• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

If a president decides to ban guns through an EO, should lower federal courts be unable to issue a nationwide injunction?

If a president decides to ban guns through an EO, should lower federal courts be unable to issue a n

  • Total voters
    16

Slartibartfast

Jesus loves you.
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
83,106
Reaction score
75,440
Location
NE Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
If a president decides to ban all guns through an EO, should lower federal courts be unable to issue a nationwide injunction to stop that EO?

Alternatively, if a president decides to alter birthright citizenship through an EO, should lower courts be allowed to issue national injunctions on that EO?
 
Last edited:
 
Pound4abrown said:
Yeah, like I said elsewhere, be careful what you wish for.
You may get it, and more.
Click to expand...
The right won't be held to the same standard given they have equally as hyportical judges in charge of SCOTUS.

SCOTUS will rule against it, and then also the Dems would just cave because they're slaves to decorum and civility and instutitions even though the insututions are poisoned beyond belief.
 
A normal administration, once receiving a court order that their conduct is unconstitutional, would stop doing it nationwide irrespective of the scope of the injunction.
 
Cameron said:
A normal administration, once receiving a court order that their conduct is unconstitutional, would stop doing it nationwide irrespective of the scope of the injunction
Click to expand...

Cameron said:
That would depend on the reputation and reasoning of the court. I wouldn't expect much deference from a liberal administration to a ruling from Amarillo, or by a conservative administration to a ruling from San Francisco.
Click to expand...
 
Slartibartfast said:
If a president decides to ban all guns through an EO, should lower federal courts be unable to issue a nationwide injunction to stop that EO?
Click to expand...

Yes. The President has unitary power to do as he wishes and only the SCOTUS decisions count.

There for the President's ban would only last a couple of years as the case made it's way through the lower courts to develop the factual history.

Slartibartfast said:
Alternatively, if a president decides to alter birthright citizenship through an EO, should lower courts be allowed to issue national injunctions on that EO?
Click to expand...

You kind of flipped context here so the correct answer to this phrasing is "no" but for the same reasons as above.
.
.
.
.
.
In no case should ANY lower court be able to undermine the policy of the Unitary President.

WW
 
@coyote505 can you please link me to the second quote you are attributing to me above?
 

Just to be clear...




WW
 
Cameron said:
@coyote505 can you please link me to the second quote you are attributing to me above?
Click to expand...
I apologize for the screw up. Keyboard error that for some reason I was unable to fix ( tried several times). It was my response, not part of your quote.
 
coyote505 said:
I apologize for the screw up. Keyboard error that for some reason I was unable to fix ( tried several times). It was my response, not part of your quote.
Click to expand...
Ok thanks. No worries.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…