SIGforum.com    Main Page  Hop To Forum Categories  The Lounge    The Trump Presidency : Year II
Page 1 ... 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 ... 308

Closed Topic Closed
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
The Trump Presidency : Year II Login/Join 
I believe in the
principle of
Due Process
Picture of JALLEN
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:
^^^ I don't understand it at all. If it were simply an executive order, why can't another president summarily end it? I guess I must be missing something.


I think you have not read the ruling. The judge usually explains, and provides the authorities upon which his decision was made.

I’ve not read it either, but my guess is that it has something to do with rights which are supposed to have vested conveyed in the order which cannot now be lost or denied without due process. Something like that.




Luckily, I have enough willpower to control the driving ambition that rages within me.

When you had the votes, we did things your way. Now, we have the votes and you will be doing things our way. This lesson in political reality from Lyndon B. Johnson

"Some things are apparent. Where government moves in, community retreats, civil society disintegrates and our ability to control our own destiny atrophies. The result is: families under siege; war in the streets; unapologetic expropriation of property; the precipitous decline of the rule of law; the rapid rise of corruption; the loss of civility and the triumph of deceit. The result is a debased, debauched culture which finds moral depravity entertaining and virtue contemptible." - Justice Janice Rogers Brown
 
Posts: 48369 | Location: Texas hill country | Registered: July 04, 2005Report This Post
I believe in the
principle of
Due Process
Picture of JALLEN
posted Hide Post
It’s more complicated than you think, as is customary.

I’ve not found the ruling, but I did find this summary.

quote:
The Regents of the University of California (UC) and Janet Napolitano, in her official capacity as President of the University of California, filed this lawsuit challenging the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) revocation of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program (DACA). The complaint was filed on September 8, 2017 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

According to the complaint, DACA has benefited approximately 800,000 individuals brought to the U.S. as children “through no choice of their own.” Under DACA, applicants who met certain criteria were eligible for deferred immigration action for two-year periods, pending approval of their applications. As the complaint stated, “DACA allowed these individuals to live, study, and work in the United States without fear that they could be arrested and deported at any time,” and so they “were able to pursue opportunities in higher education, to more readily obtain driver’s licenses and access lines of credit, to obtain jobs and access to certain Social Security and Medicare benefits, and to contribute to their communities and American society.” The plaintiffs stated that these individuals - known as Dreamers - have enabled the nation and UC to greatly benefit from their presence as students and employees at the university. The plaintiffs stated the Dreamers contribute significant to UC life, “expanding the intellectual vitality of the school, filling crucial roles as medical residents, research assistants, and student government leaders, and increasing the diversity of the community.” Plaintiff Janet Napolitano was the Secretary of Homeland Security who designed and implemented DACA in 2012.

But the revocation of DACA, the plaintiffs argued, threatened the Dreamers with “expulsion from the only country that they call home.” Moreover, the plaintiffs argued, DHS did not offer any “reasoned basis” for revoking DACA and did so in violation of legally required procedures. The plaintiffs argued that DHS’s justification for revocation is that a related but ultimately separate program - Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA) - is illegal. The plaintiffs asserted that this justification is based on “an incorrect legal premise” as the two programs “were governed by different sets of rules, applied to different individuals, and conferred different benefits” and that “no court has held that DACA is unlawful.” Further, the plaintiffs argued that in not accounting for the Dreamers' strong reliance on DACA, DHS violated Supreme Court precedent requiring agencies to provide “more substantial justification” for policy changes when there is significant reliance on the preexisting policy. The plaintiffs argued that DHS’ revocation of DACA violates the Fifth Amendment’s due process clause and the Administrative Procedure Act. They seek declaratory and injunctive relief.

The case was assigned to Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley on Sept. 8, but then reassigned to Judge Hon. William Alsup on Sept. 12.

On Sept. 18, the court related this case to State of California v. Department of Homeland Security, Case No. 17-cv-05235. Two days later, the court related two more cases to this one: Garcia v. United States of America, No. 17-cv-05380, and City of San Jose v. Trump, No. 17-cv-05329. On Oct. 16, County of Santa Clara v. Trump, No. 17-cv-05813, was added as a related case. All are in the Clearinghouse.

On Oct. 6, the defendants filed the administrative record, available here, which included a series of government documents pertaining to DACA from its inception to the decision to rescind it. On Oct. 17, after the plaintiffs moved to compel the defendants to complete the administrative record, the court ordered them to do so. The court found that the defendants did not produce all documents leading to the rescission, specifically related documents that Acting Secretary Duke did not directly review. The defendants moved to stay further proceedings at this court on Oct. 18 in light of their intent to appeal this ruling to the Ninth Circuit. The court denied staying proceedings on Oct. 19, and the defendants appealed the next day by filing a petition for a writ of mandamus to the district court and and emergency motion for stay. On Oct. 23, the district court replied to the Ninth Circuit's invitation to answer the government's petition stating it would not stay proceedings in light of the narrow window of time until the DACA ends on March 5, 2018.

On Nov. 1, in the district court, the plaintiffs moved for preliminary injunction to enjoin defendants from rescinding DACA, arguing that the rescission "violates the fundamental prohibition on arbitrary agency action imposed by the Administrative Procedure Act" by not providing a reasoned basis for it. The same day, the defendants moved to dismiss the case, arguing that the rescission is an enforcement action "presumed immune from judicial review" and that the government provided ample explanation for the rescission based on DAPA's enjoinment.

On Nov. 16, the Ninth Circuit denied defendants' motion for a writ of mandamus and vacated the stay of discovery and record expansion that had been entered, and the District Court immediately ordered the federal government to file an augmented administrative record by Nov 22. On Nov. 17, the federal government filed an emergency motion noting that it intended to file an application for mandamus with the Supreme Court no later than Nov. 20, and requesting that the Ninth Circuit stay its order pending the Supreme Court's resolution of the forthcoming petition. On Nov. 21, the Ninth Circuit dismissed the federal government's motion, noting that jurisdiction currently lies with the District Court and instructing the federal government that further relief must be sought in a new petition for mandamus.

Meanwhile, in the District Court, Judge Alsup on Nov. 20 agreed to stay all discovery until Dec. 22, at which point the augmented administrative record will be due.

On Dec. 1, 2017, the government filed notice that they appealed the Ninth's Circuit denial of mandamus relief and applied for a stay to the Supreme Court. On Dec. 21 in a per curiam opinion, the Supreme Court vacated the Ninth Circuit's denial and remanded the case, arguing that the district court should have stayed implementation of the Oct. 17 order compelling the government to complete the administrative record. The Supreme Court stated that the lower court should have "first resolved the Government’s threshold arguments (that the Acting Secretary’s determination to rescind DACA is unreviewable because it is “committed to agency discretion,” 5 U. S. C. §701(a)(2), and that the Immigration and Nationality Act deprives the District Court of jurisdiction). Either of those arguments, if accepted, likely would eliminate the need for the District Court to examine a complete administrative record." 583 U. S. ____ (2017). The same day, the district court stayed the order compelling the government to complete the administrative record.

On Jan. 9, 2018, the court dismissed the government's motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction from Nov. 1, 2017 under rule 12(b)(1) and provided provisional relief to the plaintiffs. The order indicated the court would separately dismiss the government's motion to dismiss under rule 12(b)(6). The court ordered a nationwide preliminary injunction, ordering that DACA remain in effect on the same terms and conditions that existed prior to the recession. However, the government did not need to process new applications from individuals who never before received deferred action. The court then granted in part and denied in part the government's motion to dismiss on Jan. 12, dismissing the plaintiffs' Regulatory Flexibility Act and equitable estoppel claims as well the individual plaintiffs' declaratory relief claims. The court sustained the plaintiffs' APA, due process, and equal protection claims (with a few exceptions from the various complaints of the related cases).

The government appealed to the Ninth Circuit on Jan. 16, 2018.

The case is ongoing.

Link




Luckily, I have enough willpower to control the driving ambition that rages within me.

When you had the votes, we did things your way. Now, we have the votes and you will be doing things our way. This lesson in political reality from Lyndon B. Johnson

"Some things are apparent. Where government moves in, community retreats, civil society disintegrates and our ability to control our own destiny atrophies. The result is: families under siege; war in the streets; unapologetic expropriation of property; the precipitous decline of the rule of law; the rapid rise of corruption; the loss of civility and the triumph of deceit. The result is a debased, debauched culture which finds moral depravity entertaining and virtue contemptible." - Justice Janice Rogers Brown
 
Posts: 48369 | Location: Texas hill country | Registered: July 04, 2005Report This Post
אַרְיֵה
Picture of V-Tail
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by RichardC:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/imm...-soar-184604124.html

OH, yes!

This wouldn't have happened during the Kenyan's ( or evil witch's) term.


"MIAMI (AP) — More than a dozen advocacy groups issued a warning about traveling in Florida on Wednesday saying immigration arrests there have soared more rapidly in the past year than in any other area of the country.

Leaders from immigrant rights and nonprofit organizations said new cooperation between Immigration and Customs Enforcement and 17 Florida sheriffs is also spreading fear in the state.

The travel advisory issued by 15 groups warns immigrants from other states to reconsider Florida trips or to be ready to encounter immigration agents at airports, sea ports and bus stations.

"Also, the agency last month in Florida unveiled what it called a template of a nationwide model that gives law enforcement agencies the power to hold immigrants who have been arrested for other offenses and are in the country illegally. Seventeen Florida law enforcement agencies have agreed to follow the new protocol with ICE, a decision called into question by the American Civil Liberties Union and the Southern Poverty Law Center."
Yay!



הרחפת שלי מלאה בצלופחים
 
Posts: 30545 | Location: Central Florida, Orlando area | Registered: January 03, 2010Report This Post
Political Cynic
Picture of nhtagmember
posted Hide Post
thats fine and all BUT

Congress had an opportunity over 8 years to pass a law that would have codified DACA

they didn't, they tried and it was rejected by the democrats who wanted it

Zippy the Putz took it upon himself to crayon an executive order doing exactly what congress rejected

the EO has an expiry date

how is that NOT all the due process they deserve?

the judges are requiring that the current President create another EO to extend one that is expiring

thats the bottom line

they are trying to force a sitting president to create a piece of legislation that has already been rejected by the democratic party time and again

how is that NOT the due process?

Trump should tell Napolitano and the two stooges to go fuck themselves



[B] Against ALL enemies, foreign and DOMESTIC


 
Posts: 53086 | Location: Tucson Arizona | Registered: January 16, 2002Report This Post
Member
Picture of spunk639
posted Hide Post
The slap that comes from the Supreme Court to the 9th Circuit and the district is going to sting, when it was remanded that was a salvo to get this right. The 9th took its usual stance the Supreme Court will decide and separation of powers and the President will prevail.
 
Posts: 2765 | Location: Boston, Mass | Registered: December 02, 2000Report This Post
Now in Florida
Picture of ChicagoSigMan
posted Hide Post
The Trump-backed immigration reform, which gave amnesty to almost 2 million illegals in exchange for border wall funding, major restrictions on chain migration and ending the diversity visa lottery failed in the Senate today. It couldn't even get 40 votes. 14 Republicans voted against it!

On the positive side, none of the other weaker proposals got past a cloture vote either (although they all got more than 50 votes).

This country is screwed. A majority in the Senate (and surely the house as well) are itching to give the biggest possible amnesty for the littles border security and enforcement crumbs they can get away with. Eventually the Dems will have power again, and this will be the firs tthing they do....and enough "Republicans" will go along with it to let it pass.

It will be hugely unpopular like Obamacare, but once done, it can't be undone.

And it will only encourage millions more to come illegally.

Sad day.
 
Posts: 6061 | Location: FL | Registered: March 09, 2009Report This Post
I believe in the
principle of
Due Process
Picture of JALLEN
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by ChicagoSigMan:
The Trump-backed immigration reform, which gave amnesty to almost 2 million illegals in exchange for border wall funding, major restrictions on chain migration and ending the diversity visa lottery failed in the Senate today. It couldn't even get 40 votes. 14 Republicans voted against it!

On the positive side, none of the other weaker proposals got past a cloture vote either (although they all got more than 50 votes).

This country is screwed. A majority in the Senate (and surely the house as well) are itching to give the biggest possible amnesty for the littles border security and enforcement crumbs they can get away with. Eventually the Dems will have power again, and this will be the firs tthing they do....and enough "Republicans" will go along with it to let it pass.

It will be hugely unpopular like Obamacare, but once done, it can't be undone.

And it will only encourage millions more to come illegally.

Sad day.


I think these are tactical votes, designed for the folks back home, their bases, while a deal is being hammered out behind closed doors.
You need to be able to convince the folks bsck home you are really on their side, even when you end up being forced to go along with some distasteful compromise ultimately.




Luckily, I have enough willpower to control the driving ambition that rages within me.

When you had the votes, we did things your way. Now, we have the votes and you will be doing things our way. This lesson in political reality from Lyndon B. Johnson

"Some things are apparent. Where government moves in, community retreats, civil society disintegrates and our ability to control our own destiny atrophies. The result is: families under siege; war in the streets; unapologetic expropriation of property; the precipitous decline of the rule of law; the rapid rise of corruption; the loss of civility and the triumph of deceit. The result is a debased, debauched culture which finds moral depravity entertaining and virtue contemptible." - Justice Janice Rogers Brown
 
Posts: 48369 | Location: Texas hill country | Registered: July 04, 2005Report This Post
Peace through
superior firepower
Picture of parabellum
posted Hide Post
The Family Guy tie-in is annoying, but stick with this and watch this little prancing fraud speak faster and faster as the clip progresses, in an effort to support his personal opinion. You know he's treed when he throws out that idiotic "bots" crap. Disgusting little bitch.



You are NOT a journalist, jerk.
 
Posts: 107260 | Registered: January 20, 2000Report This Post
Now in Florida
Picture of ChicagoSigMan
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by JALLEN:
quote:
Originally posted by ChicagoSigMan:
The Trump-backed immigration reform, which gave amnesty to almost 2 million illegals in exchange for border wall funding, major restrictions on chain migration and ending the diversity visa lottery failed in the Senate today. It couldn't even get 40 votes. 14 Republicans voted against it!

On the positive side, none of the other weaker proposals got past a cloture vote either (although they all got more than 50 votes).

This country is screwed. A majority in the Senate (and surely the house as well) are itching to give the biggest possible amnesty for the littles border security and enforcement crumbs they can get away with. Eventually the Dems will have power again, and this will be the firs tthing they do....and enough "Republicans" will go along with it to let it pass.

It will be hugely unpopular like Obamacare, but once done, it can't be undone.

And it will only encourage millions more to come illegally.

Sad day.


I think these are tactical votes, designed for the folks back home, their bases, while a deal is being hammered out behind closed doors.
You need to be able to convince the folks bsck home you are really on their side, even when you end up being forced to go along with some distasteful compromise ultimately.


Normally I would agree...but all the compromises were voted on. There were 4 different proposals with varying degrees of border hawkishness - from nearly clean DACA to full Trump and a couple in between. Nothing got 60 votes. I don't see what compromise is left. I think it is more likely that the Dems are content to let this issue sit out there so that they can campaign on it in the midterms.
 
Posts: 6061 | Location: FL | Registered: March 09, 2009Report This Post
Too old to run,
too mean to quit!
posted Hide Post
quote:
Nothing got 60 votes.



What the hell ever happened to that silly majority rule thingy??

As I understand it, that 60 vote crap is nothing more than what amounts to a senate "custom" that is invoked whenever they do not want to deal with something. I.e. gee, let's do the 60 vote thing, we know it will not pass, and we can move on to something more important, like how can more lobbyists get me more money. Screw the country!


Elk

There has never been an occasion where a people gave up their weapons in the interest of peace that didn't end in their massacre. (Louis L'Amour)

"To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical. "
-Thomas Jefferson

"America is great because she is good. If America ceases to be good, America will cease to be great." Alexis de Tocqueville

FBHO!!!



The Idaho Elk Hunter
 
Posts: 25640 | Location: Virginia | Registered: December 16, 2001Report This Post
I believe in the
principle of
Due Process
Picture of JALLEN
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Elk Hunter:
quote:
Nothing got 60 votes.



What the hell ever happened to that silly majority rule thingy??

As I understand it, that 60 vote crap is nothing more than what amounts to a senate "custom" that is invoked whenever they do not want to deal with something. I.e. gee, let's do the 60 vote thing, we know it will not pass, and we can move on to something more important, like how can more lobbyists get me more money. Screw the country!


I think it is more than a mere custom to be invoked on occasion.

The cloture to cut off debate is inshrined in Senate Rules and has been in various forms for many, many years. It is mandatory, unless they can pretend to conform to reconciliation.




Luckily, I have enough willpower to control the driving ambition that rages within me.

When you had the votes, we did things your way. Now, we have the votes and you will be doing things our way. This lesson in political reality from Lyndon B. Johnson

"Some things are apparent. Where government moves in, community retreats, civil society disintegrates and our ability to control our own destiny atrophies. The result is: families under siege; war in the streets; unapologetic expropriation of property; the precipitous decline of the rule of law; the rapid rise of corruption; the loss of civility and the triumph of deceit. The result is a debased, debauched culture which finds moral depravity entertaining and virtue contemptible." - Justice Janice Rogers Brown
 
Posts: 48369 | Location: Texas hill country | Registered: July 04, 2005Report This Post
Political Cynic
Picture of nhtagmember
posted Hide Post
it is all posturing

the dems know they're not going to get immediate amnesty - 12 years is a long way off and most of them will be retired by then so they can't count on the votes to help them in 2018 so they default to their best position which is to screw over the American people

they are so transparent they might as well not even exist



[B] Against ALL enemies, foreign and DOMESTIC


 
Posts: 53086 | Location: Tucson Arizona | Registered: January 16, 2002Report This Post
Bad dog!
Picture of justjoe
posted Hide Post
Mueller has indicted Russians for interfering in our 2016 election. It is banner headline on Drudge and just about everywhere.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/1...-muellers-probe.html

What utter horse shit. Every major power does something like this to other countries at their election time. Mueller-- and his entire "investigation"-- is a complete fraud.


______________________________________________________

"You get much farther with a kind word and a gun than with a kind word alone."
 
Posts: 11106 | Location: pennsylvania | Registered: June 05, 2011Report This Post
Peace through
superior firepower
Picture of parabellum
posted Hide Post
It's good news. It means that douchebag and his douchebag team of douchebags have found nothing on President Trump.
 
Posts: 107260 | Registered: January 20, 2000Report This Post
Get my pies
outta the oven!

Picture of PASig
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by justjoe:
Mueller has indicted Russians for interfering in our 2016 election.


So, it sounds like he's got nothing and needs to justify keeping this bullshit witch hunt going.

When is Trump going to shut this nonsense down already, FOR F*CKS SAKE! Mad


 
Posts: 33608 | Location: Pennsylvania | Registered: November 12, 2007Report This Post
safe & sound
Picture of a1abdj
posted Hide Post
quote:
When is Trump going to shut this nonsense down already, FOR F*CKS SAKE!


Never. Not going to happen. Trump will not shut this nonsense down and for good reason.

It will die its own death AND will justify the next special prosecutor doing the same, thorough, unimpeded, free from influence investigation into the Dems.


________________________



www.zykansafe.com
 
Posts: 15695 | Location: St. Charles, MO, USA | Registered: September 22, 2003Report This Post
goodheart
Picture of sjtill
posted Hide Post
quote:
The indictment says that the goal or the entities and people indicted was to support now-President Trump's campaign and to hurt Democrat Hillary Clinton's, and that some defendants while posing as U.S. people communicated with "unwitting individuals associated with the Trump Campaign and with other political activists to seek to coordinate political activities."


Bingo.

Link


_________________________
“ What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass.”— Lord Melbourne
 
Posts: 18017 | Location: One hop from Paradise | Registered: July 27, 2004Report This Post
wishing we
were congress
posted Hide Post
https://www.justice.gov/file/1035477/download

The indictment against the Russians (above)
(37 pages)


for reference , here are the indictments against Flynn, Manafort, and Papadopolous:


https://www.justice.gov/sco

an important link

sco special counsel Mueller

from the indictment announced today:



a very early comment on the indictment, note that several of the people are indicted for activities that began and ended in the 2013/2014 time period.

Donald Trump announced his candidacy 16 June 2015.
 
Posts: 19505 | Registered: July 21, 2002Report This Post
Get my pies
outta the oven!

Picture of PASig
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by a1abdj:


It will die its own death


How can it when the Democrats are putting all time and resources into prolonging it for the entire term of Trump's tenure, for if they can't "get" him they can at least have him under a cloud for 4 or 8 years?

No, I disagree. It's time for Trump to stick his foot up whoever's ass it is to make Mueller shut this shit down, and now.


 
Posts: 33608 | Location: Pennsylvania | Registered: November 12, 2007Report This Post
Step by step walk the thousand mile road
Picture of Sig2340
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by parabellum:
It's good news. It means that douchebag and his douchebag team of douchebags have found nothing on President Trump.


That major piece of news and key fact won't get any airtime.

All we will hear are variants of this quote from the CNBC article posted above:

quote:
A federal grand jury has indicted 13 Russian nationals and three Russian entities for alleged interference in the 2016 presidential elections, during which they boosted the candidacy of Donald Trump, special counsel Robert Mueller's office said Friday.


That will be declared "ample proof of Russian collusion" even though that isn't what is stated in the indictment.

There the term was "unwitting Trump campaign officials were duped" also a not particularly nice phraseology.

It's good news for those who care for the President because now that there are indictments, Mueller et al can be disbanded and the real criminal cases against Ohe, Page, Strzok, Rosenstein, et al can begin.





Nice is overrated

"It's every freedom-loving individual's duty to lie to the government."
Airsoftguy, June 29, 2018
 
Posts: 31382 | Location: Loudoun County, Virginia | Registered: May 17, 2006Report This Post
  Powered by Social Strata Page 1 ... 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 ... 308 

Closed Topic Closed

SIGforum.com    Main Page  Hop To Forum Categories  The Lounge    The Trump Presidency : Year II

© SIGforum 2024