Res Ipsa wrote:No, mainly because it is contrary to current law enacted by Congress.
It's a campaign stunt for the midterms.
This was all I took it as too. As an executive order it might not even make it to Supreme Court anyways, couldn't the next administration (assuming it is different) just override it, not unlike many of Obama's orders? This seems like a very short term play.
Eos are just written documentation of the President's exercise of executive power. (Or what he claims is executive power.) So, yes, the next President could simply revoke the executive order.
“The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.”
― Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, 1951
There is a whole movement within conservative jurisprudence that thinks birthright citizenship isn't within the 14th amendment. People from that crowd are being pipelined onto the federal courts, so who knows what could be done 20 years from now.
Just as Republicans have been radicalizing before our eyes, conservative legal groups have been as well. At the same time, they've been getting more efficient at getting on the bench. I think this is an underplayed story.
As for now, this is obviously ridiculous and has no chance of going anywhere. The current Supreme Court isn't going to overturn over a century of jurisprudence and the plain meaning of the Constitution on the basis of an executive order. It's just a stunt to get the press talking about immigration leading into the election because that's a better thing for Republicans than talking about their incessant lying about healthcare.
It makes me laugh when I think back at the Republican primaries to all the people saying DJT was a liberal disguised as a conservative and playing on the views of rural conservative Americans. Once he gets your vote, he won't really try to enforce the border.
And when the confederates saw Jackson standing fearless as a stone wall the army of Northern Virginia took courage and drove the federal army off their land.
ajax18 wrote:It makes me laugh when I think back at the Republican primaries to all the people saying DJT was a liberal disguised as a conservative and playing on the views of rural conservative Americans. Once he gets your vote, he won't really try to enforce the border.
I think many expected he would be distracting you with these kinds of things, which are probably not doing much anyways, so you wont notice all the other crap he is doing.
ajax18 wrote:It makes me laugh when I think back at the Republican primaries to all the people saying DJT was a liberal disguised as a conservative and playing on the views of rural conservative Americans. Once he gets your vote, he won't really try to enforce the border.
You ever wonder if all these meaningless gestures are just a way to con you into allowing your pocket to be picked? White supremacist politics has never actually been good for white people.
EAllusion wrote:There is a whole movement within conservative jurisprudence that thinks birthright citizenship isn't within the 14th amendment. People from that crowd are being pipelined onto the federal courts, so who knows what could be done 20 years from now.
Just as Republicans have been radicalizing before our eyes, conservative legal groups have been as well. At the same time, they've been getting more efficient at getting on the bench. I think this is an underplayed story.
As for now, this is obviously ridiculous and has no chance of going anywhere. The current Supreme Court isn't going to overturn over a century of jurisprudence and the plain meaning of the Constitution on the basis of an executive order. It's just a stunt to get the press talking about immigration leading into the election because that's a better thing for Republicans than talking about their incessant lying about healthcare.
I hear ya' on the topic of judges. Learning that the Federalist Society had a program to "train" Supreme Court Clerks was a pretty big shock to me.
The problem the conservatives have here is taking the phrase: "All persons born..." and changing it to "Some persons born..." For conservatives, who decry judicial activism, this would be clearly amending the Constitution by judicial fiat. When you don't like what the Constitutionalists actually says, there is a remedy for that.
“The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.”
― Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, 1951
ajax18 wrote:It makes me laugh when I think back at the Republican primaries to all the people saying DJT was a liberal disguised as a conservative and playing on the views of rural conservative Americans. Once he gets your vote, he won't really try to enforce the border.
You ever wonder if all these meaningless gestures are just a way to con you into allowing your pocket to be picked? White supremacist politics has never actually been good for white people.
What kinds of politics are good for White people, EA?
- Doc
In the face of madness, rationality has no power - Xiao Wang, US historiographer, 2287 AD.
Every record...falsified, every book rewritten...every statue...has been renamed or torn down, every date...altered...the process is continuing...minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Ideology is always right.
I think the paradigm has always been the 1% v. 99% with the Republicans traditionally playing the CEO role and the Pelosi/Schumer democrats playing the role of corrupt union bosses charged with the task of selling the masses on the latest hope and change fraud. Sorry, no increase in wages while your expenses forever increase. Meanwhile, let's talk about the latest made for T.V. political drama starring Trump and the Pelosi/Schumer crew.
There are certain issues that we cannot talk about, like the unnecessary military budget and the wars that transfer wealth up to the 1%. Syrian refugees flood europe because of our war for a gas pipeline over there. We can't talk about why Hondurans want to leave their plantation for somewhere else because our "patriotic" 1% caused the mess down there in support of Chiquita Banana/United Fruit's desire to have cheap labor. How about we allow actual democracy down there and let the people in Honduras decide how they want to use their land? Maybe by allowing immigrant populations to actually control their own countries without the american neoliberal overlords that both the left and right support, will there be a resolution to the immigration issue? My clients don't necessarily want to leave Mexico, but NAFTA threw them off of the land they farmed so big agriculture could come in and take over. Now drugs and corruption rule due in part to a dark alliance.
In the meantime, this executive order is merely a last minute political wedge designed to drive Trump supporters to the polls.
"Religion is about providing human community in the guise of solving problems that don’t exist or failing to solve problems that do and seeking to reconcile these contradictions and conceal the failures in bogus explanations otherwise known as theology." - Kishkumen
