- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 6/26/18 at 11:11 pm to AUstar
SCOTUS says frick state courts, know your roll and shut your mouth
Posted on 6/26/18 at 11:15 pm to rsbd
House Judiciary Cmte will need to meet immediately, like this week. And they need to schedule Justice Thomas among others to discuss this. shite is out of control.
Posted on 6/26/18 at 11:23 pm to AUstar
quote:
Cali judge
What does this have to do with the federal executive branch? Seriously, does a state judge have jurisdiction over the POTUS? I think not.
Posted on 6/26/18 at 11:32 pm to Y.A. Tittle
quote:
Didn't Justice Thomas give a not so subtle warning about District Judges pulling this sort of shite in today's decision and what the ramifications may ultimately be on their end?
I’m hoping it was a subtle indicator that the USSC may start consistently imposing judicial sanctions upon judges who so blatantly legislate from the bench.
The legal community has a moral obligation to police it’s own.
This post was edited on 6/26/18 at 11:34 pm
Posted on 6/26/18 at 11:36 pm to AUstar
quote:
Don Lemon
Posted on 6/26/18 at 11:37 pm to Godfather1
"A federal judge on Tuesday ruled that U.S. immigration agents could no longer separate immigrant parents and children caught crossing the border from Mexico illegally, and must work to reunite those families that had been split up in custody."
Doesn't this go against Flores settlement?
Doesn't this go against Flores settlement?
Posted on 6/26/18 at 11:42 pm to THDAY
Which was another possibility opened up by this decree.
I went with Clarence Thomas’ opinion because that was released today and said in not so veiled terms “This won’t end well if it continues”.
This violating Flores opens up the possibility of overturning the consent decree or just speeding up the deportation of everyone involved.
I went with Clarence Thomas’ opinion because that was released today and said in not so veiled terms “This won’t end well if it continues”.
This violating Flores opens up the possibility of overturning the consent decree or just speeding up the deportation of everyone involved.
Posted on 6/26/18 at 11:50 pm to teke184
It’s the best outcome Trump could’ve hoped for now he gets to put the kids with the parents together at the border and he doesn’t have to release them after 20 days because he can’t ignore either of the court orders and will have to petition SCOTUS for clarification which should be sometime after the midterms.
This post was edited on 6/27/18 at 12:05 am
Posted on 6/26/18 at 11:51 pm to BeefDawg
That is an interesting statement by Thomas because there is no doubt that under Article III the Supreme Court has the power to rule on the nationwide legality of executive policy or legislative action. The Article III power has been conferred upon the district courts. How could an Article III judge not have that power, subject to appellate review?
This post was edited on 6/26/18 at 11:52 pm
Posted on 6/27/18 at 12:05 am to Rogers Hog
If this is how it plays out, then the Dems have fallen into yet another trap in tripping over themselves to “beat Trump”.
Two plus years of Trump using jiu-jitsu on everyone coming after him and they still haven’t learned that being overly aggressive just plays into what he wants.
Two plus years of Trump using jiu-jitsu on everyone coming after him and they still haven’t learned that being overly aggressive just plays into what he wants.
Posted on 6/27/18 at 12:07 am to AUstar
Somebody needs to find out where this fukking judge eats, shits and hangs out with his family and let everyone know so they can all show up and get in his liberal arse's face. Fuk him.
Posted on 6/27/18 at 12:11 am to AUstar
Yes we must reunite child sex slaves with their child sex traffickers and the cartel child shields from their cartel handler. How dare Trump separate these people.
Posted on 6/27/18 at 12:18 am to TBoy
quote:
That is an interesting statement by Thomas because there is no doubt that under Article III the Supreme Court has the power to rule on the nationwide legality of executive policy or legislative action. The Article III power has been conferred upon the district courts. How could an Article III judge not have that power, subject to appellate review?
I think the argument isn’t that it’s absurd they have the technical ability at the moment.
Is that the technical ability is presently is being used out of the intention of the Constitution and therefore if it doesn’t stop the loophole may need to be addressed.
Think of it like this: fricktons of legal precedents are being made by these district judges that will be cited for decades, and they are being made more due to who is president rather than legal frameworks specific to the case.
Posted on 6/27/18 at 12:20 am to AUstar
Posted on 6/27/18 at 12:21 am to AUstar
It’s time to start getting rid of these retard judges who think it’s their responsibility to do stuff like this
Posted on 6/27/18 at 12:23 am to Godfather1
quote:
I’m hoping it was a subtle indicator that the USSC may start consistently imposing judicial sanctions upon judges who so blatantly legislate from the bench.
Repeat after me:
Congress controls the courts
Where is the worthless GOP during all of this?
Posted on 6/27/18 at 12:51 am to TBoy
quote:
That is an interesting statement by Thomas because there is no doubt that under Article III the Supreme Court has the power to rule on the nationwide legality of executive policy or legislative action. The Article III power has been conferred upon the district courts. How could an Article III judge not have that power, subject to appellate review?
His statement wasn’t whether they have Article III power, it was whether universal injunctions limiting the President’s Constitutional authority were themselves Constitutional or valid powers of the court, and if they are an abuse because article III doesn’t grant that much scope.
Article III powers have jurisdiction over the Constitutionality of laws and actions enacted by Congress and the President, and how they are applied. And lawsuits are tried to determine if said application is Constitutional.
What Article III powers cannot do, is let Judges determine if the Constitution is Constitutional, and it does not grant them autonomously broad scope that might include actions granted directly through the Constitution.
And using universal injunctions to halt actions by the President on mandates which he has specifically been granted authority directly by the Constitution, is the exact same thing as Judges trying to determine if said Constitutionally granted authority is....... Constitutional.
In other words, universal injunctions are being abused.
If, for example, a dozen Governors, who do not have power over immigration policy granted directly by the Constitution, decided to ban Muslims from traveling into their states, someone could sue them, and an article III Judge could place specific injunctions on these actions individually, no problem. But they would HAVE to be specific to each action only.
They cannot simply place a “universal injunction” on the mandate and cover all relative immigration actions. Why? Because the Constitution directly grants the President authority over immigration policy. So if he makes an executive action the same as the Governors, the injunction cannot apply to his action.
Ergo... universal injunctions that infringe on direct Constitutional authority, or even the potential to infringe on possible direct Constitutional authority mandates, are illegal.
This post was edited on 6/27/18 at 12:58 am
Posted on 6/27/18 at 6:24 am to TigerNAtux
yeah, lets disbar all judges we disagree with. it will probably end up going to the supreme court. the judicial system is one of the checks/balances. you may not always like what they decide but it's an important part of the republic
Posted on 6/27/18 at 6:27 am to AUstar
And if they don't reunite the families in 30 days what will the judge do to the Fed? Nothing but whine
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News