All other dimensions of this issue aside, it is stupid how lower court judges have the ability to issue nationwide stops on executive orders to the degree that they do
>>512581483
His usefulness in checking DRUMF is finished. Nobody needs to pay attention to him any more and it's not unlikely that he will be impeached and removed along with other problem judges.
>>512580614 (OP) >was way out of line by holding the Trump administration in contempt >despite SCOTUS ruling he didn't have the jurisdiction >despite
am i missing something here?
>>512581583
He thought he could just ignore the Supreme Court and now they took away his supposed powers that he never even properly had in the first place.
>>512581314
No, it is not stupid. This is how you stop gun control by executive order. What Trump is doing will, eventually, be used to ban ARs.
Don't say you weren't warned. Giving this much power to just a single court is a bad idea. You want the lower courts as powerful as possible when the government overreaches.
>>512581483 >>512581543
he did all he could and now his obligation to his true masters is fulfilled - he will quiet down,, will never be impeached and will sit for as long as he wants and then will retire with a golden pension. his immediate payoff will be in a big book deal - all paid up front - for a book no one will ever read
america is run by organized crime
>>512581831
they can invalidate the EO without holding the president in contempt.
impeachment is what opens up office holders to liability and culpability for his actions as an individual. the legislature impeaches, not the courts. >Article I Section 3 Clause 7 >Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification...but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.
>>512581831
I mean, I amend my previous statement to the following: it presumes a basic value consensus on how the law should be applied. You would grant this power to lower court judges on the assumption that they would only use it (sparingly) if they genuinely thought >hang on, I see an objective flaw in reasoning or interpretation here that SCOTUS, as an impartial arbitrator, would agree with if made aware of
But it breaks down in the current context where there are two factions with diametrically opposed views of how the law should be interpreted or enforced
>>512581831 >but akshullay its a GOOD THING because ur guns
they're all leftist shitheels like you.
I'm more worried about people like you than the entire Federal government.
The idea idiots like you are allowed to have opinions is absurd.
You dont deserve rights.
(((you))) should be picking the cabbage, not illegals.
>>512581831 >This is how you stop gun control by executive order.
wrong. if such a thing were to occur the individual states and municipalities and sheriffs simply tell the feds to get fucked. no black robed faggot required