• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama’s use of executive power faces reckoning at Supreme Court

American

American

Trump Grump Whisperer
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
96,085
Reaction score
33,411
Location
SE Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Obama

Nothing less than the boundaries of executive power are at stake Monday as the Supreme Court considers whether President Obama violated the Constitution during his first term.

Oral arguments slated for Monday will center on a trio of recess appointments to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) that were deemed unconstitutional by lower courts.
Click to expand...

This sounds like an important case.
 
Yeah it is American.....I just hope the SCOTUS will rule as the 3 lower Courts did. Despite the Dems changing the rules.
 
While their at it they should also look at Obama's EO's regarding the disregard of immigration laws by allowing certain illegal aliens to stay despite federal laws. Not to mention his conduct where he attacks states that try to go after illegal aliens while totally ignoring the states that attempt to harbor illegals inside their state such as California's driver license laws, those states with "safe haven" cities. If you're going to go after a state for going after illegal aliens due to it violating the federal governments powers regarding immigration then you should also go after the states that help illegals. Unless of course you don't want to be considered, at the very least, as hypocritical.
 
American said:
Obama



This sounds like an important case.
Click to expand...

It is an important case. I predict Roberts will roll on this like he did on ACA. Roberts could be the single worst mistake Bush made while in office.
 
MMC said:
Yeah it is American.....I just hope the SCOTUS will rule as the 3 lower Courts did. Despite the Dems changing the rules.
Click to expand...

Good point. Since the rule change made the appointments a forgone conclusion, there is no reason to even hear this fluff.
 
American said:
Obama



This sounds like an important case.
Click to expand...

the case would depend on what e used executive authory on.

the president can legally use executive orders as directives towards existing law,but has no authority to make new laws through executive order or add to existing laws either.

the court ruling would depend on whether he used eo to direct existing laws and regs,or tried to create new laws through eo.
 
Roberts better not cave, our illustrious leader needs a reminder about the checks and balances.
 
I will be looking forward to the ruling on this case. Hope justice prevails. These days though one can't count on it. Just like the dozen or so executive orders this president has managed to implement that are constitutionally unfounded based on the fact he used them as a way to circumvent the legislative branch in the first place. He certainly isn't the first president to do such things but my GAWD what will it take to restore what has been lost?
 
iguanaman said:
Good point. Since the rule change made the appointments a forgone conclusion, there is no reason to even hear this fluff.
Click to expand...


Yeah.....I know it was a good point. The Better Point was the Dems losing 3 times in the Lower Court Already. Which has to do with Appointments being Picked when the Senate is in Recess.

To bad the Dems couldn't get around that one despite their rule Change.....huh?
 
Should serve as an interesting precedent but I imagine they will just reconfirm the same appointees if SCOTUS rules that Obama exceeded his Constitutional authority.
 
beerftw said:
the case would depend on what e used executive authory on.

the president can legally use executive orders as directives towards existing law,but has no authority to make new laws through executive order or add to existing laws either.

the court ruling would depend on whether he used eo to direct existing laws and regs,or tried to create new laws through eo.
Click to expand...

House Judiciary Committee chairman Bob Goodlatte (R–VA) declared:

>" President Obama has once again abused his authority and unilaterally refused to enforce our current immigration laws by directing U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents to stop removing broad categories of unlawful immigrants.
In June of last year, the Obama Administration’s Department of Homeland Security issued a memorandum telling U.S. immigration officials how they should “enforce the Nation’s immigration laws against certain young people who were brought to this country as children and know only this country as home.” The move essentially served to implement major portions of the DREAM Act—which has been introduced and failed in Congress more than 30 times—by executive fiat..."<

Obama Grants Amnesty to Illegal Immigrants Without Congress
 
CriticalThought said:
Should serve as an interesting precedent but I imagine they will just reconfirm the same appointees if SCOTUS rules that Obama exceeded his Constitutional authority.
Click to expand...

That's fine, just do it right.
 
CriticalThought said:
Should serve as an interesting precedent but I imagine they will just reconfirm the same appointees if SCOTUS rules that Obama exceeded his Constitutional authority.
Click to expand...

It' not about whether or not the appointees would be approved today, it is all about whether the president exceeded his Constitutional authority.
 
American said:
You have to understand that he sees rainbows and unicorns when he thinks of Obama.
Click to expand...

No more than you see pitchforks and devils horns. Just like the T's in the House spending ALL their time with futile and increasingly idiotic dreams of wiping the record of the 1st black president out of the history books you will be a loser too. How does that feel?
 
iguanaman said:
No more than you see pitchforks and devils horns. Just like the T's in the House spending ALL their time with futile and increasingly idiotic dreams of wiping the record of the 1st black president out of the history books you will be a loser too. How does that feel?
Click to expand...

I don't want to wipe his record from the history books. Of course you had to play the race card.
 
iguanaman said:
No more than you see pitchforks and devils horns. Just like the T's in the House spending ALL their time with futile and increasingly idiotic dreams of wiping the record of the 1st black president out of the history books you will be a loser too. How does that feel?
Click to expand...

Exactly what does his skin color have to do with the possibility of abusing EO powers?
 
American said:
I don't want to wipe his record from the history books. Of course you had to play the race card.
Click to expand...

It is his nature to claim racism when he finds no other suitable defense.
 
GottaGo said:
Exactly what does his skin color have to do with the possibility of abusing EO powers?
Click to expand...

Absolutely nothing, but they've always got the racism card to play! I wonder if a lot of people are going to wake up one morning, though, and suddenly realize they've been conned, when it affects them? That will be something to see!

Remember how quickly the Univision questions about his failures back in September 2012 was hushed up and buried by the MSM? And they're Hispanic!
 
Long overdue. The executive is bound by laws, but they can operate outside of those laws as long as nobody calls them on it. I'm glad someone did. BTW I think this should have applied to W as well.
 
tech30528 said:
Long overdue. The executive is bound by laws, but they can operate outside of those laws as long as nobody calls them on it. I'm glad someone did. BTW I think this should have applied to W as well.
Click to expand...

Oh really? GW was far more abusive of executive power and even decided what torture was. How many calls for impeachment did he receive? ZERO. It must be because he was a Texan.
 
American said:
Obama



This sounds like an important case.
Click to expand...

Honestly this was going to happen sooner or later anyway. It was Dems that let this genie out of the bottle under the Bush Presidency when they technically weren't in recess while they were in recess. It was only a matter of time till a President called the Senate on it.

Now it's time for the Courts to rule.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom