• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Is Trump Exceeding Constitutional Authority?

Don2 (Don1 Revised) said:
From your video: Newt Gingrich: "There is no supreme court in the American constitution. Congress decides the jurisdiction of the court...It's not Supreme over the Legislative/Executive Branch..."

BUT here's the Constitution:
Article III (Article 3 - Judicial)​

Section 1
The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services, a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.
​
Section 2
1: The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;—to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;—to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;—to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;—to Controversies between two or more States;—between a State and Citizens of another State;10 —between Citizens of different States, —between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.​
Click to expand...

Emphasis added. The Supreme Court actually IS in the Constitution. Congress does not determine the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court because the Constitution does. Congress only determines the jurisdiction of inferior courts. Those are all inferior, meaning they can all be overruled by the Supreme Court.

Case closed.
Click to expand...
Marbury v Madison has more than 200 years behind it. Anyone whining about SCOTUS's role via strict constitutional interpretation is just living in Ayn Rand Fantasy Camp. These assholes have no trouble with a SCOTUS that rules for George W Bush in December 2000 or if Roe v Wade is overturned. But they are ready to burn DC down if SCOTUS says women can have abortions or gays are people too.
 
Well, we are gonna get some Plessy vs Ferguson rulings soon it all goes as planned.
 
Don2 (Don1 Revised) said:
Telling people to shut up is only slightly annoying to me in context since he's saying they can't speak as the US agency, though it smacks of totalitarianism.

But all these Executive Orders suddenly...that seem to run up against laws...like to "ease the burden of ObamaCare" that seems so vague as to get people to act illegally, thinking incorrectly they have permission.

The latest Executive Order to build the wall--that one is very surprising to me. Doesn't Congress have to approve that first? I mean, funding bills need to start in the House of Reps and so forth, no? What money is he using to do this project and how was it allocated for this purpose?

He's coming in acting as an aggressive CEO, not a legitimate President. I'm not sure that all these things he is doing are constitutional.

Do you know any specific orders he is writing/has writen that you think are unconstitutional?
Click to expand...

All of this is just raw meat to throw at his drooling base. Read the actual orders... they have exactly zero content relating to changes to anything (except the TPP pullout - that was real.. as real as pulling out of a thing that does not yet exist can be <rolleyes>).. Specifically, the EO about the AHA has something like 7 articles.. each of which begin, "to the extent allowable by current US law...."

All of the EOs are more about announcing intentions and presenting guiding principles... and then are presented to his base as the "solutions" he promised.
 
Malintent said:
Don2 (Don1 Revised) said:
Telling people to shut up is only slightly annoying to me in context since he's saying they can't speak as the US agency, though it smacks of totalitarianism.

But all these Executive Orders suddenly...that seem to run up against laws...like to "ease the burden of ObamaCare" that seems so vague as to get people to act illegally, thinking incorrectly they have permission.

The latest Executive Order to build the wall--that one is very surprising to me. Doesn't Congress have to approve that first? I mean, funding bills need to start in the House of Reps and so forth, no? What money is he using to do this project and how was it allocated for this purpose?

He's coming in acting as an aggressive CEO, not a legitimate President. I'm not sure that all these things he is doing are constitutional.

Do you know any specific orders he is writing/has writen that you think are unconstitutional?
Click to expand...

All of this is just raw meat to throw at his drooling base. Read the actual orders... they have exactly zero content relating to changes to anything (except the TPP pullout - that was real.. as real as pulling out of a thing that does not yet exist can be <rolleyes>).. Specifically, the EO about the AHA has something like 7 articles.. each of which begin, "to the extent allowable by current US law...."

All of the EOs are more about announcing intentions and presenting guiding principles... and then are presented to his base as the "solutions" he promised.
Click to expand...
In general, I'd agree. A bunch of things are more about intent, not actually enforceable, other than the immigration ban of course.
 
repoman said:
Judicial review is an unconstitutional usurpation of power as is the abuse of executive orders.

Click to expand...


Be careful what you wish for.

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3T4TozPnUR4[/YOUTUBE]
 
Every time Obama issued an EO, it triggered the GOP and their media surrogates to label him a dictator. George F. Will must have penned a couple dozen columns raging against the practice, stating over and over that Obama's EOs were unconstitutional. Any bets on the time frame of the hard right getting around to calling BOTT (Beast of Trump Tower) a dictator? (Actually, Will might be the first, as he detests Trump.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom