• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

The Sanctuary-Cities Executive Order Is Trump’s Next Legal Train Wreck

logger said:
Because leftists are corrupt and need to be uprooted from government. It will get rectified.
Click to expand...

So basically a Republican president can issue whatever executive order he wants and if a "leftist" judge blocks it is evidence of corruption.

And you pretend you're not an authoritarian.
 
Tony Stark said:
So basically a Republican president can issue whatever executive order he wants and if a "leftist" judge blocks it is evidence of corruption.

And you pretend you're not an authoritarian.
Click to expand...

Do you just throw these stupid statements without thinking?

There is precedent for the federal government putting stipulations on money given, simple stuff here folks. This will be overturned.
 
Once again the judge used Trump's own words (or in this case whoever wrote the order) as the reason for blocking the order.

Of course Trump talking out of both sides of his mouth isn't helping him.

Reuters
The Justice Department said the counties had taken an overly broad interpretation of the president's order, which it said would affect only Justice Department and Homeland Security funds, a fraction of the grant money received by the counties.

In his ruling, Orrick said the language of the order made it clear it sought to withhold funds beyond law enforcement. "And if there was doubt about the scope of the Order, the President and Attorney General have erased it with their public comments," Orrick wrote.
Click to expand...
 
logger said:
Do you just throw these stupid statements without thinking?

There is precedent for the federal government putting stipulations on money given, simple stuff here folks. This will be overturned.
Click to expand...

Wanna bet?
 
Tony Stark said:
This article makes a very persuasive case why the federal government (and certainly not Trump by his own power) can't try to force state and local authorities to help them enforce immigration laws.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligence...s-order-is-trumps-next-legal-train-wreck.html
Click to expand...


Coming up on 100 days and Trump just can't seem to get his act together.

Federal court rules against Trump’s executive order targeting sanctuary cities

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ting-sanctuary-cities/?utm_term=.a7dd9a16f0a0
Click to expand...
 
logger said:
Lol
Yes, he's quite happy with what he is *******.
Click to expand...

If he's happy with it, why the need to make it great again?

Or if you mean Melania...evidence she actually has sex with that 270 lbs of chewed gum?
 
logger said:
Do you just throw these stupid statements without thinking?

There is precedent for the federal government putting stipulations on money given, simple stuff here folks. This will be overturned.
Click to expand...

The fun part with these posts is in asking you people for an example.

So...

evidence?
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
Once again the judge used Trump's own words (or in this case whoever wrote the order) as the reason for blocking the order.

Of course Trump talking out of both sides of his mouth isn't helping him.

Reuters
Click to expand...

And look at what the dumbass in chief did today (at 5:20am, no less):

First the Ninth Circuit rules against the ban & now it hits again on sanctuary cities-both ridiculous rulings. See you in the Supreme Court!
Click to expand...

He called it a "ban" again. Hahaha.

I mean, he's so amazingly stupid. Anyone who even considered casting a vote for this monumentally inept boob....
 
BobTheCoward said:
Highway funding tied to drinking age. The principle upheld in South Dakota v dole.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Dakota_v._Dole
Click to expand...

Key portion:

South Dakota v. Dole, 483 U.S. 203 (1987)[1], was a case in which the United States Supreme Court considered the limitations the Constitution places on the authority of the United States Congress when it uses its authority to influence the individual states in areas of authority normally reserved to the states.
Click to expand...

Court in the Sanctuary Cities case ruled that the president doesn't have that power, Congress does.
 
logger said:
Yes it is quite a shocker. Not a shocker that a leftist POS judge once again blocked it.
Click to expand...

If only there were only conservatives, right? That way, nothing would ever change and those uppity ******* would go back to picking cotton while the fags would stop buying wedding cake and pregnant women would pay dearly for daring to have sex. Meanwhile those towel heads would all be sent back to their country or run into the ocean, the rich would pay no taxes at all, and America would be a glorious white nation.

A man can dream.
 
logger said:
Because leftists are corrupt and need to be uprooted from government. It will get rectified.
Click to expand...

So the right does not, in fact, have all the power?

Good to know. After the election you were practically dancing on the left's grave, and now you're complaining that they're casually blocking the right's bills and EOs. So which is it?
 
TraneWreck said:
Key portion:



Court in the Sanctuary Cities case ruled that the president doesn't have that power, Congress does.
Click to expand...

The post noahfence objected to in logger's post said "the federal government." Noahfence asked for evidence only of the claim "There is precedent for the federal government putting stipulations on money given."
 
BobTheCoward said:
The post noahfence objected to in logger's post said "the federal government." Noahfence asked for evidence only of the claim "There is precedent for the federal government putting stipulations on money given."
Click to expand...

Fair. Just pointing out that the ruling cited doesn't apply to the case at hand, even it was an adequate response to their debate.
 
Argumemnon said:
If only there were only conservatives, right?
Click to expand...
Right!
That way, nothing would ever change and those uppity ******* would go back to picking cotton while the fags would stop buying wedding cake and pregnant women would pay dearly for daring to have sex. Meanwhile those towel heads would all be sent back to their country or run into the ocean, the rich would pay no taxes at all, and America would be a glorious white nation.

A man can dream.
Click to expand...
It's interesting that you post something like this, you really think I believe this don't you? Even though I have your whole rant in my family, blacks, gays and 1 Arab. This is why you leftists aren't to be compromised with, worked with or admired. You're to be defeated, because no one can work with people who are this extreme.
 
TraneWreck said:
Fair. Just pointing out that the ruling cited doesn't apply to the case at hand, even it was an adequate response to their debate.
Click to expand...

I really appreciate it because I actually didn't follow this injunction. Do we know if the city seeking the injunction brought up this point? Did the attorneys for the feds say anything on this point?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom