Obama offer to 5m illegal migrants

[Chicog]

However, a bipartisan Immigration Bill would have originated in Congress this year (and probably been passed and signed by now) if Boehner had not refused to put the bill up for a vote.

You keep saying this, but Boehner was under no obligation to write up a bill that would have been mostly supported by democrats and the democrats refused to put up bills from the republican house time after time - something like 400 bills. Turn about is fair play.

I agree with your hypothesis, but that isn't the reason Boehner stalled the bill, nor is it the excuse that he gave.

Edited December 24, 2014 by Chicog

[Chicog]

2013:

House Speaker John Boehner is sticking to his position: The House will not vote on the Senate-passed immigration bill.

“I’ve made it clear and I’ll make it clear again, the House does not intend to take up the Senate bill,” Boehner said Monday. “The House is going to do its own job in developing an immigration bill.”

He added, “It is time for Congress to act. But I believe the House has its job to do, and we will do our job.”

Gotta love it.

234: The number of bills passed by the 113th Congress, the lowest recorded total in congressional history. The number is down 18 percent from the 112th Congress and is only about a fourth of the 906 public bills legislation passed by the 80th in 1947-48, which President Harry Truman dubbed the “Do Nothing Congress.”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2014/12/congress-numbers-113658.html#ixzz3MnrHMNAm

Edited December 24, 2014 by Chicog

[chuckd]

Whatever rebuttal there may be to the presidents executive orders will come through the courts raised by constituents or their local representatives..

I'm pretty sure Chuck will be all over me like a cheap suit me if I'm wrong, but as far as I can see he didn't sign any Executive Orders, just Presidential Memoranda to "Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies", links to which are below.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/11/21/presidential-memorandum-modernizing-and-streamlining-us-immigrant-visa-s

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/11/21/presidential-memorandum-creating-welcoming-communities-and-fully-integra

It would appear that it may be difficult to challenge them in court.

Yoo wrote there is no legal or political "remedy" to Obama's executive actions on immigration, because "the prevailing standard of review of challenges to executive non-enforcement decisions is extraordinarily lenient." In other words, if the president does it, it's de facto legal, because there's no way to stop it.

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/immigration/227829-on-immigration-obama-beat-beltway-gop-but-fight-is-far-from

Before anyone jumps up and down without reading the actual article, the last part means *any* president, not just this one.

Talking about reading articles, here is one you might want to read.

Many Americans know there is little difference between Executive Orders and Executive Memoranda. Our British cousins, maybe not.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Obama issues 'executive orders by another name'

Gregory Korte, USA TODAY 1:16 p.m. EST December 17, 2014

WASHINGTON — President Obama has issued a form of executive action known as the presidential memorandum more often than any other president in history — using it to take unilateral action even as he has signed fewer executive orders.

When these two forms of directives are taken together, Obama is on track to take more high-level executive actions than any president since Harry Truman battled the "Do Nothing Congress" almost seven decades ago, according to a USA TODAY review of presidential documents.

Obama has issued executive orders to give federal employees the day after Christmas off, to impose economic sanctions and to determine how national secrets are classified. <snip>

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2014/12/16/obama-presidential-memoranda-executive-orders/20191805/

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

The article goes on to further explain the impact of Executive Orders and Executive Memoranda by stating this...

"Like executive orders, presidential memoranda don't require action by Congress. They have the same force of law as executive orders and often have consequences just as far-reaching. And some of the most significant actions of the Obama presidency have come not by executive order but by presidential memoranda."

I will now take my cheap suit and retire to the bench and seek out other misstatements you might have made.

Merry Christmas and Happy Reading

[chuckd]

I read it and I don't agree with the assertions made. There is a protocol for challenge and it is through the courts. If the protocol is followed most people accept the outcome. As I said before, I have no issue with a change in immigration policy towards leniency, but that change should have originated in Congress.

I don't think it says the protocol is wrong, just that the courts normally side with the president.

As for the second bit, I couldn't agree with you more. However, a bipartisan Immigration Bill would have originated in Congress this year (and probably been passed and signed by now) if Boehner had not refused to put the bill up for a vote.

Perhaps they are planning their own scaled back version for 2015.

Uh, the immigration bill passed by the Senate was not voted on by the House of Representatives because Senator Harry Reid (D-NV) never formally released the Senate bill to the House for consideration and vote.

They can't vote on something they don't have and have never had.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Senate Democrats keep own immigration bill from House, urge Obama executive action

Measure yet to be sent to lower chamber for vote as president weighs amnesty order

By Stephen Dinan - The Washington Times - Monday, November 17, 2014

Senate Democrats say Republicans could head off President Obama’s immigration plans by passing the Senate’s own immigration bill — the only problem is the Democrats still haven’t sent the measure to the House for a vote.

Known as S.744, the 1,200-page bill has been bottled up by Majority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat, in a bit of legislative gamesmanship that has clouded much of the debate over the past two years. Now, that bill has become the centerpiece of last-minute chiding as Democrats say they have exhausted all alternatives except for having Mr. Obama go it alone.

Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/nov/17/senate-democrats-keep-own-immigration-bill-from-ho/#ixzz3Moe0ImzE

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Chicog]

Uh, the immigration bill passed by the Senate was not voted on by the House of Representatives because Senator Harry Reid (D-NV) never formally released the Senate bill to the House for consideration and vote.

They can't vote on something they don't have and have never had.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Senate Democrats keep own immigration bill from House, urge Obama executive action

Measure yet to be sent to lower chamber for vote as president weighs amnesty order

By Stephen Dinan - The Washington Times - Monday, November 17, 2014

Senate Democrats say Republicans could head off President Obama’s immigration plans by passing the Senate’s own immigration bill — the only problem is the Democrats still haven’t sent the measure to the House for a vote.

Known as S.744, the 1,200-page bill has been bottled up by Majority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat, in a bit of legislative gamesmanship that has clouded much of the debate over the past two years. Now, that bill has become the centerpiece of last-minute chiding as Democrats say they have exhausted all alternatives except for having Mr. Obama go it alone.

Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/nov/17/senate-democrats-keep-own-immigration-bill-from-ho/#ixzz3Moe0ImzE

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I thought we'd already covered this, but maybe you should send your post to the Speaker.

House Speaker John Boehner is sticking to his position: The House will not vote on the Senate-passed immigration bill.

“I’ve made it clear and I’ll make it clear again, the House does not intend to take up the Senate bill,” Boehner said Monday.

[Chicog]

Whatever rebuttal there may be to the presidents executive orders will come through the courts raised by constituents or their local representatives..

I'm pretty sure Chuck will be all over me like a cheap suit me if I'm wrong, but as far as I can see he didn't sign any Executive Orders, just Presidential Memoranda to "Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies", links to which are below.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/11/21/presidential-memorandum-modernizing-and-streamlining-us-immigrant-visa-s

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/11/21/presidential-memorandum-creating-welcoming-communities-and-fully-integra

It would appear that it may be difficult to challenge them in court.

Yoo wrote there is no legal or political "remedy" to Obama's executive actions on immigration, because "the prevailing standard of review of challenges to executive non-enforcement decisions is extraordinarily lenient." In other words, if the president does it, it's de facto legal, because there's no way to stop it.

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/immigration/227829-on-immigration-obama-beat-beltway-gop-but-fight-is-far-from

Before anyone jumps up and down without reading the actual article, the last part means *any* president, not just this one.

Talking about reading articles, here is one you might want to read.

Many Americans know there is little difference between Executive Orders and Executive Memoranda. Our British cousins, maybe not.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Obama issues 'executive orders by another name'

Gregory Korte, USA TODAY 1:16 p.m. EST December 17, 2014

WASHINGTON — President Obama has issued a form of executive action known as the presidential memorandum more often than any other president in history — using it to take unilateral action even as he has signed fewer executive orders.

When these two forms of directives are taken together, Obama is on track to take more high-level executive actions than any president since Harry Truman battled the "Do Nothing Congress" almost seven decades ago, according to a USA TODAY review of presidential documents.

Obama has issued executive orders to give federal employees the day after Christmas off, to impose economic sanctions and to determine how national secrets are classified. <snip>

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2014/12/16/obama-presidential-memoranda-executive-orders/20191805/

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

The article goes on to further explain the impact of Executive Orders and Executive Memoranda by stating this...

"Like executive orders, presidential memoranda don't require action by Congress. They have the same force of law as executive orders and often have consequences just as far-reaching. And some of the most significant actions of the Obama presidency have come not by executive order but by presidential memoranda."

I will now take my cheap suit and retire to the bench and seek out other misstatements you might have made.

Merry Christmas and Happy Reading

That's very interesting, thank you. Makes you wonder why they have these different forms of executive action if they are functionally and legally identical.

[chuckd]

Uh, the immigration bill passed by the Senate was not voted on by the House of Representatives because Senator Harry Reid (D-NV) never formally released the Senate bill to the House for consideration and vote.

They can't vote on something they don't have and have never had.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Senate Democrats keep own immigration bill from House, urge Obama executive action

Measure yet to be sent to lower chamber for vote as president weighs amnesty order

By Stephen Dinan - The Washington Times - Monday, November 17, 2014

Senate Democrats say Republicans could head off President Obama’s immigration plans by passing the Senate’s own immigration bill — the only problem is the Democrats still haven’t sent the measure to the House for a vote.

Known as S.744, the 1,200-page bill has been bottled up by Majority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat, in a bit of legislative gamesmanship that has clouded much of the debate over the past two years. Now, that bill has become the centerpiece of last-minute chiding as Democrats say they have exhausted all alternatives except for having Mr. Obama go it alone.

Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/nov/17/senate-democrats-keep-own-immigration-bill-from-ho/#ixzz3Moe0ImzE

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I thought we'd already covered this, but maybe you should send your post to the Speaker.

House Speaker John Boehner is sticking to his position: The House will not vote on the Senate-passed immigration bill.

“I’ve made it clear and I’ll make it clear again, the House does not intend to take up the Senate bill,” Boehner said Monday.

We have already covered this. That's why I kept the link because I knew you wouldn't understand what we covered the first time around.

My guess is the conversation between Reid and Boehner went something like this.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reid: I want to send this immigration bill over to you for a vote. Do you have the votes to pass it?

Boehner: Nope.

Reid: Then I'll just hold it here and we'll use the main stream media to make you guys look like obstructionists. These stupid voters will believe anything the MSM tells them.

Boehner: OK.

Reid: Bye.

End of story.

[Chicog]

Reid: I want to send this immigration bill over to you for a vote. Do you have the votes to pass it?

Boehner: Nope.

Reid: Then I'll just hold it here and we'll use the main stream media to make you guys look like obstructionists. These stupid voters will believe anything the MSM tells them.

Boehner: OK.

Reid: Bye.

End of story.

Which doesn't explain why Boehner wouldn't just put a bill to the vote and let it get voted down. And why his excuse for not doing so was to blame Obama (Surely he could have then just said it was Obama's fault it didn't get enough votes?).

On the balance of the opinion I read, there were enough votes for it to get through, but Boehner would have been doomed if he'd allowed that to happen.

As I understand it, the reason the bill had enough bipartisan support is that it include major expansion of border security which satisfied enough Republicans for them to get behind it.

[chuckd]

Reid: I want to send this immigration bill over to you for a vote. Do you have the votes to pass it?

Boehner: Nope.

Reid: Then I'll just hold it here and we'll use the main stream media to make you guys look like obstructionists. These stupid voters will believe anything the MSM tells them.

Boehner: OK.

Reid: Bye.

End of story.

Which doesn't explain why Boehner wouldn't just put a bill to the vote and let it get voted down. And why his excuse for not doing so was to blame Obama (Surely he could have then just said it was Obama's fault it didn't get enough votes?).

On the balance of the opinion I read, there were enough votes for it to get through, but Boehner would have been doomed if he'd allowed that to happen.

As I understand it, the reason the bill had enough bipartisan support is that it include major expansion of border security which satisfied enough Republicans for them to get behind it.

I spent my speculation allowance on the imaginary conversation.

Why not write your Congressman and seek an answer?

Oops. Forget that last bit.

[Publicus]

"Most voters oppose President Obama's reported plan to unilaterally grant amnesty to several million illegal immigrants and think Congress should challenge him in court if he goes ahead with it.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 62% of Likely U.S. Voters oppose the president granting amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants without the approval of Congress. Just 26% are in favor of Obama's plan, while 12% are undecided." LINK

Everyone except the far right and dubious pollsters know the president's executive action has nothing to do with "amnesty." It is a step by step, program, a comprehensive, layered process over 13 years to deal with undocumented immigrants who have no criminal record.

Here's Rasmussen's question with my emphasis added....

2* According to news reports, President Obama is considering granting amnesty to several million illegal immigrants without the approval of Congress. Do you favor or oppose the president granting such an amnesty?

3* Does the president have the legal authority to grant amnesty to several million illegal immigrants without the approval of Congress?

4* If the president does grant amnesty to these illegal immigrants, should Congress challenge that action in court?

5* Which should come first – securing the border to prevent future illegal immigration or amnesty for some illegal immigrants now in this country?

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/questions/pt_survey_questions/august_2014/questions_immigration_amnesty_august_28_29_2014

Rasmussen Reports Loses Scott Rasmussen, But the Inaccurate Reports Remain

Rasmussen Reports Loses Scott Rasmussen, But the Inaccurate Polls Will RemainasinBy Nate Cohn @nate_cohn

Scott Rasmussen has left Rasmussen Reports, one of the least accurate pollsters of the last two elections. From that perspective, you might expect that Rasmussen was fired for bad surveys. His polls were biased toward Republican candidates in two consecutive cycles, outrageously so in 2012.

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/114430/scott-rasmussen-leaves-rasmussen-reports

The fact remains the Republican party and its allies are doing everything they can to stop immigration and any attempt to deal rationally or reasonably with immigration.

Immigration is a core pillar of the United States without which the US would remain a wilderness. Continued successful immigration is necessary so the US can develop into the 21st century rather than to suddenly become a backward wilderness.

This stop immigration campaigning by the radical right and the Republican party in general is a lost cause as mainstream Americans throughout the country reject it in favor of continuing immigration while managing and governing immigration in the most reasonable and realistic ways possible.

Edited December 24, 2014 by Publicus

[Chicog]

I spent my speculation allowance on the imaginary conversation.

Why not write your Congressman and seek an answer?

Oops. Forget that last bit.

How about a real one then?

Ramos: "Why are you blocking the Immigration bill?".

Boehner: "Blah Blah Blah Obamacare Blah Blah Blah".

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/video/jorge-ramos-confronts-john-boehner-27698236

Edited December 24, 2014 by Chicog

[JDGRUEN]

I read in other sources that Wyoming, New Mexico and Missouri are pending joining the law suit. Injunctions are pending that will stop the outlaw government in its tracks.



Tennessee Joins Lawsuit Challenging Obama's Immigration Action

http://www.nashvillescene.com/pitw/archives/2014/12/22/tennessee-joins-lawsuit-challenging-obamas-immigration-action

[JDGRUEN]

In this lengthy video, Mark Levin - A U.S. Constitution scholar - explains why the States Lawsuit against the obama administration on the stealth Amnesty side constitutional stepping must be successful in stopping it.

And Mr. Levin goes much further and calmly explains why the States in the collective must do more -- and initiate a Convention of the States to reign in the runaway Federal Executive and Bureaucracy that is acting in an extra legal unconstitutional manner...

If you are an American who considers himself / herself to be a political moderate or Conservative and are concerned about the fate of the United States of America then please take time and listen to what is being said in this video. You will not regret it.

[Publicus]

It took the federal district court judge in Washington less than 24 hours to throw the case out on its ear in what was essentially a summary dismissal.

The Gallup surveys show 76% of Americans support the provisions of Prez Obama's executive action to deal effectively with immigration. The consensus in the mainstream legal community is that the president's executive action is both legal and constitutional.

Mainstream America supports the president and the actions of the judges in dealing with this tombstone Arizona cowboy sheriff and his dry gulch lawyers.

Check it out....

Judge throws out Arizona sheriff's immigration suit against Obama

A federal judge on Tuesday threw out a lawsuit brought against Barack Obama by an Arizona police chief who called the president's sweeping immigration reforms unconstitutional, saying the plaintiff lacked legal standing in the case.

Judge Beryl Howell of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia denied the demand by Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio for a preliminary injunction to halt the policies.

Arpaio, who calls himself "America's Toughest Sheriff," filed the case last month, saying Obama had overstepped his powers by bypassing Congress and ordering the changes himself.

An Arizona federal judge in May 2013 ruled that deputies of Arpaio's office had racially profiled Latino drivers.

The judge ordered that race no longer be used as a factor in law enforcement decisions and appointed a court monitor to oversee Arpaio's operations.

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/nationworld/chi-arizona-sheriff-immigration-suit-20141223-story.html

[Publicus]

In this lengthy video, Mark Levin - A U.S. Constitution scholar - explains why the States Lawsuit against the obama administration on the stealth Amnesty side constitutional stepping must be successful in stopping it.

And Mr. Levin goes much further and calmly explains why the States in the collective must do more -- and initiate a Convention of the States to reign in the runaway Federal Executive and Bureaucracy that is acting in an extra legal unconstitutional manner...

If you are an American who considers himself / herself to be a political moderate or Conservative and are concerned about the fate of the United States of America then please take time and listen to what is being said in this video. You will not regret it.

In this lengthy video

It's a busy day today but I squeezed five minutes in for this guy and I have to say I'm impressed. He apparently goes on for twice as long as Fidel Castro ever did, to include the 50th Anniversary Week of the Cuban Revolution...impressive indeed.

I'm not an expert but one of my friends said the guy obviously has a severe case of posse comitatus, which I'm told would be incurable.

I'd have to say anyway the whole scheme doesn't have a prayer...his side has been talking about this for more than 30 years, probably more if I really think about it. A constitutional convention full of tea party delegates is all we'd need...

Washington, Jefferson, Adams, Lincoln, Kennedy would rise up out of their sacred tombs to advise against it.

A constitutional convention precipitated by opposition against one of the pillars of American Civilization -- immigration -- is never going to happen and you can take that to the border....please.

Edited December 25, 2014 by Publicus

[teatree]

So can anyone just show up in the US, work illegally and then claim citizenship some time down the line? Or is this only for Mexicans?

[chuckd]

It took the federal district court judge in Washington less than 24 hours to throw the case out on its ear in what was essentially a summary dismissal.

The Gallup surveys show 76% of Americans support the provisions of Prez Obama's executive action to deal effectively with immigration. The consensus in the mainstream legal community is that the president's executive action is both legal and constitutional.

Mainstream America supports the president and the actions of the judges in dealing with this tombstone Arizona cowboy sheriff and his dry gulch lawyers.

Check it out....

Judge throws out Arizona sheriff's immigration suit against Obama

A federal judge on Tuesday threw out a lawsuit brought against Barack Obama by an Arizona police chief who called the president's sweeping immigration reforms unconstitutional, saying the plaintiff lacked legal standing in the case.

Judge Beryl Howell of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia denied the demand by Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio for a preliminary injunction to halt the policies.

Arpaio, who calls himself "America's Toughest Sheriff," filed the case last month, saying Obama had overstepped his powers by bypassing Congress and ordering the changes himself.

An Arizona federal judge in May 2013 ruled that deputies of Arpaio's office had racially profiled Latino drivers.

The judge ordered that race no longer be used as a factor in law enforcement decisions and appointed a court monitor to oversee Arpaio's operations.

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/nationworld/chi-arizona-sheriff-immigration-suit-20141223-story.html

This law suit has nothing to do with the 24 state suit filed against the Obama administration.

They are two separate legal actions.

Edited December 25, 2014 by chuckd

[Publicus]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

So can anyone just show up in the US, work illegally and then claim citizenship some time down the line? Or is this only for Mexicans?

You first....

It took the federal district court judge in Washington less than 24 hours to throw the case out on its ear in what was essentially a summary dismissal.

The Gallup surveys show 76% of Americans support the provisions of Prez Obama's executive action to deal effectively with immigration. The consensus in the mainstream legal community is that the president's executive action is both legal and constitutional.

Mainstream America supports the president and the actions of the judges in dealing with this tombstone Arizona cowboy sheriff and his dry gulch lawyers.

Check it out....

Judge throws out Arizona sheriff's immigration suit against Obama

A federal judge on Tuesday threw out a lawsuit brought against Barack Obama by an Arizona police chief who called the president's sweeping immigration reforms unconstitutional, saying the plaintiff lacked legal standing in the case.

Judge Beryl Howell of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia denied the demand by Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio for a preliminary injunction to halt the policies.

Arpaio, who calls himself "America's Toughest Sheriff," filed the case last month, saying Obama had overstepped his powers by bypassing Congress and ordering the changes himself.

An Arizona federal judge in May 2013 ruled that deputies of Arpaio's office had racially profiled Latino drivers.

The judge ordered that race no longer be used as a factor in law enforcement decisions and appointed a court monitor to oversee Arpaio's operations.

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/nationworld/chi-arizona-sheriff-immigration-suit-20141223-story.html

This law suit has nothing to do with the 24 state suit filed against the Obama administration.

They are two separate legal actions.

Judge throws out Arizona sheriff's immigration suit against Obama

[JDGRUEN]

Senator Blunt Joins Cruz, Cornyn On Amicus Brief Against President Obama’s Executive Amnesty

(plus 24 Members of the U.S. House of Representatives)

http://politicalnews.me/?id=31575

[Publicus]

The usual suspects.

The Republican party and the political fringe attached to it along with everyone else knows already how this will pan out. The federal judge in Texas will rule against Prez Obama...the guy was appointed by Bush and has already ruled harshly against the administration in another aspect of immigration.

The Supreme Court has made itself clear in the matter of executive branch autonomy and jurisdiction over immigration, which is to recognize executive authority and expertise in enforcement, meaning Obama's action is valid all around.

Opponents are hoping they can buy time to do something to modify if not try to kill the executive action by the president. They may temporarily stop it, but only until the SCOTUS takes the case. That is if the US 5th Circuit Court of Appeals doesn't uphold the Supreme Courts ruling precedent in the matter.The case will go the the appeals court from the US District Court in Texas.

In the meantime the administration can get a stay (stop) of the Texas federal judge's ruling from the Supreme Court justice who has urgency jurisdiction over the 5th Circuit, Justice Scalia who despite his politics should be expected to respect his own court's rulings concerning executive branch prerogatives in enforcing the laws.

Game over, the only question is exactly when.

[Digitalnomade]

if you want make a Mexican miserable, give him a green card.... then he will have to deal with the 200 government offices such a IRS, fbar, fatca, fbi, .... and probably finish in jail because as he doesn't know to read, he can not fill the paper correctly. proof? 2 millions guys in jail. the biggest jail in the world is on USA soil. country of freedom,

welcome in America!

(send me now your thumbs up!)

Edited December 25, 2014 by Digitalnomade

[Ulysses G.]

The federal judge in Texas will rule against Prez Obama...

As well he should and this time the Supreme Court will uphold his ruling. Because Jonathan Gruber finally admitted the truth about Obamacare - that the Affordable Care Act is a monumental lie and that it was with the utmost deception that the law was passed - there should be some payback. Hopefully, the Supreme Court will put put a stop to Obama administration's constant con games and end runs around the constitution.

Edited December 25, 2014 by Ulysses G.

[Chicog]

The federal judge in Texas will rule against Prez Obama...

As well he should and this time the Supreme Court will uphold his ruling. Because Jonathan Gruber finally admitted the truth about Obamacare - that the Affordable Care Act is a monumental lie and that it was with the utmost deception that the law was passed - there should be some payback. Hopefully, the Supreme Court will put put a stop to Obama administration's constant con games and end runs around the constitution.

Impeach him!

Added: They have a special on....

Send - Impeach Obama Petition Fax Blast ALL 535 Members of Congress

Send once for just $17.76 or twice for just $29.11 Edited December 25, 2014 by Chicog

[up-country_sinclair]

However, a bipartisan Immigration Bill would have originated in Congress this year (and probably been passed and signed by now) if Boehner had not refused to put the bill up for a vote.

You keep saying this

Maybe he keeps saying it because it's undeniably true.

And none of the "ifs ands or buts" that you can dream up will refute it.

[thailiketoo]

if you want make a Mexican miserable, give him a green card.... then he will have to deal with the 200 government offices such a IRS, fbar, fatca, fbi, .... and probably finish in jail because as he doesn't know to read, he can not fill the paper correctly. proof? 2 millions guys in jail. the biggest jail in the world is on USA soil. country of freedom,

welcome in America!

(send me now your thumbs up!)

Since this is a thread about Mexicans wanting to come to the USA your post seems rather odd. Why would all of the folks from Mexico want a green card if it would make them miserable?

[Ulysses G.]

However, a bipartisan Immigration Bill would have originated in Congress this year (and probably been passed and signed by now) if Boehner had not refused to put the bill up for a vote.

You keep saying this

Maybe he keeps saying it because it's undeniably true.

Another fortune teller. What is your psychic feeling about the approximately 400 bills that Harry Reid just sat on in the Senate?

Edited December 25, 2014 by Ulysses G.

[Ulysses G.]

The federal judge in Texas will rule against Prez Obama...

As well he should and this time the Supreme Court will uphold his ruling. Because Jonathan Gruber finally admitted the truth about Obamacare - that the Affordable Care Act is a monumental lie and that it was with the utmost deception that the law was passed - there should be some payback. Hopefully, the Supreme Court will put put a stop to Obama administration's constant con games and end runs around the constitution.

Impeach him!

There is not enough time left in his term to make it worth it. Better if the Supreme Court rules against him and clips his wings.

[Publicus]

The federal judge in Texas will rule against Prez Obama...

As well he should and this time the Supreme Court will uphold his ruling. Because Jonathan Gruber finally admitted the truth about Obamacare - that the Affordable Care Act is a monumental lie and that it was with the utmost deception that the law was passed - there should be some payback. Hopefully, the Supreme Court will put put a stop to Obama administration's constant con games and end runs around the constitution.

So now the topic is supposed to be the AffordableImmigrationCareTyranny of Barack Obama's socialistmonarchy....or something like that....

This is what the Supreme Court ruled that addresses directly and decisively this 24-state Republican party in process immigration lawsuit (emphasis added).....

But one thing is clear: The president has the constitutional authority to decide to not proceed with deportations. It has always been within the president’s discretion to decide whether to have the Department of Justice enforce a particular law. As the Supreme Court declared in United States v. Nixon, “the Executive Branch has exclusive authority and absolute discretion to decide whether to prosecute a case.”

The long and the short of it is that the Congress makes the laws and the executive branch executes the laws. It's called the separation of powers and it is written all over the Constitution -- in English.

And here is the conservative Justice Anthony Kennedy writing for the Court's immigration majority in 2010 which included Chief Justice John Roberts....

“A principal feature of the removal system is the broad discretion exercised by immigration officials,” the Court wrote, adding that “[t]he dynamic nature of relations with other countries requires the Exec­utive Branch to ensure that enforcement policies are con­sistent with this Nation’s foreign policy with respect to these and other realities.”

The Court wrote about realities....and by many accounts that's 6 of the Court's 9 justices.

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/120328/obama-immigration-executive-action-why-it-will-be-legal

The federal district court judge in Texas will have his day, his 15 minutes...after which the case will move up through the judicial system where in due course we will hear the fat lady sing....to Barack Obama.

[Ulysses G.]

The federal district court judge in Texas will have his day, his 15 minutes...after which the case will move up through the judicial system where in due course we will hear the fat lady sing....to Barack Obama.

This reminds me off your misguided predictions about what would happen to Officer Wilson in Ferguson - your fortune telling abilities do not have a good track record.

[Publicus]

The federal district court judge in Texas will have his day, his 15 minutes...after which the case will move up through the judicial system where in due course we will hear the fat lady sing....to Barack Obama.

This reminds me off your misguided predictions about what would happen to Officer Wilson in Ferguson - your fortune telling abilities do not have a good track record.

It's considered highly unlikely, but that hard core federal district judge in Texas might chicken out and rule in favor of the government simply because very few judges like to be overruled by a higher court, in this instance the US 5th Circuit Court of Appeals that sits in New Orleans, Louisiana and has Texas as one of its states.

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, which has mostly conservative judges, doesn't like to be overturned by its next highest power, the Supreme Court, either...it always looks bad for judges when they get overturned because it makes everyone think the overturned judges don't know the law, which is why this appeals court may well just respect the Supremes' immigration rulings that I've cited in my posts and zap the Texas judge right then and there with an outright reversal of his ruling. (It's called "giving new instructions" to the judge whose ruling was just demolished by the higher court.)

I learned long ago that a given jury will surprise everyone and that a court can confound even the best observers. But the Ferguson grand jury was completely predictable, as was the grand jury in NYC in the Garner case and as the trial jury was in the Trayvon Martin case. I'd said Officer Darren Wilson was finished as a cop and his lawyers have since said the same....Wilson's certification as a police officer is now being challenged before the State of Missouri board that decides these things. If Wilson is hired again as a cop I'd know immediately about the department that might hire him and so would the Justice Department

Remaining on topic however, I dunno know about you but I'm gonna bookmark this thread.... .

Edited December 25, 2014 by Publicus