Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Do you think that was an abuse of power or something?I'm not going to comment on whether the judge/panel is right or wrong, should or shouldn't have ruled as s/he/it did, etc. because I haven't read the decision, nor do I know off the top of my head what precedents and so on pertain to the matter, and, frankly, I don't feel like making the effort to find out. I will say, however, that at this rate, we're going to end up with country being "run" by the judicial rather than by the executive branch.
The judicial branch is there as a check on that executive branch. That's kind of the whole point.
Because, otherwise, I don't even see the point in you saying that. The last travel ban was within his authority. Pretty sure holding municipalities and states accountable for doing illegal acts and helping criminals is within his administrations authority as well.
Oh I didn't even address the content. I addressed the use of the adjective "California" firstly, and the wish of the other poster to dispense with the intentionally-designed system of checks and balances secondly.
Any minute now we'll hear from AG Gump: "I really am amazed that a judge sitting on an estuary in the most populous state can issue an order that stops the President of the United States in what appears to be clearly his statutory constitutional duty". I wonder if Gump voted to put this judge in place too...the wish of the other poster to dispense with the intentionally-designed system of checks and balances secondly.
Whoa, nelly! That is an inference you made from what I wrote. It is not something to which I alluded, nor is it someting to which I attested.
What I wrote reflects the beginning and end of what I wanted to say and meant. You've surely seen enough of my posts to know damn well that I do not shy from nor am I incapable of providing a full picture of the ideas I aim to express. Nobody has to play "mind reader" with my posts.
Nah, it's like the constitution. No one thinks much of it, it's just useful for bludgeoning opponents with.I'm guessing we won’t be hearing any complaints about “separation of powers” from the MSM-Democrats on this one.
the federal govt LET THEM IN....not the States. If the federal govt did their jobs, the States/cities would not be faced with this predicament?Another damn activist judge.
why don't we just make these judges president?
California judge blocks Trump order on sanctuary city money
What is disgusting about this is that on one hand they say that "not giving these sanctuary cities funds will hurt these cities", but on the other hand they tell these same cities that if an illegal immigrant which they defend harms or kills a citizen, they cannot be sued and are protected from culpability. Which is it? Do these cities have responsibility for their actions or not? If not, they shouldn't be given a penny from the rest of the nation that opposes these cities
Arrogant and hypocritical. These "cities" want their cake and eat it too even though the vast majority of Americans are against their positions. Kate Steinles family should sue all the way to the Supreme Court. This is bothersome at the very least. One state or another impacting the entire nation by playing a political power play.
So you are completely OK with abuse of power as long as it fits your agenda?so you are saying this is all a personal vendetta? InterestingMaybe he should have kept his mouth shut instead of making racist remarks about Judge Curiel last year. He was too stupid and somebody should have told him about checks n' balances and separation of power! LOVE IT.
Trump is fucking IMPOTENT.
Idiot.
You've got more gaps going on than those in your post.
I think there could be a little payback going on here.
Judges, even on a local level, are arrogant as hell. Worse than surgeons.
So federal district judges think they are gods and will protect their own against pigs like Trump.
And I LIKE IT. I don't care HOW Trump gets taken down, just as long as he does.
Nice.
It is, but only when executives and legislators fail to exercise good judgement in taking the actions they do. Even though those elected individuals are members of one party or another, they are nonetheless the representatives of all the citizens of the U.S. When one's favorability is as low as Trump's and the Congress', good judgment, in part, includes making and enforcing policy in a win-win way, not an "I say this is best; therefore it is" way.
These local jurisidictions do not get to say 'fuck you' to federal law simply because a bunc of lunatics in the preceding administration fucked up all over the place.the federal govt LET THEM IN....not the States. If the federal govt did their jobs, the States/cities would not be faced with this predicament?
They still have to obey the gawd damned laws.
Oh, lord. Are you the member (one of the members?) who is given to turning every topic into a "federal reserve" one? Or are you the one who sees a conspiracy around every corner? I truly can't recall.You don't have leaders, you have kleptocrats bent upon the cannibalization, extraction, concentration ,and redistribution of societal wealth.It is, but only when executives and legislators fail to exercise good judgement in taking the actions they do. Even though those elected individuals are members of one party or another, they are nonetheless the representatives of all the citizens of the U.S. When one's favorability is as low as Trump's and the Congress', good judgment, in part, includes making and enforcing policy in a win-win way, not an "I say this is best; therefore it is" way.I'm not going to comment on whether the judge/panel is right or wrong, should or shouldn't have ruled as s/he/it did, etc. because I haven't read the decision, nor do I know off the top of my head what precedents and so on pertain to the matter, and, frankly, I don't feel like making the effort to find out. I will say, however, that at this rate, we're going to end up with country being "run" by the judicial rather than by the executive branch.
The judicial branch is there as a check on that executive branch. That's kind of the whole point.
It all comes down to selecting the right leadership style for the situation at hand. That's what good leaders do. They don't stick to just one and apply it, come hell or high water. Given the factually fractious nature of the citizenry in the U.S. these days, a genuinely collaborative approach is what will work best.
Now, in all honesty, I don't expect too many lawyers to be savvy about the ways and means of good operations management, but I do expect a former CEO who's staffed his administration with other former CEOs to know those principles inside out and apply them to their fullest effect. As I've said before, they "play chess."
Might as well, we lead the planet in that incarceration bidness, hell, we made a for profit bidness out of it complete with a return to convict leasing and profiteering from bondage.Like I said throw the city council and Mayor in jail problem solved......Another damn activist judge.
why don't we just make these judges president?
California judge blocks Trump order on sanctuary city money
Oh, lord. Are you the member who is given to turning every topic into a "federal reserve" one? Or are you the one who sees a conspiracy around every corner? I truly can't recall.You don't have leaders, you have kleptocrats bent upon the cannibalization, extraction, concentration ,and redistribution of societal wealth.It is, but only when executives and legislators fail to exercise good judgement in taking the actions they do. Even though those elected individuals are members of one party or another, they are nonetheless the representatives of all the citizens of the U.S. When one's favorability is as low as Trump's and the Congress', good judgment, in part, includes making and enforcing policy in a win-win way, not an "I say this is best; therefore it is" way.I'm not going to comment on whether the judge/panel is right or wrong, should or shouldn't have ruled as s/he/it did, etc. because I haven't read the decision, nor do I know off the top of my head what precedents and so on pertain to the matter, and, frankly, I don't feel like making the effort to find out. I will say, however, that at this rate, we're going to end up with country being "run" by the judicial rather than by the executive branch.
The judicial branch is there as a check on that executive branch. That's kind of the whole point.
It all comes down to selecting the right leadership style for the situation at hand. That's what good leaders do. They don't stick to just one and apply it, come hell or high water. Given the factually fractious nature of the citizenry in the U.S. these days, a genuinely collaborative approach is what will work best.
Now, in all honesty, I don't expect too many lawyers to be savvy about the ways and means of good operations management, but I do expect a former CEO who's staffed his administration with other former CEOs to know those principles inside out and apply them to their fullest effect. As I've said before, they "play chess."
Do you think that was an abuse of power or something?I'm not going to comment on whether the judge/panel is right or wrong, should or shouldn't have ruled as s/he/it did, etc. because I haven't read the decision, nor do I know off the top of my head what precedents and so on pertain to the matter, and, frankly, I don't feel like making the effort to find out. I will say, however, that at this rate, we're going to end up with country being "run" by the judicial rather than by the executive branch.
The judicial branch is there as a check on that executive branch. That's kind of the whole point.
Because, otherwise, I don't even see the point in you saying that. The last travel ban was within his authority. Pretty sure holding municipalities and states accountable for doing illegal acts and helping criminals is within his administrations authority as well.
Oh I didn't even address the content. I addressed the use of the adjective "California" firstly, and the wish of the other poster to dispense with the intentionally-designed system of checks and balances secondly.
Any minute now we'll hear from AG Gump: "I really am amazed that a judge sitting on an estuary in the most populous state can issue an order that stops the President of the United States in what appears to be clearly his statutory constitutional duty". I wonder if Gump voted to put this judge in place too...the wish of the other poster to dispense with the intentionally-designed system of checks and balances secondly.
Whoa, nelly! That is an inference you made from what I wrote. It is not something to which I alluded, nor is it someting to which I attested.
What I wrote reflects the beginning and end of what I wanted to say and meant. You've surely seen enough of my posts to know damn well that I do not shy from nor am I incapable of providing a full picture of the ideas I aim to express. Nobody has to play "mind reader" with my posts.
How then are we to interpret "we're going to end up with country [sic] being 'run' by the judicial rather than by the executive branch."
Btw I completely concur with everything before this particular sentence. It's perfectly logical.
How then are we to interpret "we're going to end up with country [sic] being 'run' by the judicial rather than by the executive branch."
no one in the previous admin f'd up all over the place...they reduced the flow of illegal immigrants MORE than any of the 5 previous administrations to them.These local jurisidictions do not get to say 'fuck you' to federal law simply because a bunc of lunatics in the preceding administration fucked up all over the place.the federal govt LET THEM IN....not the States. If the federal govt did their jobs, the States/cities would not be faced with this predicament?
They still have to obey the gawd damned laws.
Criminals go to jail.....not sending them there, especially lawless officials leads to chaos...Might as well, we lead the planet in that incarceration bidness, hell, we made a for profit bidness out of it complete with a return to convict leasing and profiteering from bondage.Like I said throw the city council and Mayor in jail problem solved......Another damn activist judge.
why don't we just make these judges president?
California judge blocks Trump order on sanctuary city money
All of america should recall that your "job creator" class has lobbied and urged immigration, legal and otherwise, forever. You people are expensive and have hard won protections that many of you are totally ignorant of.All Americans, should take note which side of the aisle works tirelessly to end all immigration law enforcement.
It's a federal judge. What's "California" got to do with anything?
Is California "an island in the Pacific"? Or is there some new geographical feature this week that magically nullifies the federal judiciary?
California just happens to be the most liberal state in the US, filled with liberal activist judges. No surprise here.It's a federal judge. What's "California" got to do with anything?
Is California "an island in the Pacific"? Or is there some new geographical feature this week that magically nullifies the federal judiciary?
how is that an abuse of power? Good luck explaining that one. Especially since the "visitor logs" have only been public for a few years.. lolSo you are completely OK with abuse of power as long as it fits your agenda?so you are saying this is all a personal vendetta? InterestingMaybe he should have kept his mouth shut instead of making racist remarks about Judge Curiel last year. He was too stupid and somebody should have told him about checks n' balances and separation of power! LOVE IT.
Trump is fucking IMPOTENT.
Idiot.
You've got more gaps going on than those in your post.
I think there could be a little payback going on here.
Judges, even on a local level, are arrogant as hell. Worse than surgeons.
So federal district judges think they are gods and will protect their own against pigs like Trump.
And I LIKE IT. I don't care HOW Trump gets taken down, just as long as he does.
Nice.
Trump is abusing HIS power, in case you haven't noticed.
He's discontinued the visitor's log to the White House and hosting foreign leaders visit Mar A Lago on the sly, as well.
Trump met secretly with two Colombian ex-presidents at Mar-a-Lago
You don't have to be criminal to go to prison in america, far from it. The system can turn $40-50K per year per hominid. There's ya jobs program right there and you're already tracked and under surveillance 24/7/365. But you got scared and gave George and Barack too much power.Criminals go to jail.....not sending them there, especially lawless officials leads to chaos...Might as well, we lead the planet in that incarceration bidness, hell, we made a for profit bidness out of it complete with a return to convict leasing and profiteering from bondage.Like I said throw the city council and Mayor in jail problem solved......Another damn activist judge.
why don't we just make these judges president?
California judge blocks Trump order on sanctuary city money
