Topic: Who is the Speaker going to file a lawsuit with? - page 3. (Read 2748 times)

Quote from: sana8410 on July 05, 2014, 08:15:36 AM

Supreme Court? I would think they would throw out this suit, because it's political bullshit so boenher can keep his job. But 5 conservative judges might go for it. Question is, can democrats sue a republican president. the stats the media keeps showing is that Obama has issued far fewer executive orders than his predecessors.

I think you've got your priorities mixed up....When a law is legally passed and the president uses an executive order to nullify it, THAT is political bullshit.

Educate me. Which law(s) are you talking about?

I'll pick one (there are many examples)

In 2010 the dream act failed, so Obama used executive orders to stop deportations and of illegal immigrants.

So even though the law (he supported) failed, he just wrote it in and told law enforcement and the justice dept how to act.
Someone or other passed a law about recess appointments:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politi...d19_story.html

...and the other side played the technicalities card by holding fake sessions to block recess appointments.

But technicalities count, so thank god we can say republicans have achieved something in congress.

Another Obama SCOTUS smack down. He's the President, not the King. When was the last?Here:
United States v. Jones
Sackett v. EPA
Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church & School v. EEOC
Gabelli v. SEC
Arkansas Fish & Games v. United States
PPK Corp. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
Horne v. USDA
Sekhar v. United States
Burrage v. United States
Bond v. United States
United States v. Wurie/Riley v. California
NLRB v. Noel Canning

Ok let's look at these.

1. The FBI can't track a car by installing GPS on it--clearly a desire of the current admin

2. One act allows for another to be charged, recommends the 1970s Clean Water act be clarified--everyone knows this is a key piece of Obama legislation

3. Government can't pick religious employees, ruling leaves open suing--clear blow to the presidents agenda of appointing religious figures

4. Statue of limitations is tied to the date you did the crime, not when it was discovered--drats, Obama is foiled again

5. Let's sue the federal government for its flood control efforts--sure showed that uppity negro a thing or two

Your first five examples are shit. They don't even pertain to the current administration. In fact, they show the normal court deliberations that would happen under any administration. Asserting these belong on a list with recess appointments or filing suit is silly and desperate--trumped up.

Try using your own words when making your menopausal response.

Rigon

sr. member

Activity: 994

Merit: 441

Quote from: Rigon on July 05, 2014, 08:13:02 AM

Quote from: zolace on July 07, 2014, 10:50:21 AM

Supreme Court? I would think they would throw out this suit, because it's political bullshit so boenher can keep his job. But 5 conservative judges might go for it. Question is, can democrats sue a republican president. the stats the media keeps showing is that Obama has issued far fewer executive orders than his predecessors.

I think you've got your priorities mixed up....When a law is legally passed and the president uses an executive order to nullify it, THAT is political bullshit.

Educate me. Which law(s) are you talking about?

I'll pick one (there are many examples)

In 2010 the dream act failed, so Obama used executive orders to stop deportations and of illegal immigrants.

So even though the law (he supported) failed, he just wrote it in and told law enforcement and the justice dept how to act.
Someone or other passed a law about recess appointments:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politi...d19_story.html

...and the other side played the technicalities card by holding fake sessions to block recess appointments.

But technicalities count, so thank god we can say republicans have achieved something in congress.

Another Obama SCOTUS smack down. He's the President, not the King. When was the last?Here:
United States v. Jones
Sackett v. EPA
Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church & School v. EEOC
Gabelli v. SEC
Arkansas Fish & Games v. United States
PPK Corp. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
Horne v. USDA
Sekhar v. United States
Burrage v. United States
Bond v. United States
United States v. Wurie/Riley v. California
NLRB v. Noel Canning

sana8410

sr. member

Activity: 448

Merit: 250

Quote from: sana8410 on July 07, 2014, 10:48:51 AM

Side A might be silly buggers but all sides are buggers period.Ergo going for a recess appointment is only slightly less buggerish than extending do nothing sessions into pro forma sessions to block recess appointments.

It wasn't responsive to what was being discussed. I'm sure it was responsive to whatever the voices in your head were discussing.

It was plenty responsive. In fact it gave your less than helpful post some context. Feel free to comment.

zolace

sr. member

Activity: 364

Merit: 250

Quote from: sana8410 on July 07, 2014, 10:48:51 AM

Side A might be silly buggers but all sides are buggers period.Ergo going for a recess appointment is only slightly less buggerish than extending do nothing sessions into pro forma sessions to block recess appointments.

It wasn't responsive to what was being discussed. I'm sure it was responsive to whatever the voices in your head were discussing.

sana8410

sr. member

Activity: 448

Merit: 250

Side A might be silly buggers but all sides are buggers period.Ergo going for a recess appointment is only slightly less buggerish than extending do nothing sessions into pro forma sessions to block recess appointments.

TheButterZone

legendary

Activity: 3038

Merit: 1032

RIP Mommy

The Nobel Peace Prize committee?

InwardContour

sr. member

Activity: 644

Merit: 260

Quote from: commandrix on July 05, 2014, 04:25:28 PM

Quote from: sana8410 on July 05, 2014, 08:07:21 AM

Executive orders are legitimate. The issue is executive orders that contradict the laws duly passed by Congress and signed by the president himself.

The president is constitutionally required to carry out laws. That's his fucking job. He doesn't get to pick and choose which laws he wants to carry out, or to change them on the fly.

Obama sure is trying to pick and choose the laws he wants to enforce. If any lawsuits are filed, I hope there's one that forces him to do a proper job of securing our borders, for instance.

I have read that the speaker is going to sue regarding the immigration laws on behalf of congress.

Obama is setting very bad precedent by not enforcing our laws. Not only that but it is making it difficult for congress to trust him to negotiate with him as they don't trust that he will enforce the laws that he agrees to.

commandrix

hero member

Activity: 798

Merit: 1000

Quote from: sana8410 on July 05, 2014, 08:07:21 AM

Executive orders are legitimate. The issue is executive orders that contradict the laws duly passed by Congress and signed by the president himself.

The president is constitutionally required to carry out laws. That's his fucking job. He doesn't get to pick and choose which laws he wants to carry out, or to change them on the fly.

Obama sure is trying to pick and choose the laws he wants to enforce. If any lawsuits are filed, I hope there's one that forces him to do a proper job of securing our borders, for instance.

InwardContour

sr. member

Activity: 644

Merit: 260

Supreme Court? I would think they would throw out this suit, because it's political bullshit so boenher can keep his job. But 5 conservative judges might go for it. Question is, can democrats sue a republican president. the stats the media keeps showing is that Obama has issued far fewer executive orders than his predecessors.

I think you've got your priorities mixed up....When a law is legally passed and the president uses an executive order to nullify it, THAT is political bullshit.

Educate me. Which law(s) are you talking about?

The president has not enforced our immigration laws for the majority/all of his presidency.

He has made changes to the ACA aka Obamacare via executive orders by changing deadlines and other requirements that are very clear in the law.

Wilikon

legendary

Activity: 1176

Merit: 1001

minds.com/Wilikon

Supreme Court? I would think they would throw out this suit, because it's political bullshit so boenher can keep his job. But 5 conservative judges might go for it. Question is, can democrats sue a republican president. the stats the media keeps showing is that Obama has issued far fewer executive orders than his predecessors.

I think you've got your priorities mixed up....When a law is legally passed and the president uses an executive order to nullify it, THAT is political bullshit.

Educate me. Which law(s) are you talking about?

Which EO are you defending?

Spendulus

legendary

Activity: 2926

Merit: 1386

Quote from: Rigon on July 05, 2014, 08:13:02 AM

Supreme Court? I would think they would throw out this suit, because it's political bullshit so boenher can keep his job. But 5 conservative judges might go for it. Question is, can democrats sue a republican president. the stats the media keeps showing is that Obama has issued far fewer executive orders than his predecessors.

I think you've got your priorities mixed up....When a law is legally passed and the president uses an executive order to nullify it, THAT is political bullshit.

Educate me. Which law(s) are you talking about?

Educate YOU? You brought the subject up. Which executive actions are you defending?

You defined this matter as political bullshit.

But courts are where genuine differences of opinion on the meaning of law SHOULD BE DECIDED.

That's the right way to resolve a conflict.

sana8410

sr. member

Activity: 448

Merit: 250

Supreme Court? I would think they would throw out this suit, because it's political bullshit so boenher can keep his job. But 5 conservative judges might go for it. Question is, can democrats sue a republican president. the stats the media keeps showing is that Obama has issued far fewer executive orders than his predecessors.

I think you've got your priorities mixed up....When a law is legally passed and the president uses an executive order to nullify it, THAT is political bullshit.

Educate me. Which law(s) are you talking about?

I'll pick one (there are many examples)

In 2010 the dream act failed, so Obama used executive orders to stop deportations and of illegal immigrants.

So even though the law (he supported) failed, he just wrote it in and told law enforcement and the justice dept how to act.
Someone or other passed a law about recess appointments:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politi...d19_story.html

...and the other side played the technicalities card by holding fake sessions to block recess appointments.

But technicalities count, so thank god we can say republicans have achieved something in congress.

Rigon

sr. member

Activity: 994

Merit: 441

Quote from: umair127 on July 05, 2014, 08:00:55 AM

Supreme Court? I would think they would throw out this suit, because it's political bullshit so boenher can keep his job. But 5 conservative judges might go for it. Question is, can democrats sue a republican president. the stats the media keeps showing is that Obama has issued far fewer executive orders than his predecessors.

I think you've got your priorities mixed up....When a law is legally passed and the president uses an executive order to nullify it, THAT is political bullshit.

Educate me. Which law(s) are you talking about?

I'll pick one (there are many examples)

In 2010 the dream act failed, so Obama used executive orders to stop deportations and of illegal immigrants.

So even though the law (he supported) failed, he just wrote it in and told law enforcement and the justice dept how to act.
Someone or other passed a law about recess appointments:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politi...d19_story.html

zolace

sr. member

Activity: 364

Merit: 250

Quote from: zolace on July 05, 2014, 07:54:10 AM

It's not the quantity, since the impact of any EO isn't equal in scope.

Please describe the quality that deserves such a lawsuit?

You misunderstood me. I'm not saying Boehner "the tool" has a case. I'm simply saying you can't weigh each EO equal and quantify them like numbers on a scoreboard.

umair127

sr. member

Activity: 378

Merit: 250

Supreme Court? I would think they would throw out this suit, because it's political bullshit so boenher can keep his job. But 5 conservative judges might go for it. Question is, can democrats sue a republican president. the stats the media keeps showing is that Obama has issued far fewer executive orders than his predecessors.

I think you've got your priorities mixed up....When a law is legally passed and the president uses an executive order to nullify it, THAT is political bullshit.

Educate me. Which law(s) are you talking about?

sana8410

sr. member

Activity: 448

Merit: 250

Executive orders are legitimate. The issue is executive orders that contradict the laws duly passed by Congress and signed by the president himself.

The president is constitutionally required to carry out laws. That's his fucking job. He doesn't get to pick and choose which laws he wants to carry out, or to change them on the fly.

Rigon

sr. member

Activity: 994

Merit: 441