• 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!

EPA/BLM overstep their bounds again

ludin

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 3, 2013
Messages
57,470
Reaction score
14,587
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Federal judge blocks new Obama administration rules on fracking | Fox News

For all the merit that Obama is a constitutional lawyer he sure didn't read any of it.

Once again the EPA and the BLM have been smacked down for overstepping their authority.
it amazes me how this administration attempts to defy this on a regular basis.

Obama really thinks all he needs is a pen and a phone.
 
What he thinks more precisely is that American concepts of law and their historical basis have no meaning. Which I do not find at all surprising.
 
What he thinks more precisely is that American concepts of law and their historical basis have no meaning. Which I do not find at all surprising.

I will suggest that he agrees these agencies have no right to make law. That's for congress at federal levels, and state legislatures at the state level.
 
When I first read the title, I thought BLM stood for Black Lives Matter. :lol:

yea no it is land management. basically the EPA got struck down so it tried to do an end run around with land management
and a judge said you can't do that.
 
I will suggest that he agrees these agencies have no right to make law. That's for congress at federal levels, and state legislatures at the state level.

that is exactly it. except that the president continues to ignore the separation of powers.
 
It was a question, not an attack. Settle down.

you evidently don't know what a strawman is.
you are referring to an ad hominem which I never said which makes this a strawman as well.

let me know when you actually have something to say that isn't a fallacy.
 
you evidently don't know what a strawman is.
you are referring to an ad hominem which I never said which makes this a strawman as well.

let me know when you actually have something to say that isn't a fallacy.

You are misusing both ad hominem and straw man.
 
Once again the EPA and the BLM have been smacked down for overstepping their authority.

The EPA ruling yer referring to involves a remand back to the appellate court for further consideration, not a "smackdown." The rules remain in place.

these agencies have no right to make law.

They aren't and they don't. They are empowered to formulate, implement, and enforce regulations that have the force of law in accordance with relevant legislation. Aggrieved parties have access to legal recourse through the courts.
 
The EPA ruling yer referring to involves a remand back to the appellate court for further consideration, not a "smackdown." The rules remain in place.

umm yes that is a smack down. the court ruled against the EPA and BLM. it often sends those cases back to the lower court to fix their mistake.

They aren't and they don't. They are empowered to formulate, implement, and enforce regulations that have the force of law in accordance with relevant legislation. Aggrieved parties have access to legal recourse through the courts.

yet they have to obey the law in doing that. in this case they didn't obey the law and the SCOTUS smacked them down for it.
 
They aren't and they don't. They are empowered to formulate, implement, and enforce regulations that have the force of law in accordance with relevant legislation. Aggrieved parties have access to legal recourse through the courts.

LOL...

Rationalize much?
 
that is exactly it. except that the president continues to ignore the separation of powers.

Must not have been a very good constitutional professor, to ignore such a fundamental and key component of the US Constitution.
 
Back
Top Bottom