Search results

I do not have a bias when it comes to left and right. Your 1 and 0 thought process is yours and many others do share that but I do not. Whether or not the court is biased and you may very well be right about that, it does not concern me. What concerns me are the individual cases that each Judge...

See you still do not understand. I have presented my case and will not try to get you to understand it anymore since you seem to be stuck elsewhere. I advise you to read over the linked Supreme Court Decision and how it may or may not affect this Executive order. What is being challenged is not...

See, this is all I needed to hear. Your bias is so overwhelming that even when a judge makes a ruling that results in a non challenge from the President and a rewrite of the executive order, you can not give credit and instead must concentrate only on his perceived bias by you.

I am literally asking you to please understand that what is being challenged here is not whether or not the Federal Government can enforce immigration laws or withhold Federal funding. Yes, they can. What I am asking you to understand is why this is being challenged. There is a very specific...

You are obviously not going to read the challenge or the precedent so I will just assume that our conversation ends here. You must first understand what the President is asking local government to do in specific areas of the executive order and why that has been found unconstitutional in the...

I hope you will read what I am typing. It is well within the rights of the President to withhold Federal money. Whether it is a good thing to do is debatable but still not the challenge. That is not the challenge. I can not be anymore clear than that. When you understand what is being challenged...

Sure. That is not what is being argued here. What is being argued is an overreach by the Federal Government. Feel free to read the court case above. The Federal Government can not demand that local police collect immigration status information from suspects. That is what is being challenged.

{{meta.pageTitle}} Printz v. United States, 521 U.S. 898 (1997) Printz v. United States, 521 U.S. 898 (1997) Printz v. United States | Casebriefs Printz v. United States Case Brief - Quimbee Printz v. United States 521 U.S. 898 (1997) Printz v. United States (1997) Printz v. United States...

See above posts about the legal precedent to challenge this. So you do not wish to go on record on why you oppose this judges ruling other than that he is biased? How do you define his bias? Is he liberal or not? Why would he block the executive order for personal reasons or is he just a bad...

Correct, they can be deported. That is not the legal precedent that is being challenged though. I understand that it is the political reason it is being challenged but it is not the legal justification for blocking the executive order. The legal justification for blocking it is that the...

A George W. Bush appointed Federal Judge. Let me clarify for you and others. Your interpretation of that is clear. You believe he is liberal because he did not rule in your favor.

But local governments and state governments do and that is what is being challenged. Specifically this is the precedent they are using: Printz v. United States - Wikipedia

Yep, human lives. On top of that this is also a legal fight between a possible overreach of Federal Government into State and local governments rights. But you can just make it about illegal aliens if you wish.

And yet a conservative Federal Judge says he did so he revised the initial Executive Order and signed a new one. Again, the law and his actions say one thing and you another.

Here is some good reading on his challenges: Obama and Executive Overreach - FactCheck.org

Are you kidding me? Republicans pitched a fit over every one of them. I oppose the use of them, personally.

A Federal Judge is checking whether or not that is the case. As Federal Judges have done to many other Presidents before Trump. Congress gives the President limited reach and power. Federal Judges are in place to check this. It is what I have been saying over and over and over again.

A signature and a biased review from your Attorney General. This is why they should be challenged when the outcome of them reach so many people's lives.

Actually it would very much cause burden on me. A healthy America is a productive America. An America where we do not invest in its future health is an America that is not beneficial to me. The way you are approaching things, under our current system, I feel harms a healthy America. When you get...