Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
Political Discussion
Reply to "Customs agents refuse to follow court order and continue enforcement the executive order "
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]They need to be held in contempt and arrested. [/quote] ICE agents work for Trump. If they don't follow their boss' order, they would be in contempt. This is clearly within the authority of the executive branch to implement policies for public safety. The constitutionality of the order will be decided by the supreme court.[/quote] No, they are in contempt of court. They have sworn an oath to uphold the Constitution. That means respecting checks and balances and the ability of the judicial branch to stay implementation of Federal law/EOs pending review of the legality/constitutionality. Trump does not get to unilaterally demand that Federal employees (who do not work for Trump directly) do his bidding no matter what.[/quote] It's actually not required by the constitution that the courts have the ultimate say on whether something is constitutional and that the other branches must comply. That idea didn't come around until Mabury v. Madison. It's just as defensible to say that executive branch officers that swore an oath to uphold the constitution have a duty to ignore an incorrect court order. [/quote] I it isn't just as defensible because[b] Marburg v Madison [/b]is the law of the US. You are advocating an upending of the entire system of laws of our country. [/quote] Marbury v Madison is not a law, it's judicial precedent....there's a big difference.[/quote] Your comment explains the current saturation situation in our legal industry if you're a lawyer. Our country is a common law jurisdiction and we are bound by the principle of stare decisis--so yes it is a law. [/quote]
Options
Disable HTML in this message
Disable BB Code in this message
Disable smilies in this message
Review message
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics