Results 1 to 5 of 5
  1. #1 Federal judge says Trump must fully restore DACA 
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008

    Judi Lynn (123,060 posts)

    Federal judge says Trump must fully restore DACA

    Source: The Hill

    BY ARIS FOLLEY - 08/03/18 05:20 PM EDT

    A federal judge ruled Friday that the Trump administration must full restore the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program.

    In his 25-page opinion, Judge John Bates said the Trump White House had again failed to provide justification for its proposal to end the Obama-era program, under which nearly 800,000 people brought to the country illegally as children, known as "Dreamers," have received work permits and deferral from deportation.

    The judge also said in his opinion that he has agreed to delay his ruling to give the Trump administration 20 days "to determine whether it intends to appeal the Court’s decision and, if so, to seek a stay pending appeal."

    President Trump rescinded DACA last September, a decision Bates wrote in his opinion “was arbitrary and capricious” with legal judgment that was “inadequately explained.”

    Read more:
    The DUmmies are excited.

    PBC_Democrat (13 posts)

    3. I agree with this decision ...

    And I think we need to come up with a permanent solution for this.

    But if was created with an Executive Order - why can't it be dissolved with an Executive Order?

    This is one of the big reasons why elections matter.
    Why not indeed.

    BigmanPigman (17,938 posts)

    4. YIPPIE!!!!!!!!

    Two in one day! Happy weekend!

    Another judge ruled earlier today that the Fucking Moron has to reunite the separated immigrant families that they planned to separate for over a hear with no intention of reuniting. The ACLU took tRump admin to court for this crime and the moron had the balls to say the ACLU had to do the work, AND pay for reuniting the families even though they are 100% responsible for it since it was their own anti-immigration plan/goal.

    Thank you judges!!!!!
    ailsagirl (18,352 posts)

    5. YES!!!!!!!!!!!

    hughee99 (15,050 posts)

    8. So presidents need to adequately explain EO's

    And executive branch policy from now on? I have a feeling this is one of those rulings we’ll cheer now and complain about down the road.
    Wow. It only took 8 comments to get to this conclusion.

    Liberals have made it clear that they approve of using lawsuits and then judge shopping to find for a compliant liberal jude to prevent President Trump from enacting the agenda he was elected to enact. They are fine with their side enacting unconstitutional rules, regulations and programs to get what they want, and then they bring lawsuits to keep it in place, denying President Trump his authority and responsibilities as President.

    However, I'll bet that they still think that when they "get rid of Trump" and put one of their stooges in the Presidency that they will just "over turn all for Trump's executive orders" using executive orders. In fact I've seen that sentiment on DU many times.

    They can think again. They've started a precedent. Somehow many of them think the ends justify the means and that it won't be used against them.

    Hulk (5,018 posts)

    9. I can "adequately explain" it for you....

    ...because President Obama made an executive order protecting these citizens. This orange buffoon is out to un-do everything President Obama has done...EVERY THING!!
    DACA is unconstitutional. The Republican states should have gone ahead with a lawsuit, had it declared unconstitutional and then threatened to start deportations if the Democrats don't come to the table and pass a common sense immigration bill.

    MadDAsHell (1,278 posts)
    14. I'm confused how Executive Orders work...

    I assumed it was just as easy to end them as it is to enact them.

    Thank goodness such protections are in place, but considering that they’re the whim of one person, it’s strange that they can’t be “undone” as easily as they’re “done.”
    They used to be as easy to be "undone" as they were to do, but that has now ENDED.

    And here I thought they WANTED to be able to get rid of President Trumps executive orders. LOL. Won't happen now.
    Reply With Quote  

  2. #2  
    Senior Member Angry Old White Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Swamps of Southern La
    Let's all guess his motive, this one won't take long to be thrown out and the ass wipe should be removed from his position, clearly he is out of his lawful authority to tell the President what to hell he can and can't do.. I am sick of these bastards all crawling from under the rocks to cause trouble.
    Reply With Quote  

  3. #3  
    Power CUer NJCardFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Article 1, section 8 is clear. All matters regarding immigration must go through congress, period. Obama violated this when he signed that EO. But since he did, Trump can reverse any and all EO's signed by Obama with an EO of his own. This judges ruling does not hold water. Trump was well within his Constitutional authority to reverse this EO plain and simple. How a federal judge can rule on this in any way is mindboggling because no law was violated when Trump reversed it. But as usual, it's going to take this going to the SCOTUS to school these activist judges on Constitutional law.
    Progressivism is a bottomless pit of absurdity.
    Reply With Quote  

  4. #4  
    Senior Member Dlr Pyro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    So. Cal
    Hulk (5,018 posts)

    9. I can "adequately explain" it for you....

    ...because President Obama made an executive order protecting these citizens.
    If they were United States Citizens in the first place, then obama would not have had to have made the EO to protect them in the first place.
    "People who think they know it all, are annoying to those of us who really do".... Pyro Bob

    "Even if Trump didn't pay Russian hookers to pee on one another to defile a bed the Obamas once slept on it sounds like something he would do and that's all that matters." DemocratSinceBirth, Wed Jan 11, 2017, 09:32 AM

    "Enemy. The word you are looking for is enemy. When the ideals of someone are antithetical to yours, you can say the word "enemy". DUmmy ret5hd Fri Aug 24, 2018, 05:10 PM
    Reply With Quote  

  5. #5  
    Power CUer
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    If Trump has been trying to smoke out judges that need replacing, he's doing a great job.

    This judge rules AGAINST the Constitution.
    Reply With Quote  

Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts