreme Court out of it.

Congress has all of the authority it needs- whether or not it uses that authority- well that we shall see.

 

[Jarlaxle]

The Congress of "No" deserves a fair share of the blame for gridlock as well. If they're still not willing to compromise, nothing will get done.

Now that Reid can no longer ignore bills send over from the house, it's a good bet that Congress will get a lot more done.

Now that the shoe is on the other foot, Reid can filibuster every bill to come over including when to break for lunch.

Or the GOP can give him a taste of his own medicine and eliminate the filibuster...

 

[Roadrunner]

Like stopping the closing of Gitmo, all Congress has to do is pass a bill to stop the E.O. So no Constitutional crisis. With control of both chambers of Congress, if the GOP can't get that done, it will just show how powerless they are.

There are Dems so scared now they are going to be tying themselves to Reps to save their seats in 2016.

They will join in in reigning in Obama if he goes much further.

America has had enough of Obama; if they believed in him, they would have given him back the House and Senate so he could carry out his agenda in his last two years.

They didn't; America is waking up.

 

[Roadrunner]

Constitutional Amendment Process

The Constitution provides that an amendment may be proposed either by the Congress with a two-thirds majority vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate or by a constitutional convention called for by two-thirds of the State legislatures. None of the 27 amendments to the Constitution have been proposed by constitutional convention. The Congress proposes an amendment in the form of a joint resolution. Since the President does not have a constitutional role in the amendment process, the joint resolution does not go to the White House for signature or approval. The original document is forwarded directly to NARA's Office of the Federal Register (OFR) for processing and publication. The OFR adds legislative history notes to the joint resolution and publishes it in slip law format. The OFR also assembles an information package for the States which includes formal "red-line" copies of the joint resolution, copies of the joint resolution in slip law format, and the statutory procedure for ratification under 1 U.S.C. 106b.

The Archivist submits the proposed amendment to the States for their consideration by sending a letter of notification to each Governor along with the informational material prepared by the OFR.

First time for everything; states are getting tired of being shit on too.

 

[Roadrunner]

Like stopping the closing of Gitmo, all Congress has to do is pass a bill to stop the E.O. So no Constitutional crisis. With control of both chambers of Congress, if the GOP can't get that done, it will just show how powerless they are.

Nice that we're already talking about not only gridlock but a constitutional crisis between the prick in the Whitehouse and Congress.

As long as he's there nothing gets done.

Gridlock maintains the status quo. There is no Constitutional crisis. It is a cycle that keeps repeating itself. (How much was spent and where did it all go?)

The Congress of "No" deserves a fair share of the blame for gridlock as well. If they're still not willing to compromise, nothing will get done.

There is no compromising with a man whose approach to things is "I Won".

You can't compromise with a man that says he speaks for the 2/3 of voters that stayed home.

 

[Antares]

Like stopping the closing of Gitmo, all Congress has to do is pass a bill to stop the E.O. So no Constitutional crisis. With control of both chambers of Congress, if the GOP can't get that done, it will just show how powerless they are.

Nice that we're already talking about not only gridlock but a constitutional crisis between the prick in the Whitehouse and Congress.

As long as he's there nothing gets done.

Gridlock maintains the status quo. There is no Constitutional crisis. It is a cycle that keeps repeating itself. (How much was spent and where did it all go?)

The Congress of "No" deserves a fair share of the blame for gridlock as well. If they're still not willing to compromise, nothing will get done.

There is no compromising with a man whose approach to things is "I Won".

You can't compromise with a man that says he speaks for the 2/3 of voters that stayed home.

That was a stunning moment, the man is delusional.

 

[Roadrunner]

Looks like now that we're going to control Congress a few amendments will have to be made. Repealing the 14th amendment for one. Passing an amendment that makes the DACA illegal.

Repealing the 14th Amendment.....wow.....

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

I can see why the far right would object to the 14th Amendment.

Imagine- telling States that they can't deprive Americans of their civil rights.....

Post the whole thing.

It was passed to protect the children of former slaves, not to allow any foreigner who squats a child out on the banks of the Rio Grande have a right to citizenship for the child and a free ride for life.

The whole anchor baby thing has to stop.

 

[Borillar]

The Congress of "No" deserves a fair share of the blame for gridlock as well. If they're still not willing to compromise, nothing will get done.

Now that Reid can no longer ignore bills send over from the house, it's a good bet that Congress will get a lot more done.

Now that the shoe is on the other foot, Reid can filibuster every bill to come over including when to break for lunch.

Or the GOP can give him a taste of his own medicine and eliminate the filibuster...

Be fine with me. I wish the Dems had done away with it completely a long time ago. Bills and appointments should be given an up or down vote, not this BS where you have to have a supermajority to do anything. Or at the very least, make the obstructionist get up and make their case in public as to why they are opposed to the bill.

 

[Clementine]

What is to stop Obama from trying it before the new congress is in? Of course, he would have the support of the current Dems. Funny that not a one of them campaigned on granting amnesty.

 

[Borillar]

What is to stop Obama from trying it before the new congress is in? Of course, he would have the support of the current Dems. Funny that not a one of them campaigned on granting amnesty.

Probably because the idea is a big loser. Obama is a fool if he does this unilaterally. I don't think that there would be wholehearted support from Democrats either. They would certainly lose my support with such a move. Immigration reform, yes, but work something out. It is an insult to all the immigrants who have followed the rules, obeyed the laws, and have become naturalized citizens.

 

[Contumacious]

Looks like now that we're going to control Congress a few amendments will have to be made. Repealing the 14th amendment for one. Passing an amendment that makes the DACA illegal.

Repealing the 14th Amendment.....wow.....

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

I can see why the far right would object to the 14th Amendment.

Imagine- telling States that they can't deprive Americans of their civil rights.....

Excuse me ding dong,

In 1787 did the states know that nine of them practiced slavery?


How can the Amendment be Constitutional when it was adopted


the 14th Amendment was: 1) fraudulently, unlawfully, illegally proposed by the U.S. Congress rendering it null and void at the outset; 2) ratified in the Southern states by 'rump legislatures', literally by military force at bayonet point — threat, duress and coercion — rendering it null and void in the second instance; 3) had nothing to do with giving freed slaves citizenship status and instead created a new status of citizenship for all Americans (U.S. citizens rather than Citizens of our respective states) which in effect enslaved us all; 4) dissolved and replaced constitutional law with the 'Laws of Commerce and Admiralty'... and 5) in a very real sense became a new constitution within the constitution.

Judge Leander Perez

 

[JakeStarkey]

Looks like now that we're going to control Congress a few amendments will have to be made. Repealing the 14th amendment for one. Passing an amendment that makes the DACA illegal.

We don't have the votes to get it out of Congress, much less in the states.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Time for sanity check.

1) the Amendment was legally proposed;

2) lawfully passed in the reconstructed Southern states;

3) lawfully created the concept of American citizenship for representation in US federal courts, thus rendering Dred Scott null and void;

4) lawfully expanded the definition of law in the Constitution; and

5) and lawfully expanded constitutional powers of the national government.

Any who buy Conty's nonsense will become a libertarian for all of the wrong reasons.

 

[Contumacious]

Time for sanity check.

Comrade Starkiev, you meant a Insanity check.

1) the Amendment was legally proposed;

According to Cuban, Venezuelan and Former USSR Law.

2) lawfully passed in the reconstructed Southern states;

Only if 'rump legislatures' and amendment adopted literally by military force at bayonet point — threat, duress and coercion — is lawful



'nuff said.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Conty, you are a goof ball who is a libertarian for bad ways. You know it. I know it. You will not get what you want. End of discussion.

 

[mudwhistle]

Time for sanity check.

1) the Amendment was legally proposed;

2) lawfully passed in the reconstructed Southern states;

3) lawfully created the concept of American citizenship for representation in US federal courts, thus rendering Dred Scott null and void;

4) lawfully expanded the definition of law in the Constitution; and

5) and lawfully expanded constitutional powers of the national government.

Any who buy Conty's nonsense will become a libertarian for all of the wrong reasons.

And it will have to be amended because the framers didn't take illegal immigration into account when they wrote it. It was supposed to give slaves citizenship, not draw people from 3rd world countries into the U.S. so they could have their children here, and send cash to their relatives living across the border, or bring the rest of their families here to live.

The Abuse of the Fourteenth Amendment- The Imaginative Conservative

Consequences of misinterpreting the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution - Fourteenth Amendment - anchor babies and birthright citizenship - interpretations and misinterpretations - US Constitution