About Those 'Co-Equal' Branches of Government...

[endicom]

PJ Media
Michael Walsh
Mar. 17, 2017

Once again, a lawful executive order on "immigration" has been blocked by a couple of federal judges. To the Left, of course, this is a triumph of "representative democracy" but to the rest of us it's anything but. The idea that a single federal judge, anywhere, can -- for any reason, or no reason at all -- frustrate the legitimate functioning of the Executive branch makes absolutely no sense, except in the political sense.

>

Clearly, this is intolerable. A functioning country cannot have the president subject to whimsical overrulings by some 3,300 regional judges, many of whom are also political activists.

More... https://pjmedia.com/trending/2017/03/17/about-those-co-equal-branches-of-government/

[Maj. Bill Martin]

I think it is really important to point out that the court did not find that Trump had exceeded the authority granted to him by Congress.  He actually found the policy itself to be unconstitutional.  That means that this policy would be stricken down even if it was not issued pursuant to an EO, but in fact was actually passed into law by Congress itself. 

The reach of this decision is incredible.  It would create a precedent where an express congressional limits on immigration, refugees, etc., could be stricken down by courts if those courts determined that Congress had an "impermissible motive."  It's so far over the line that it's not even funny. 

[Bigun]

I think it is really important to point out that the court did not find that Trump had exceeded the authority granted to him by Congress.  He actually found the policy itself to be unconstitutional.  That means that this policy would be stricken down even if it was not issued pursuant to an EO, but in fact was actually passed into law by Congress itself. 

The reach of this decision is incredible.  It would create a precedent where an express congressional limits on immigration, refugees, etc., could be stricken down by courts if those courts determined that Congress had an "impermissible motive."  It's so far over the line that it's not even funny.

And congress is standing around 

[Cyber Liberty]

And congress is standing around 

I haven't heard a single word about impeaching any Judges, have you?   :nometalk:

[Maj. Bill Martin]

All Congress would have to do is to pass a law depriving the courts of jurisdiction to hear certain classes of immigration cases.  Vest original jurisdiction solely in the Supreme Court to handle cases regarding the constitutionality of Legislative or Executive actions on immigration.

[Bigun]

All Congress would have to do is to pass a law depriving the courts of jurisdiction to hear certain classes of immigration cases.  Vest original jurisdiction solely in the Supreme Court to handle cases regarding the constitutionality of Legislative or Executive actions on immigration.

NO! NO! and NO! A thousand times now!  I do not want to make ANY bunch of unelected judges KINGS!  NO WAY in hell will I ever stand still for that!

What the president should do right now is to proceed to enforce his order and let the courts try and do something about it!  The Congress should, at the same time, launch impeachment proceeding against all three of the judges who have stepped far beyond the bounds of their chartered authority!
 

[Cyber Liberty]

NO! NO! and NO! A thousand times now!  I do not want to make ANY bunch of unelected judges KINGS!  NO WAY in hell will I ever stand still for that!

What the president should do right now is to proceed to enforce his order and let the courts try and do something about it!  The Congress should, at the same time, launch impeachment proceeding against all three of the judges who have stepped far beyond the bounds of their chartered authority!

I count at least five judges that need to be removed.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

What the president should do right now is to proceed to enforce his order and let the courts try and do something about it!  The Congress should, at the same time, launch impeachment proceeding against all three of the judges who have stepped far beyond the bounds of their chartered authority!

That impeachment effort would not ucceed, and the press would have a field day with Trump trying to get away with unconstitutional actions.  It would actually accomplish nothing.  And because it wouldn't actually succeed,  courts like these would continue making these kind of rulings.

NO! NO! and NO! A thousand times now!  I do not want to make ANY bunch of unelected judges KINGS!  NO WAY in hell will I ever stand still for that!

Well, you're not going to get a 2/3 conviction in the Senate, and you're not going to get enough Senators to try to divest the entire court system of jurisdiction.  That might not even survive review.

But depriving all the lower courts of the power to hear these kind of cases would be a massive improvement over the judge-shopping reality we have now, where plaintiffs deliberately find jurisdictions with sympathetic judges to rule as they wish.   If only the Supreme Court was permitted to hear those cases, it would likely dismiss them all out of hand.  Or at least, we'd have a much better shot than we do with the specially-selected lower court judges currently making these decisions.

[240B]

What this does is to make Federal Judges as supreme rulers. They are, apparently, above Congress and are even above POTUS. They are above everything and everyone.

[Bigun]

That impeachment effort would not ucceed, and the press would have a field day with Trump trying to get away with unconstitutional actions.  It would actually accomplish nothing.  And because it wouldn't actually succeed,  courts like these would continue making these kind of rulings.

Well, you're not going to get a 2/3 conviction in the Senate, and you're not going to get enough Senators to try to divest the entire court system of jurisdiction.  That might not even survive review.

But depriving all the lower courts of the power to hear these kind of cases would be a massive improvement over the judge-shopping reality we have now, where plaintiffs deliberately find jurisdictions with sympathetic judges to rule as they wish.   If only the Supreme Court was permitted to hear those cases, it would likely dismiss them all out of hand.  Or at least, we'd have a much better shot than we do with the specially-selected lower court judges currently making these decisions.

The courts have no jurisdiction on this as it stands today IMHO!  All that needs to happen is for the president and congress to stand up to them!

[endicom]

But depriving all the lower courts of the power to hear these kind of cases would be a massive improvement over the judge-shopping reality we have now, where plaintiffs deliberately find jurisdictions with sympathetic judges to rule as they wish.   If only the Supreme Court was permitted to hear those cases, it would likely dismiss them all out of hand.  Or at least, we'd have a much better shot than we do with the specially-selected lower court judges currently making these decisions.

Judge shopping is what I called this the other day. I thought there might be hundreds of so capable judges but Walsh is indicating a few thousand. Any can hamstring the president? Ridiculous.

[Cyber Liberty]

What this does is to make Federal Judges as supreme rulers. They are, apparently, above Congress and are even above POTUS. They are above everything and everyone.

They are.  Just ask a judge, any Judge.  You should have seen the piece of shit Judge I had the last time I had to go to Family Court.

[Bigun]

What this does is to make Federal Judges as supreme rulers. They are, apparently, above Congress and are even above POTUS. They are above everything and everyone.

Which is where they have been trying to go since before the ink was dry on the constitution if you ask me!

[endicom]

UPDATE: The Trump administration has just appealed the Maryland judge's decision to block the president's executive order:

More... https://pjmedia.com/trending/2017/03/17/about-those-co-equal-branches-of-government/

[Cyber Liberty]

Which is where they have been trying to go since before the ink was dry on the constitution if you ask me!

I don't have to ask you, I think the same thing.