Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The case over the constitutionality of President Trump's EO questions the presidents authority to control the entry of foreign nationals into the United States. If the president does not have the authority to allow or disallow entry to visa holders, refugees, or other NON-citizens then I ask you, WHO SHOULD be the one controlling the "spigot" of immigration? Who SHOULD decide whether the Unites States can revoke entry to a person or group of persons?
For reference:
Obama ceased entry of Iraqi nationals after the Bowling Green terrorists arrests.
Obama and his administration unilaterally chose to resettle Syrian refugees
Clinton and Bush both resettled thousands of Somali refugees into the United States.
So I ask, if it is not the prerogative of the Exectutive branch as granted by section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, which reads:
(f) Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or non-immigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate
The President has specific enumerated authority to control immigration via the US Constitution AND Congress felt so compelled to cement that authority they further passed LAW granting enforcement powers and furthering the role of the executive branch in this area.
All of these court cases are nothing but pandering to those who are in favor of open borders policies. That's it.
Congress put forward the rules.
The executive branch has to follow these laws and rules.
(Even George W asked congress for approval when US invaded Iraq)
This is middle school stuff, why it suddenly became a topic in doubt?
Congress put forward the rules.
The executive branch has to follow these laws and rules.
(Even George W asked congress for approval when US invaded Iraq)
This is middle school stuff, why it suddenly became a topic in doubt?
it's civics 101
Legislative branch makes the law.
Executive branch enforces the law.
Judicial Branch interprets the law.
in this case, it is more than obvious that Trump is well within his rights - the judiciary (specifically, one particular area of the judiciary) just doesn't like Trump and/or the EO and are trying to change the law which is above and beyond their enumerated powers.
What I'm asking though - to those who do not believe it is the executives prerogative to enforce immigration laws - is WHO gets to enforce the laws if not the president?
Legislative branch makes the law.
Executive branch enforces the law.
Judicial Branch interprets the law.
in this case, it is more than obvious that Trump is well within his rights - the judiciary (specifically, one particular area of the judiciary) just doesn't like Trump and/or the EO and are trying to change the law which is above and beyond their enumerated powers.
What I'm asking though - to those who do not believe it is the executives prerogative to enforce immigration laws - is WHO gets to enforce the laws if not the president?
What wrong with asking congress (in case of a change in policy)?
Just for the record - Trump benefits from majority in congress AND senate for the first time in decades. No other president had this luxury and yet he dodges congress with executive orders. Do you have any explanation?
The case over the constitutionality of President Trump's EO questions the presidents authority to control the entry of foreign nationals into the United States. If the president does not have the authority to allow or disallow entry to visa holders, refugees, or other NON-citizens then I ask you, WHO SHOULD be the one controlling the "spigot" of immigration? Who SHOULD decide whether the Unites States can revoke entry to a person or group of persons?
For reference:
Obama ceased entry of Iraqi nationals after the Bowling Green terrorists arrests.
Obama and his administration unilaterally chose to resettle Syrian refugees
Clinton and Bush both resettled thousands of Somali refugees into the United States.
So I ask, if it is not the prerogative of the Exectutive branch as granted by section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, which reads:
(f) Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or non-immigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate
Who's prerogative IS it?
Yes, I believe 8 USC 1182(f) is very clear. the President has the authority to do exactly what he did: Issue a Proclamation suspending the entry of a certain group or class of aliens.
As for the Constitutionality of said Proclamation, I am still waiting for someone smarter than I am to tell me exactly what Article, Section, and Paragraph of the Constitution the President violated.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
