Boss signs executive orders just now

S

Stretch

New member
1) Hiring freeze on government workers (except Military)
2) U.S. out of TPP
3) Forbids U.S. funding of international family planning organizations that promote or provide abortions.
 
Last edited:
POTUS can order hirings and freezes as part of the executive purview. What he cannot do is legislate-
like Obama's "pen and phone" XO's on immigration (etc)
 
anatta said:
POTUS can order hirings and freezes as part of the executive purview. What he cannot do is legislate-
like Obama's "pen and phone" XO's on immigration (etc)
Click to expand...

Tell us exactly which laws Obama broke, which of his XO's were illegal and why the Republican Congress didn't prosecute him for it?

Oh wait, everything Obama did in getting around the Republicans' unprecedented level of partisan obstructionism was perfectly, 100% LEGAL.

Boo hoo 4U.
 
Nomad said:
Tell us exactly which laws Obama broke, which of his XO's were illegal and why the Republican Congress didn't prosecute him for it?

Oh wait, everything Obama did in getting around the Republicans' unprecedented level of partisan obstructionism was perfectly, 100% LEGAL.

Boo hoo 4U.
Click to expand...
IDIOT - you are batting 1000 today.. They are "unconstitutional" not Illegal -i thought you were a lawyer? here is some of his case loses by SCOTUS

These cases have been in such disparate areas as criminal procedure, religious liberty, property rights, immigration, securities regulation, tax law, and the separation of powers. Here are some recent unanimous headline-grabbers.
Click to expand...

In Hosanna-Tabor Church v. EEOC (2012), the government sued a church school that fired a teacher for violating one of its religious tenets. The court ruled that punishing a church for not retaining an unwanted teacher violates the First Amendment.

In United States v. Jones (2012), the government claimed the power to attach a GPS device to a suspected drug dealer’s car and monitor his movements without a warrant. While the justices had differing opinions on why this violated the Fourth Amendment, all agreed that it did.

In Sackett v. EPA (2012), the government denied property owners the right to contest an order to stop building their house. The court ruled that access to courts is the least the government can provide in response to “the strong-arming of regulated parties.”

While the conventional wisdom about Arizona v. United States (2012) is that the high court smacked down a perniciously anti-immigrant state, Arizona actually won unanimously on its most controversial “show me your papers” provision. Not one justice accepted the theory that mere enforcement priorities trump state laws.

In Horne v. Department of Agriculture (2013), the government claimed raisin farmers weren’t entitled to judicial review of a byzantine New Deal-era program that confiscated crops in an attempt to regulate prices. The Supreme Court again allowed plaintiffs their day in court—and two years later ruled for them 8-1 on the merits.

In Riley v. California (2014), the Supreme Court ruled that the government needs to get a warrant if it wants to search the digital information stored on arrestees’ cell phones.

In Noel Canning v. National Labor Relations Board (2014), the court invalidated President Obama’s National Labor Relations Board appointments essentially because the Senate had not declared a recess when he made them.

Just last week, in McDonnell v. United States (2016), the court reversed the conviction of a former Virginia governor because meetings with constituents who seek the favor of elected officials are not the kinds of “official acts” that can be prosecuted under public-corruption statutes.
++
In a blow to President Obama, Supreme Court blocks immigration executive action
hursday’s decision in United States v. Texas leaves in place the decision of then5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, effectively ending Obama’s initiative to circumvent Congressional inaction on comprehensive immigration reform.

The Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents plan, or DAPA, would have spared as many as 5 million undocumented immigrants from deportation. Led by Texas, a coalition of 26 states challenged the executive order on the grounds that the program exceeded the president’s statutory authority and imposed an undue burden on the states to implement.
http://www.salon.com/2016/06/23/in_...me_court_blocks_immigration_executive_action/
 
I love how they did not make any distinction when attacking Obama for his executive orders, but do now that Trumpovitch is issuing them.
 
i like less foreign aid and us out of tpp. If you wanna fund an abortion clinic do it in the US so it creates jobs here.

not sure about federal hiring freeze.
 
tsuke said:
i like less foreign aid and us out of tpp. If you wanna fund an abortion clinic do it in the US so it creates jobs here.

not sure about federal hiring freeze.
Click to expand...

We don't need any more paper-pushing federally employed lifers.......drain the swamp.
 
anatta said:
IDIOT - you are batting 1000 today.. They are "unconstitutional" not Illegal -i thought you were a lawyer? here is some of his case loses by SCOTUS



In Hosanna-Tabor Church v. EEOC (2012), the government sued a church school that fired a teacher for violating one of its religious tenets. The court ruled that punishing a church for not retaining an unwanted teacher violates the First Amendment.

In United States v. Jones (2012), the government claimed the power to attach a GPS device to a suspected drug dealer’s car and monitor his movements without a warrant. While the justices had differing opinions on why this violated the Fourth Amendment, all agreed that it did.

In Sackett v. EPA (2012), the government denied property owners the right to contest an order to stop building their house. The court ruled that access to courts is the least the government can provide in response to “the strong-arming of regulated parties.”

While the conventional wisdom about Arizona v. United States (2012) is that the high court smacked down a perniciously anti-immigrant state, Arizona actually won unanimously on its most controversial “show me your papers” provision. Not one justice accepted the theory that mere enforcement priorities trump state laws.

In Horne v. Department of Agriculture (2013), the government claimed raisin farmers weren’t entitled to judicial review of a byzantine New Deal-era program that confiscated crops in an attempt to regulate prices. The Supreme Court again allowed plaintiffs their day in court—and two years later ruled for them 8-1 on the merits.

In Riley v. California (2014), the Supreme Court ruled that the government needs to get a warrant if it wants to search the digital information stored on arrestees’ cell phones.

In Noel Canning v. National Labor Relations Board (2014), the court invalidated President Obama’s National Labor Relations Board appointments essentially because the Senate had not declared a recess when he made them.

Just last week, in McDonnell v. United States (2016), the court reversed the conviction of a former Virginia governor because meetings with constituents who seek the favor of elected officials are not the kinds of “official acts” that can be prosecuted under public-corruption statutes.
++
In a blow to President Obama, Supreme Court blocks immigration executive action
hursday’s decision in United States v. Texas leaves in place the decision of then5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, effectively ending Obama’s initiative to circumvent Congressional inaction on comprehensive immigration reform.

The Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents plan, or DAPA, would have spared as many as 5 million undocumented immigrants from deportation. Led by Texas, a coalition of 26 states challenged the executive order on the grounds that the program exceeded the president’s statutory authority and imposed an undue burden on the states to implement.
http://www.salon.com/2016/06/23/in_...me_court_blocks_immigration_executive_action/
Click to expand...

You can list all the bullshit "precedent" cases that don't really apply all you want to but the fact remains that aside from pissing and whining, the GOP Congress never successfully put up any legal challenges to them.

Ergo, you have nothing.
 
Nomad said:
You can list all the bullshit "precedent" cases that don't really apply all you want to but the fact remains that aside from pissing and whining, the GOP Congress never successfully put up any legal challenges to them.

Ergo, you have nothing.
Click to expand...
ROFL. Why would Congress have gone to SCOTUS for "legal challenges"?
Hardly ever is that done as SCOTUS is loathe to get into separation of powers issues.

Congress decision not do to immigration reform for ex -was a decision in itself because reform came independent of border control-
there was no guarantee the wall ( already authorized) would be extended.

The states ( Texas et all) went after DAPA as the executive legislating - the other cases have their own particulars.
 
anatta said:
ROFL. Why would Congress have gone to SCOTUS for "legal challenges"?
Hardly ever is that done as SCOTUS is loathe to get into separation of powers issues.

Congress decision not do to immigration reform for ex -was a decision in itself because reform came independent of border control-
there was no guarantee the wall ( already authorized) would be extended.

The states ( Texas et all) went after DAPA as the executive legislating - the other cases have their own particulars.
Click to expand...

So then it was never decided by the court that Obama's XO's were unconstitutional and as such, you are just parroting right-wing OPINION.

You lose.
 
Nomad said:
So then it was never decided by the court that Obama's XO's were unconstitutional and as such, you are just parroting right-wing OPINION.

You lose.
Click to expand...
The 1 XO that did go to the courts was DAPA -SCOTUS affirmed a lower courts ruling against Obama

You are batting .000 today -the same percentage Obama did with XO rulings by the courts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top