• Please keep all posts on the Rittenhouse verdict here: Rittenhouse Verdict. Note the moderator warnings in the thread. The thread will be heavily moderated with a zero tolerance policy for any baiting, flaming, trolling or other rule breaks. Stick to the topic and not the other posters. Thank you.
  • 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!

Obama blocked on immigration

MickeyW

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 10, 2015
Messages
14,012
Reaction score
3,439
Location
Southern Oregon
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Obama immigration plan blocked by 4-4 tie at Supreme Court\


The Supreme Court deadlocked Thursday on President Barack Obama's immigration plan that sought to shield millions living in the U.S. illegally from deportation, effectively killing the plan for the rest of his presidency.
News from The Associated Press


:thumbs::thumbs:
 

manise

Active member
Joined
Apr 28, 2016
Messages
407
Reaction score
199
Location
Northeast USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Obama immigration plan blocked by 4-4 tie at Supreme Court\


The Supreme Court deadlocked Thursday on President Barack Obama's immigration plan that sought to shield millions living in the U.S. illegally from deportation, effectively killing the plan for the rest of his presidency.
News from The Associated Press


:thumbs::thumbs:
But the Supreme Court ruling didn't set a precedent. When President Clinton fills the vacancy early next year, the matter will return to a far more liberal court. And then a precedent will be established.
 

clownboy

DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
26,087
Reaction score
10,860
Location
Oregon
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
But the Supreme Court ruling didn't set a precedent. When President Clinton fills the vacancy early next year, the matter will return to a far more liberal court. And then a precedent will be established.

No it won't. Unless the then president tries to do the same end run around congress by issuing a bogus EO.
 

manise

Active member
Joined
Apr 28, 2016
Messages
407
Reaction score
199
Location
Northeast USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
No it won't. Unless the then president tries to do the same end run around congress by issuing a bogus EO.
The EO won't be bogus if the 5th liberal court justice votes with the other 4, and establishes precedent.
 

clownboy

DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
26,087
Reaction score
10,860
Location
Oregon
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
The EO won't be bogus if the 5th liberal court justice votes with the other 4, and establishes precedent.

Yup, and as I said, the new president would have to issue said bogus EO (knowing it is bogus when they do) AND wait for their appointment to be seated and then petition the court to review and accept the case. The new SCOTUS may not even accept such a case.
 

manise

Active member
Joined
Apr 28, 2016
Messages
407
Reaction score
199
Location
Northeast USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Yup, and as I said, the new president would have to issue said bogus EO (knowing it is bogus when they do) AND wait for their appointment to be seated and then petition the court to review and accept the case. The new SCOTUS may not even accept such a case.
The EO isn't bogus according to 4 of 8 justices. The 9th justice appointed by President Clinton in early 2017 will likely side with the president should a new lawsuit be filed to overturn her EO, assuming the House and Senate remain in Republican hands. This issue far from over, but Obama won't be in office to claim credit.
 

clownboy

DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
26,087
Reaction score
10,860
Location
Oregon
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
The EO isn't bogus according to 4 of 8 justices. The 9th justice appointed by President Clinton in early 2017 will likely side with the president should a new lawsuit be filed to overturn her EO, assuming the House and Senate remain in Republican hands. This issue far from over, but Obama won't be in office to claim credit.

First, that's not the bar. The lower court's decision is in full force - so yes, bogus. Second, even if the new President is Cankles, she'd have to make a nomination and manage to get it approved. Care to guess what the senate will be asking this new court hopeful? Can you say Bork?
 

polgara

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2013
Messages
20,215
Reaction score
17,786
Location
NE Ohio
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Other
Yup, and as I said, the new president would have to issue said bogus EO (knowing it is bogus when they do) AND wait for their appointment to be seated and then petition the court to review and accept the case. The new SCOTUS may not even accept such a case.

Greetings, clownboy. :2wave:

How many times can the same case be brought before the SCOTUS? Talk about diehards who want their own way! :thumbdown:
 

clownboy

DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
26,087
Reaction score
10,860
Location
Oregon
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Greetings, clownboy. :2wave:

How many times can the same case be brought before the SCOTUS? Talk about diehards who want their own way! :thumbdown:

As long as four justices say they're willing to grant the writ of certiorari. Oh, and there has to be a case (that is suitable for the SCOTUS). As of now there isn't one.
 
Top Bottom