DACA

[airdvr 210]

Surprised you guys aren't losing your collective minds over this.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[billeisele 130]

everyone knows that everything is caused by man-made climate change

Give one city to the thugs so they can all live together. I vote for Chicago where they have strict gun laws.

[Phil1111 1,186]

airdvr

Surprised you guys aren't losing your collective minds over this.

Well trump is a idiot, a buffoon and a liar. But he is not totally stupid. He promised to end it and he didn't. Instead he passed the whole issue to congress. So the story will be told by the new year how the republican congress addresses this issue.

Oh and of course who looses over the whole DACA issue.

Setting aside the whole issue that these people were children when they were brought to the US. I wonder if they were white Irish children who came to the US. Would there be DACA?

[jakee 1,599]

airdvr

Surprised you guys aren't losing your collective minds over this.

Oh hey look, it's your second gotcha thread in 2 days.

When you start using the fact that people are behaving in a reasonable and rational way to attack them, you really should start to consider that you are everything that's wrong with modern political discourse.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[airdvr 210]

jakee

***Surprised you guys aren't losing your collective minds over this.

Oh hey look, it's your second gotcha thread in 2 days.

When you start using the fact that people are behaving in a reasonable and rational way to attack them, you really should start to consider that you are everything that's wrong with modern political discourse.

I don't consider either of them a gotcha thread. I would have thought DACA would be right in your wheelhouse. I realize it's tough keeping track of everything you hate about Trump. Be that as it may BHO's 2012 XO was unconstitutional and he knew it.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[gowlerk 2,277]

airdvr

******Surprised you guys aren't losing your collective minds over this.

Oh hey look, it's your second gotcha thread in 2 days.

When you start using the fact that people are behaving in a reasonable and rational way to attack them, you really should start to consider that you are everything that's wrong with modern political discourse.

I don't consider either of them a gotcha thread. I would have thought DACA would be right in your wheelhouse. I realize it's tough keeping track of everything you hate about Trump. Be that as it may BHO's 2012 XO was unconstitutional and he knew it.


The most interesting thing about DACA is how Trump has managed to force the R party to legalize it shortly. Instead of doing what he said he will do.

Starting a thread about people "losing their collective minds" is a pretty insulting way to open a conversation.

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

airdvr

... Be that as it may BHO's 2012 XO was unconstitutional and he knew it.

In what way?

He simply directed the Justice Dept to not go after those kids.

He told them to use their limited resources to go after the "bad" guys.

If it was that wrong, why didn't someone sue to have it overturned?

Oh. Yeah.

They did.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Some right wing website told him it was unconstitutional, which for many makes it fact.

[jakee 1,599]

airdvr

******Surprised you guys aren't losing your collective minds over this.

Oh hey look, it's your second gotcha thread in 2 days.

When you start using the fact that people are behaving in a reasonable and rational way to attack them, you really should start to consider that you are everything that's wrong with modern political discourse.

I don't consider either of them a gotcha thread.
Why not?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[Lawndarter 3]

airdvr

Be that as it may BHO's 2012 XO was unconstitutional and he knew it.

It was so unconstitutional no one even bothered to challenge it.

I'm old enough to remember when Republican idiots screeched about executive orders being manifestly evil - until Lord Cheeto took office, and then they somehow became a mark of his "leadership".

Trump's attack on DACA is one of the stupidest things he's done yet, and that is saying something, because I can't really find anything he has done that isn't stupid.

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

SkyDekker

Some right wing website told him it was unconstitutional, which for many makes it fact.

Well, Atty General Sessions said it too.

But, considering the strong possibility that he committed perjury during his confirmation hearings, I don't consider his assertions to be much more credible than, say, Breitbart or InfoWars or any of that sort of garbage.

And as a sidenote:

Isn't there some sort of quote somewhere about "The children shall lead us"?

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[kallend 2,156]

airdvr

Be that as it may BHO's 2012 XO was unconstitutional and he knew it.

Which article of the Constitution did it violate?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[airdvr 210]

kallend

*** Be that as it may BHO's 2012 XO was unconstitutional and he knew it.

Which article of the Constitution did it violate?

How about separation of powers and the president's duty to execute the laws faithfully?

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[kallend 2,156]

airdvr

****** Be that as it may BHO's 2012 XO was unconstitutional and he knew it.

Which article of the Constitution did it violate?

How about separation of powers and the president's duty to execute the laws faithfully?

Which article of the Constitution did it violate? Setting priorities within the budget allocated by Congress is within the authority of the President.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 2,156]

More than 100 law school professors and university lecturers wrote Trump in August to insist it's legal.

"In our view, there is no question that DACA 2012 is a lawful exercise of prosecutorial discretion. Our conclusions are based on years of experience in the field and a close study of the U.S. Constitution, administrative law, immigration statutes, federal regulations and case law,"

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[airdvr 210]

kallend

********* Be that as it may BHO's 2012 XO was unconstitutional and he knew it.

Which article of the Constitution did it violate?

How about separation of powers and the president's duty to execute the laws faithfully?

Which article of the Constitution did it violate? Setting priorities within the budget allocated by Congress is within the authority of the President.

If you'd like to refute my statement have at it.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Lol, you answer a question with a statement and then ask the other person to refute the statement that didn't answer the question.

[airdvr 210]

kallend

More than 100 law school professors and university lecturers wrote Trump in August to insist it's legal.

"In our view, there is no question that DACA 2012 is a lawful exercise of prosecutorial discretion. Our conclusions are based on years of experience in the field and a close study of the U.S. Constitution, administrative law, immigration statutes, federal regulations and case law,"

The DACA controversy demonstrates the wages of the "progressive" conceit that our ingenious constitutional system is obsolete, that modern problems are so unprecedentedly complex they demand extra-constitutional solutions — such as a president's usurping of congressional power, exactly the road to tyranny the Framers feared.

That is what President Barack Obama did in presidentially legislating the Deferred Action on Childhood Arrivals program. Contrary to much of the public commentary, the defect in DACA is not that it was done in the form of an executive action (under the guise of a Department of Homeland Security memorandum). There is nothing wrong with an executive order that merely directs the lawful operations of the executive branch.

The problem is the substance of executive action. DACA is defective in two ways. First, it presumes to exercise legislative power by conferring positive legal benefits on a category of aliens. Second, it distorts the doctrine of prosecutorial discretion to rationalize this presidential legislating and to grant a de facto amnesty. These maneuvers violated core constitutional principles: separation of powers and the president's duty to execute the laws faithfully.

There has never been a shred of honesty in the politics of DACA. Democrats have taken the constitutionally heretical position that a president must act if Congress "fails" to. They now claim that to vacate DACA would be a travesty, notwithstanding that the program is blatantly illegal and would be undone by the courts if President Donald Trump does not withdraw it.

https://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/commentary/2017/09/05/end-daca-follow-constitution

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[Lawndarter 3]

SkyDekker

Lol, you answer a question with a statement and then ask the other person to refute the statement that didn't answer the question.

It all makes sense, really: https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/life/the-hot-button/study-links-low-intelligence-with-right-wing-beliefs/article543361/?ref=http://www.theglobeandmail.com&

[airdvr 210]

Lawndarter

***Lol, you answer a question with a statement and then ask the other person to refute the statement that didn't answer the question.

It all makes sense, really: https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/life/the-hot-button/study-links-low-intelligence-with-right-wing-beliefs/article543361/?ref=http://www.theglobeandmail.com&

Perhaps you have something of substance to add to the discussion? I understand you want to believe that conservatives are stupid. I guess if you can't attack the argument you must attack the poster.

BTW...if you're going to copy and paste a link at least be smart enough to make it a clicky.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[SkyDekker 1,465]

The author of that piece also wrote:

Quote

I believe that the issue of Obama's personal radicalism, including his collaboration with radical, America-hating Leftists, should have been disqualifying

I don't think I will take his opinion as overly unbiased when it comes to DACA's legality.

[airdvr 210]

SkyDekker

The author of that piece also wrote:

Quote

I believe that the issue of Obama's personal radicalism, including his collaboration with radical, America-hating Leftists, should have been disqualifying

I don't think I will take his opinion as overly unbiased when it comes to DACA's legality.

Right up there with over 100 college professors and lecturers. Ultimately it will be decided by the Supremes.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[rushmc 23]

airdvr

****** Be that as it may BHO's 2012 XO was unconstitutional and he knew it.

Which article of the Constitution did it violate?

How about separation of powers and the president's duty to execute the laws faithfully?

If Trump does something similar it will be a ends justifies the means bs.

He does not care that a president can not make or change law if a Democrat does it

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

SkyDekker

Lol, you answer a question with a statement and then ask the other person to refute the statement that didn't answer the question.

Lawyers on both sides said this would be overturned.

kallend does not care because laws and constitutional limitations only apply to Repuplicans

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 3,121]

>First, it presumes to exercise legislative power by conferring positive legal benefits
>on a category of aliens.

No, it does not. It merely prioritizes enforcement; it does not change their legal status.

Let's take an example. Let's say that a local police chief decides to prioritize police efforts towards stopping violent crimes (rape, murder) over traffic infractions. Is that "conferring positive legal benefits on a category of criminals?" Is that police chief "violating the Constitution?"

>it distorts the doctrine of prosecutorial discretion to rationalize this presidential
>legislating and to grant a de facto amnesty.

It uses the well-known (and often used) principle of prosecutorial discretion to ensure that dangerous criminals (i.e. the "bad hombres" Trump is always talking about) are prioritized over people who have done nothing wrong, do not threaten society and indeed provide benefits (tax income, labor) for the US. That's not distortion. That's what prosecutorial discretion is FOR.