Obama's actions lawful, top legal scholars say-

I think it is pretty funny that you think that people taught by Obama, the constitutional scholar who brought us the ACA is not a tax tax, agreeing with their alum is an endorsement. Or perhaps his appointee to the JD, Karl Thompson, whose opinion dropped an hour or so before his speech would carry any weight with anyone other than the dreamers who still believe.

Why are his "legal experts" so indelibly tied to him? "I talked with my yes men, and they agree with me."

"Good enough for me."

Pray tell, what was their opinion on the other matters struck down by SCOTUS that the president insisted were legal?

 

No, he knows its wrong, and his voting base will crucify him.

 

you know Obama lawyers made sure it was legal before he did it, I am sure Obama wanted to do more if he could of, but the rules are the rules, Obama did what he could, hopefully now Congress will address it from their end, as they have more powers in this area then the President does

.

 

Legal or not I am not sure if it is the right thing to do. There are millions of Americans who are struggling with student loan debt that could use help who are legal citizens who have done nothing wrong other than try to better themselves.

 

we can only hope republicans vote out every republican that was "wrong" on this one

maybe republicans should check with their lawyers before making up lies about stuff being unconstitutional next time as they obviously know very little about the constitution

.

 

Where were all these "top legal scholars" when, for six years, Obama was going around correctly denying he had the authority to nullify federal immigration law with an executive order? Were they all kept in sedation in a closet somewhere?
Did no one ever tap him on the shoulder when he made one of his twenty-five or so declarations that he could not just create federal law on his say so
and say, "Umm...Mr President, you DO have that authority. Use the Force, Mr. President. Use the Force."

The lies from Obama are absurd but the rationalization for those lies are absolutely hilarious.

 

You may disagree with the action taken, but the unconstitutionality of it was never an issue until Obama came along.

 

Deferring deportation is not illegal, it is everything else that is. Obama has essentially changed the law giving citizenship status to illegals and putting on the tax roles.

 

This action is not permanent, you know this. But it is what the GOP gets for refusing to vote on immigration action. Obama called their bluff and the GOP is in trouble as repealing the order would impact millions.

Look, I'm all for tough border security and an end to illegal immigration, but the GOP brought this on themselves.

 

Of course it is virtually permanent and you know it. Obama did nothing on this during his first year in office with both houses of Congress democrat after he promised to do something about it in his first year. Quit trying to blame others for Obama's failure.

 

Some say it is legal....and some say it's at a minimum, an overreach that might set a precedent that Dems will not like. IOW's, if this passes with legal experts and the Constitution, then there is nothing stopping a Republicans president from coming in later and with the stroke of his pen and with the funds provided by a Republican Congress...actually and finally make our border secure. It was one of the 3 prong parts of the 1986 legislation, by the way....and the part that the politician weakened later as they never really want to actually secure the border. NONE of Obama's actions....or any other president's actions work UNLESS and UNTIL the border is actually sealed and secured.

So, if Obama came come in with his pen some 28 years after the last piece of legislation and do something all on his own....so will the next Republican president be able to do exactly the same thing!!! Just remember that Dems.....because there were many good things in that bill that never got done because of politicians.

 

What immigration action? You mean that piece of Immigration the Dems passed his first two years when they had it ALL??? Oh wait....never mind. They passed ZERO immigration legislation then, right? Oh yeah, how quickly they forget.

Or perhaps you were referring to the 2007 Comprehensive Immigration legislation that Senator Barack Obama single-handedly killed?

 

Good then. Because it will be great when in 2016, a Republican president comes in....and with a Republican Senate and House....once and for all actually secures our borders with the stroke of a pen!! I don't want to hear any of the Dems whining about it either. You reap what you sow......

 

You mean like how Bush secured the border when the GOP controlled all three branches for two years ?

Neither party has or will do anything about the border.

 

He probably didn't understand how far presidential authority extended with regards to immigration law and how the law is written to give a president discretion as to the laws enforcement.

Then again he might've been playing conservatives. You know, their not understanding the presidents authority and allowing Obama to box them in on immigration by executive action. There had been speculation he was hoping for an overreaction from the base which would backfire with the American people.

In that he is a constitutional scholar, I wonder which one Occam's razor would support.

 

I'm not supportive of Obama's action, but I'm not against it if it will move either party to actually do sometime about the border.

 

All those "legal" scholars that are either Democrat by Party, or donate heavily to the Democrat party, or were Obama's Professors at the UoC? Yea, very subjective if you ask me.

 

In this famous concurring opinion, Justice Jackson (formerly an Assistant U.S. Attorney involved in similar seizures under Roosevelt) said:

Or could the Supreme Court forbid such actions based upon some vague limit to executive powers, see Youngstown Sheet & Tube & Co. v. Sawyer (link to decision), 343 U.S. 579 (1952) and discussion in The Story of the Steel Seizure Case, by Patricia L. Bellia (link).

In this famous concurring opinion, Justice Jackson (formerly an Assistant U.S. Attorney involved in similar seizures under Roosevelt) said:

What is troubling here is the impact of Congressional paralysis. President Gerald Ford was said to have "governed by veto." The normally conservative New York Sun editorially supported Obama's move on immigration as his "finest hour." (link to editorial). The New York Sun stated:

I personally favor immigration but am highly troubled by his constant usurpation of power.

For the reasons you pointed out the order is effectively permanent. That is the problem.

Then again when we allowed 11,000,000 to stay illegally we created an insoluble problem since no one suggests that kind of mass deportation.

 

That's because Reagan and Bush's executive order was in accordance with Immigration reform passed by the Congress. Obamas is not.

 

Work permits have been given out for eons. Social Security cards ensure that they are paying INTO the Social Security system. Use your head, man.

 

That's because Presidents before him recognized the limits of their authority. Like Obama did, publicly stating over 20 times that to do so was beyond his authority.

 

The deadbeats need their drugs. Can't patrol the border without interfering with the drug superhighway. It's a billion dollar industry. Nobody is going to even try to interfere.

 

Those who contend that Reagen's Executive order on Amnesty is akin to Obama's are not well informed.
But there is certainly precedence by a republican via Executive Order on Immigration for what President Obama has

Republican president Herbert Hoover issued the most far-reaching executive order in the history of our immigration policy when he unilaterally decided that his administration would issue immigration visas only to persons with the means to support themselves independently in the United States.

This wasn't about enforcement. It directly changed Law.

max

 

is your issue the executive order or the fact you don't agree with it ?

 

You can find as many legal experts who will explain how Obama's recent executive order is illegal as will say it was legal. What you must do is check to see if any of these experts have a political axe yo grind and are disguising their bias.

I've noticed that one side is composed of people entirely of one political leaning and the other is made up of people from a variety of political backgrounds.