Judge Will Block Trump Border Wall in New Ruling

[Formerly Once-Ler]

https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/immigration/2019/10/judge-will-block-trump-border-wall-in-new-ruling.html

EL PASO, TX - Today, a Texas federal court ruled that President Trump’s proclamation of a national emergency along the Southern border violated federal law. The court declared that the president’s proclamation is invalid because it illegally sought to override Congress’s decision to not fund further border wall construction. The court invited the plaintiffs, El Paso County, Texas, and the Border Network for Human Right to propose terms for an injunction that would prevent the government from using funds to build border barriers that Congress specifically refused to authorize.

This lawsuit, which is unrelated to one brought in California challenging the president’s shuffling of Department of Defense funding streams to pay for his border wall, was brought on behalf of El Paso County, Texas, and the Border Network for Human Rights—an El Paso-based nonprofit dedicated to ensuring the participation of marginalized border communities and defending human and civil rights.

Kristy Parker, Counsel for Protect Democracy, a nonpartisan nonprofit which represented the plaintiffs, said: “Throughout history, democracies have been felled by overzealous leaders who sought to aggrandize their own powers under the banner of real or imagined ‘emergencies.’ Our Founders were wise enough to anticipate that danger and created a strong separation of powers to prevent that from happening here. Today’s ruling vindicates the Founders’ wisdom and confirms that the president is not a king, and that he cannot override Congress’s power to decide how to appropriate funds.

more at link

[truth_seeker]

@Once-Ler ,

do you support or oppose the Wall?

[skeeter]

How many *ucking bites at the apple do these leftist judges get?

[Formerly Once-Ler]

@Once-Ler ,

do you support or oppose the Wall?

@truth_seeker
It's not a black and white issue for me. I support physical barriers to stem the flow of drugs, criminals, and terrorists, but as a symbol of xenophobia or a solution to illegal immigration I oppose Trump's wall.

[skeeter]

@truth_seeker
It's not a black and white issue for me. I support physical barriers to stem the flow of drugs, criminals, and terrorists, but as a symbol of xenophobia or a solution to illegal immigration I oppose Trump's wall.

So... do you support a wall or not?

[PeteS in CA]

Trump has children by women who are naturalized citizens but is a xenophobe? That idea is just dumb.

[Formerly Once-Ler]

So... do you support a wall or not?

It's my tax dollars being used to build/not build it, so I guess I do support it.

So let me ask you @skeeter do you support the Constitutional right of Congress to impeach the President?  Yes or No.

[skeeter]

It's my tax dollars being used to build/not build it, so I guess I do support it.

So let me ask you @skeeter do you support the Constitutional right of Congress to impeach the President?  Yes or No.

@Once-Ler Under the terms and spirit set forth in the Constitution, of course.

Why wouldn't I?

[Chosen Daughter]

I support the wall, but Trump already made it ineffective.  Anywhere that has liberal local government can opt out.  What good is that?  When building fences in your yard to keep your animals in or neighbors out would you put holes in it?

Well Trump signed that himself.  And only 77 miles have been built according to the ICE Director in the Press Conference.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

@Once-Ler Under the terms and spirit set forth in the Constitution, of course.

Why wouldn't I?

Ever wonder why someone would even ask such a question unless they are not US citizens or do not know what constitutes our country?

Are there any other scenarios?

[IsailedawayfromFR]

How many *ucking bites at the apple do these leftist judges get?

Until we have a responsible Congress who addresses their actions.

[Victoria33]

"Today’s ruling vindicates the Founders’ wisdom and confirms that the president is not a king, and that he cannot override Congress’s power to decide how to appropriate funds."

He should not be able to take money congress appropriated to a government department.  That is true, he is not king, even though he thinks he owns the whole government and all people in the country.

[Chosen Daughter]

"Today’s ruling vindicates the Founders’ wisdom and confirms that the president is not a king, and that he cannot override Congress’s power to decide how to appropriate funds."

He should not be able to take money congress appropriated to a government department.  That is true, he is not king, even though he thinks he owns the whole government and all people in the country.

I wholeheartedly disagree with you on this one.  Not because I am anti immigration  but because the President has the Constitutional duty to secure the nation and keep it safe from invasion.  Congress also has the job to make sure the nation is secure.  They are simply doing the will of themselves.  Serving foreigners that will come and eventually vote for them because they appropriate Socialism.  This country is on the brink of losing what the Founding Fathers gave us. 

I used to be proud.  Now I am only proud of those who serve selflessly like the men and women in our military.  The President was forced to divert the funds to fulfill his Constitutional duty to this nation and the citizens of the United States of America.

Furthermore this Congress is holding some of the lowest approval ratings ever.

Approve 21 Disaprove 63

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/

What does it mean Republican?  What does it mean Democrat?  What makes them worthy of representing American people if they will not abide by the laws?  What about these agenda judges?  We have laws and they should be upheld.  That is what the system is supposed to do.  But it doesn't.  So don't go getting all high and mighty about Congress appropriating.  They would rather appropriate for the deaths of term babies.  Appropriating funds so that Planned Parenthood can turn it back to political campaigns for liberals.  And for the agenda of Hollywood.

Yeah Hollywood.  And our government has become one screwed up bad movie. 

US Constitution:

Article IV, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution "The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against invasion ; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence."

Congressional Oath of Office:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.

Presidential Oath of Office:

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States."

Each person that takes those oaths are ensuring that they will uphold the Constitution.  That they will serve the American people not their party or themselves.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

That is true, he is not king, even though he thinks he owns the whole government and all people in the country.

You actually believe the garbage you write?

[skeeter]

Ever wonder why someone would even ask such a question unless they are not US citizens or do not know what constitutes our country?

Are there any other scenarios?

What kind of person thinks a legitimate use of the impeachment process is solely as a means to reverse the results of an election? Probably like the one you described.

[rangerrebew]

Judge Finds Community Organization Has Standing to Block Border Wall
Why? I am not sure, but it sets a bad precedent
 
By Andrew R. Arthur on October 17, 2019

In my last post, I discussed an October 11, 2019, Memorandum Opinion issued by Senior Judge David Briones of the of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, El Paso Division. In that opinion, Judge Briones found that a "Presidential Proclamation on Declaring a National Emergency Concerning the Southern Border of the United States" violated the 2019 Consolidated Appropriations Act (2019 CAA). In issuing that opinion, Judge Briones found that a "community organization", the Border Network for Human Rights (BNHR), had standing to challenge the proclamation "because its members have suffered a concrete injury," including "impair[ment of] its organization's mission" and an expenditure of funds. It is not clear how, exactly, that impairment differs from BNHR's mission.

In particular, Judge Briones found:

https://cis.org/Arthur/Judge-Finds-Community-Organization-Has-Standing-Block-Border-Wall

[skeeter]

Tedious.

This'll be overturned. The strategy here, obviously, is to tie things up until Trump is out.

Which is a total abuse of the law and a perversion of the spirit of the judicial system.

[truth_seeker]

@Once-Ler  stated that a border wall, is "xenophobic."

[Cyber Liberty]

@Once-Ler  stated that a border wall, is "xenophobic."

I find people who refuse to acknowledge the legitimate complaints of the people in border states who watch loved ones die at the hands of the illegal invaders unimpressive, and I ignore their ignorant epithets like "xenophobic."

[skeeter]

@Once-Ler  stated that a border wall, is "xenophobic."

He said he would want one but for the fact we want one. So he doesn't want one.

[Formerly Once-Ler]

I find people who refuse to acknowledge the legitimate complaints of the people in border states who watch loved ones die at the hands of the illegal invaders unimpressive, and I ignore their ignorant epithets like "xenophobic."

@Cyber Liberty
When Rep Bill Hurd, the last black republican in the house, retires in Nov every house district on the southern border will be represented by Wall hating rats.

[Cyber Liberty]

@Cyber Liberty
When Rep Bill Hurd, the last black republican in the house, retires in Nov every house district on the southern border will be represented by Wall hating rats.

Rats will be Rats.  They aren't the one who disappoint me.

[Formerly Once-Ler]

I find people who refuse to acknowledge the legitimate complaints of the people in border states who watch loved ones die at the hands of the illegal invaders unimpressive.

@Cyber Liberty
I'm sorry I see it differently.  I've heard the stories.  Illegal crosses the border.  Some things happened.  Those anecdotal stories are tragic but don't reflect on the tens of millions of illegals in America 

Southern Border states
CA - rat owned.  Has sanctuary cities.  Not for Wall.
NM - rat owned.  Has sanctuary cities.  Not for Wall.
TX - gop owned.  No sanctuary cities.   For Wall.
AZ - gop owned.  No sanctuary cities.   For Wall.

Looks like you acknowledge the complaints of half the border states.  I'm sorry I'm not for a wall.  I'd like to see more secure borders and a more efficient flow of trade with Mexico.  I think a greatly expanded wall is too costly to build and maintain for it's limited effectiveness.  I am thankful Trump has been thwarted in building anything substantial thus far, if he every really wanted the Wall as anything other than a campaign gimmick.

and I ignore their ignorant epithets like "xenophobic."

Good, because I didn't direct that epithet at you.  I aimed it at a wall.
The wall is a symbol of xenophobia.  It makes skin heads feel warm and accepted.  I don't like it. 
It may not be a symbol of hatred to you, or even a large majority of the GOP, but it is to me...and Bannon, Miller, and Gorka IMO.

[Cyber Liberty]

@Cyber Liberty
I'm sorry I see it differently.  I've heard the stories.  Illegal crosses the border.  Some things happened.  Those anecdotal stories are tragic but don't reflect on the tens of millions of illegals in America 

Southern Border states
CA - rat owned.  Has sanctuary cities.  Not for Wall.
NM - rat owned.  Has sanctuary cities.  Not for Wall.
TX - gop owned.  No sanctuary cities.   For Wall.
AZ - gop owned.  No sanctuary cities.   For Wall.

Looks like you acknowledge the complaints of half the border states.  I'm sorry I'm not for a wall.  I'd like to see more secure borders and a more efficient flow of trade with Mexico.  I think a greatly expanded wall is too costly to build and maintain for it's limited effectiveness.  I am thankful Trump has been thwarted in building anything substantial thus far, if he every really wanted the Wall as anything other than a campaign gimmick.

Good, because I didn't direct that epithet at you.  I aimed it at a wall.
The wall is a symbol of xenophobia.  It makes skin heads feel warm and accepted.  I don't like it. 
It may not be a symbol of hatred to you, or even a large majority of the GOP, but it is to me...and Bannon, Miller, and Gorka IMO.

"Some people did something."