Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work at DHS. I think the EO is disgusting but dhs employees are being put in an impossible decision. I heard there were cBP and tsa agents crying at dulles last night. The average employee of the federal government depends on their superiors to know what they are legally supposed to do. If they were getting one message from their bosses and one from the press?

When. The DAPA injunction came down department leadership immediately instructed compliance. IMO our ire should be directed at dhs leadership not customs officers who are not legal experts

Crying?

Yes. Is it so hard to believe that some of them are human beings getting conflicting advice from 10 different sources and feeling shitty allot detaining a 5 year old?

+1. I'm a fed who is no fan of Trump's, but I feel the foot soldiers' pain. They were handed this unenforceable piece of shit EO and told to immediately enforce it, but not given any directions as to how. They are given conflicting orders, and no clarification. Most people do not want to put an eledely refugee or a 5 year old back on a plane. They have their boss stressed out because he is getting conflicting orders and no guidance. You have the President telling yo to do one thing. The Courts telling you to do another. TV weighing in TPP. And you never read Marbury v. Madison. All the protestors aren't helping. BPD agents now have lots of people furious with them. And are still unsure as to how to do. They know this in unconstitutional, so they are stuck.

You've sworn an oath to uphold the Constitution and the judge's order isn't particularly lengthy or complex. Those detained included a five-year old American citizen and permanent legal residents. CBP policies, procedures and regulations were not amended. Not even a close call. They need to be cited for contempt.

You're assuming they had all those facts at hand. From all accounts customs was a mess yesterday. These people went into work with basically no guidance on what to do or how to do it. I'm not saying heads shouldn't roll, just that the average agent/officer was likely just trying to do their best in an impossible situation.

Chain of command in situations like this is serious. CBP leadership needs to be called into a courtroom for sure.

Handcuffing green card holders, searching their phones and asking whether they support Trump doesn't seem to be trying to do your best. A kindergartener returning to his home country wasn't planning a sneak attack.

Well, under the order -- if your job is to strictly carry it out -- those things all seem like requirements, except for the asking about Trump part. Look, I think the order is heinous, but let's put the blame where it belongs -- at the top. Most officers on the ground are just trying to carry out what they're told are their new responsibilities. The asking about Trump part is excessive but not clearly unlawful. Refusing to allow access to lawyers in the face of a court order IS clearly unlawful, however. That's where the problems for individuals arise, not from the moment they started enforcing the EO, which is their job.

"I was just following orders" are not a defense.

Anonymous wrote:Bets on what the SCT will do? I am betting 6-2 in favor of upholding dct ruling.

Do you know anything about SCOTUS? Best case for Trump is 4-4 (Ginsberg, Sottimayor, Kagen, Breyer), which has the effect of upholding lower Court rulings. Kennedy probably swing over to make it 5-3. Roberts might also swing liberal on this. But odds are 5-3 against. But please, tell us which of the 3 liberal women judges plus Breyer votes to uphold this POS order? I'd love to see the 6-2 against list, for a good laugh.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work at DHS. I think the EO is disgusting but dhs employees are being put in an impossible decision. I heard there were cBP and tsa agents crying at dulles last night. The average employee of the federal government depends on their superiors to know what they are legally supposed to do. If they were getting one message from their bosses and one from the press?

When. The DAPA injunction came down department leadership immediately instructed compliance. IMO our ire should be directed at dhs leadership not customs officers who are not legal experts

Crying?

Yes. Is it so hard to believe that some of them are human beings getting conflicting advice from 10 different sources and feeling shitty allot detaining a 5 year old?

+1. I'm a fed who is no fan of Trump's, but I feel the foot soldiers' pain. They were handed this unenforceable piece of shit EO and told to immediately enforce it, but not given any directions as to how. They are given conflicting orders, and no clarification. Most people do not want to put an eledely refugee or a 5 year old back on a plane. They have their boss stressed out because he is getting conflicting orders and no guidance. You have the President telling yo to do one thing. The Courts telling you to do another. TV weighing in TPP. And you never read Marbury v. Madison. All the protestors aren't helping. BPD agents now have lots of people furious with them. And are still unsure as to how to do. They know this in unconstitutional, so they are stuck.

You've sworn an oath to uphold the Constitution and the judge's order isn't particularly lengthy or complex. Those detained included a five-year old American citizen and permanent legal residents. CBP policies, procedures and regulations were not amended. Not even a close call. They need to be cited for contempt.

You're assuming they had all those facts at hand. From all accounts customs was a mess yesterday. These people went into work with basically no guidance on what to do or how to do it. I'm not saying heads shouldn't roll, just that the average agent/officer was likely just trying to do their best in an impossible situation.

Chain of command in situations like this is serious. CBP leadership needs to be called into a courtroom for sure.

Handcuffing green card holders, searching their phones and asking whether they support Trump doesn't seem to be trying to do your best. A kindergartener returning to his home country wasn't planning a sneak attack.

Well, under the order -- if your job is to strictly carry it out -- those things all seem like requirements, except for the asking about Trump part. Look, I think the order is heinous, but let's put the blame where it belongs -- at the top. Most officers on the ground are just trying to carry out what they're told are their new responsibilities. The asking about Trump part is excessive but not clearly unlawful. Refusing to allow access to lawyers in the face of a court order IS clearly unlawful, however. That's where the problems for individuals arise, not from the moment they started enforcing the EO, which is their job.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work at DHS. I think the EO is disgusting but dhs employees are being put in an impossible decision. I heard there were cBP and tsa agents crying at dulles last night. The average employee of the federal government depends on their superiors to know what they are legally supposed to do. If they were getting one message from their bosses and one from the press?

When. The DAPA injunction came down department leadership immediately instructed compliance. IMO our ire should be directed at dhs leadership not customs officers who are not legal experts

Crying?

Yes. Is it so hard to believe that some of them are human beings getting conflicting advice from 10 different sources and feeling shitty allot detaining a 5 year old?

+1. I'm a fed who is no fan of Trump's, but I feel the foot soldiers' pain. They were handed this unenforceable piece of shit EO and told to immediately enforce it, but not given any directions as to how. They are given conflicting orders, and no clarification. Most people do not want to put an eledely refugee or a 5 year old back on a plane. They have their boss stressed out because he is getting conflicting orders and no guidance. You have the President telling yo to do one thing. The Courts telling you to do another. TV weighing in TPP. And you never read Marbury v. Madison. All the protestors aren't helping. BPD agents now have lots of people furious with them. And are still unsure as to how to do. They know this in unconstitutional, so they are stuck.

You've sworn an oath to uphold the Constitution and the judge's order isn't particularly lengthy or complex. Those detained included a five-year old American citizen and permanent legal residents. CBP policies, procedures and regulations were not amended. Not even a close call. They need to be cited for contempt.

You're assuming they had all those facts at hand. From all accounts customs was a mess yesterday. These people went into work with basically no guidance on what to do or how to do it. I'm not saying heads shouldn't roll, just that the average agent/officer was likely just trying to do their best in an impossible situation.

Chain of command in situations like this is serious. CBP leadership needs to be called into a courtroom for sure.

Handcuffing green card holders, searching their phones and asking whether they support Trump doesn't seem to be trying to do your best. A kindergartener returning to his home country wasn't planning a sneak attack.

Bets on what the SCT will do? I am betting 6-2 in favor of upholding dct ruling.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work at DHS. I think the EO is disgusting but dhs employees are being put in an impossible decision. I heard there were cBP and tsa agents crying at dulles last night. The average employee of the federal government depends on their superiors to know what they are legally supposed to do. If they were getting one message from their bosses and one from the press?

When. The DAPA injunction came down department leadership immediately instructed compliance. IMO our ire should be directed at dhs leadership not customs officers who are not legal experts

Crying?

Yes. Is it so hard to believe that some of them are human beings getting conflicting advice from 10 different sources and feeling shitty allot detaining a 5 year old?

+1. I'm a fed who is no fan of Trump's, but I feel the foot soldiers' pain. They were handed this unenforceable piece of shit EO and told to immediately enforce it, but not given any directions as to how. They are given conflicting orders, and no clarification. Most people do not want to put an eledely refugee or a 5 year old back on a plane. They have their boss stressed out because he is getting conflicting orders and no guidance. You have the President telling yo to do one thing. The Courts telling you to do another. TV weighing in TPP. And you never read Marbury v. Madison. All the protestors aren't helping. BPD agents now have lots of people furious with them. And are still unsure as to how to do. They know this in unconstitutional, so they are stuck.

Marbury v. Madison and Trumps order have no relation to Constitutionality of the Executive Order.
How the fuck does any CBP or ICE officer "know" this is unconstitutional?

Last time I checked, Marbury lost.

The power for LEO is within the courts, but Constitutionality judgement is not part of the badge.

Who will prosecute them for noncompliance? Trump's DOJ?

not surprised - customs agents are more 'prole' stock. they probably voted for trump.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work at DHS. I think the EO is disgusting but dhs employees are being put in an impossible decision. I heard there were cBP and tsa agents crying at dulles last night. The average employee of the federal government depends on their superiors to know what they are legally supposed to do. If they were getting one message from their bosses and one from the press?

When. The DAPA injunction came down department leadership immediately instructed compliance. IMO our ire should be directed at dhs leadership not customs officers who are not legal experts

Crying?

Yes. Is it so hard to believe that some of them are human beings getting conflicting advice from 10 different sources and feeling shitty allot detaining a 5 year old?

+1. I'm a fed who is no fan of Trump's, but I feel the foot soldiers' pain. They were handed this unenforceable piece of shit EO and told to immediately enforce it, but not given any directions as to how. They are given conflicting orders, and no clarification. Most people do not want to put an eledely refugee or a 5 year old back on a plane. They have their boss stressed out because he is getting conflicting orders and no guidance. You have the President telling yo to do one thing. The Courts telling you to do another. TV weighing in TPP. And you never read Marbury v. Madison. All the protestors aren't helping. BPD agents now have lots of people furious with them. And are still unsure as to how to do. They know this in unconstitutional, so they are stuck.

Marbury v. Madison and Trumps order have no relation to Constitutionality of the Executive Order.
How the fuck does any CBP or ICE officer "know" this is unconstitutional?

Last time I checked, Marbury lost.

The power for LEO is within the courts, but Constitutionality judgement is not part of the badge.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work at DHS. I think the EO is disgusting but dhs employees are being put in an impossible decision. I heard there were cBP and tsa agents crying at dulles last night. The average employee of the federal government depends on their superiors to know what they are legally supposed to do. If they were getting one message from their bosses and one from the press?

When. The DAPA injunction came down department leadership immediately instructed compliance. IMO our ire should be directed at dhs leadership not customs officers who are not legal experts

Crying?

Yes. Is it so hard to believe that some of them are human beings getting conflicting advice from 10 different sources and feeling shitty allot detaining a 5 year old?

+1. I'm a fed who is no fan of Trump's, but I feel the foot soldiers' pain. They were handed this unenforceable piece of shit EO and told to immediately enforce it, but not given any directions as to how. They are given conflicting orders, and no clarification. Most people do not want to put an eledely refugee or a 5 year old back on a plane. They have their boss stressed out because he is getting conflicting orders and no guidance. You have the President telling yo to do one thing. The Courts telling you to do another. TV weighing in TPP. And you never read Marbury v. Madison. All the protestors aren't helping. BPD agents now have lots of people furious with them. And are still unsure as to how to do. They know this in unconstitutional, so they are stuck.

You've sworn an oath to uphold the Constitution and the judge's order isn't particularly lengthy or complex. Those detained included a five-year old American citizen and permanent legal residents. CBP policies, procedures and regulations were not amended. Not even a close call. They need to be cited for contempt.

You're assuming they had all those facts at hand. From all accounts customs was a mess yesterday. These people went into work with basically no guidance on what to do or how to do it. I'm not saying heads shouldn't roll, just that the average agent/officer was likely just trying to do their best in an impossible situation.

Chain of command in situations like this is serious. CBP leadership needs to be called into a courtroom for sure.

The head of CBP was fired on Thursday. Coincidence, or good planning by Trump and Bannon?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work at DHS. I think the EO is disgusting but dhs employees are being put in an impossible decision. I heard there were cBP and tsa agents crying at dulles last night. The average employee of the federal government depends on their superiors to know what they are legally supposed to do. If they were getting one message from their bosses and one from the press?

When. The DAPA injunction came down department leadership immediately instructed compliance. IMO our ire should be directed at dhs leadership not customs officers who are not legal experts

Crying?

Yes. Is it so hard to believe that some of them are human beings getting conflicting advice from 10 different sources and feeling shitty allot detaining a 5 year old?

+1. I'm a fed who is no fan of Trump's, but I feel the foot soldiers' pain. They were handed this unenforceable piece of shit EO and told to immediately enforce it, but not given any directions as to how. They are given conflicting orders, and no clarification. Most people do not want to put an eledely refugee or a 5 year old back on a plane. They have their boss stressed out because he is getting conflicting orders and no guidance. You have the President telling yo to do one thing. The Courts telling you to do another. TV weighing in TPP. And you never read Marbury v. Madison. All the protestors aren't helping. BPD agents now have lots of people furious with them. And are still unsure as to how to do. They know this in unconstitutional, so they are stuck.

You've sworn an oath to uphold the Constitution and the judge's order isn't particularly lengthy or complex. Those detained included a five-year old American citizen and permanent legal residents. CBP policies, procedures and regulations were not amended. Not even a close call. They need to be cited for contempt.

You're assuming they had all those facts at hand. From all accounts customs was a mess yesterday. These people went into work with basically no guidance on what to do or how to do it. I'm not saying heads shouldn't roll, just that the average agent/officer was likely just trying to do their best in an impossible situation.

Chain of command in situations like this is serious. CBP leadership needs to be called into a courtroom for sure.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work at DHS. I think the EO is disgusting but dhs employees are being put in an impossible decision. I heard there were cBP and tsa agents crying at dulles last night. The average employee of the federal government depends on their superiors to know what they are legally supposed to do. If they were getting one message from their bosses and one from the press?

When. The DAPA injunction came down department leadership immediately instructed compliance. IMO our ire should be directed at dhs leadership not customs officers who are not legal experts

Crying?

Yes. Is it so hard to believe that some of them are human beings getting conflicting advice from 10 different sources and feeling shitty allot detaining a 5 year old?

+1. I'm a fed who is no fan of Trump's, but I feel the foot soldiers' pain. They were handed this unenforceable piece of shit EO and told to immediately enforce it, but not given any directions as to how. They are given conflicting orders, and no clarification. Most people do not want to put an eledely refugee or a 5 year old back on a plane. They have their boss stressed out because he is getting conflicting orders and no guidance. You have the President telling yo to do one thing. The Courts telling you to do another. TV weighing in TPP. And you never read Marbury v. Madison. All the protestors aren't helping. BPD agents now have lots of people furious with them. And are still unsure as to how to do. They know this in unconstitutional, so they are stuck.

You've sworn an oath to uphold the Constitution and the judge's order isn't particularly lengthy or complex. Those detained included a five-year old American citizen and permanent legal residents. CBP policies, procedures and regulations were not amended. Not even a close call. They need to be cited for contempt.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work at DHS. I think the EO is disgusting but dhs employees are being put in an impossible decision. I heard there were cBP and tsa agents crying at dulles last night. The average employee of the federal government depends on their superiors to know what they are legally supposed to do. If they were getting one message from their bosses and one from the press?

When. The DAPA injunction came down department leadership immediately instructed compliance. IMO our ire should be directed at dhs leadership not customs officers who are not legal experts

Crying?

Yes. Is it so hard to believe that some of them are human beings getting conflicting advice from 10 different sources and feeling shitty allot detaining a 5 year old?

+1. I'm a fed who is no fan of Trump's, but I feel the foot soldiers' pain. They were handed this unenforceable piece of shit EO and told to immediately enforce it, but not given any directions as to how. They are given conflicting orders, and no clarification. Most people do not want to put an eledely refugee or a 5 year old back on a plane. They have their boss stressed out because he is getting conflicting orders and no guidance. You have the President telling yo to do one thing. The Courts telling you to do another. TV weighing in TPP. And you never read Marbury v. Madison. All the protestors aren't helping. BPD agents now have lots of people furious with them. And are still unsure as to how to do. They know this in unconstitutional, so they are stuck.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They need to be held in contempt and arrested.

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.

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.

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.

I it isn't just as defensible because Marburg v Madison is the law of the US. You are advocating an upending of the entire system of laws of our country.

Marbury v Madison is not a law, it's judicial precedent....there's a big difference.

Loony LaRouche supporter?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work at DHS. I think the EO is disgusting but dhs employees are being put in an impossible decision. I heard there were cBP and tsa agents crying at dulles last night. The average employee of the federal government depends on their superiors to know what they are legally supposed to do. If they were getting one message from their bosses and one from the press?

When. The DAPA injunction came down department leadership immediately instructed compliance. IMO our ire should be directed at dhs leadership not customs officers who are not legal experts

Crying?

Yes. Is it so hard to believe that some of them are human beings getting conflicting advice from 10 different sources and feeling shitty allot detaining a 5 year old?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They need to be held in contempt and arrested.

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.

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.

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.

I it isn't just as defensible because Marburg v Madison is the law of the US. You are advocating an upending of the entire system of laws of our country.

Yes it's the law based on court precedent but it isn't dictated by the constitution. So saying that the executive officers "won't follow the constitution" is not accurate. Just pointing that out.

I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that you are not a lawyer...

I am, actually. I just think it's laughable when people point the finger and say "you don't care about the constitution," when really SCOTUS (along with everyone else) has been shitting on the constitution for decades. So don't try to take the constitutional high ground after finding magical rights for men to marry each other, for the government to regulate the size of holes in Swiss cheese, etc. The "constitution" is just a rhetorical device at this point.

Some lawyer. I think you missed the point that the Constitution is whatever Scotus says it is, unless there's an actual Constitutional Amendment passed. Marbury v. Madison was decided 200 years ago and it's been that way ever since. People way smarter than you or me have interpreted the Constitution for decades. The fact that you disagree with their interpretations means nothing. It's the law. Get over it.

Wrong! Executive branch officers swear an oath to uphold the constitution. If the Supreme Court violated the constitution, they are duty-bound to ignore that Court order.

Good one. What TTT law school did you attend? Liberty?

Seriously. That mindset explains a lot, actually. News flash, buddy -- executive branch officers (and I am one) swear an oath to uphold the Constitution. They don't get to interpret it, however. That is for the courts, and ultimately the Supreme Court, to do. If there is no guidance then sure, the executive branch can interpret all they like, but once court rulings come down they are bound to follow them. Upholding the Constitution means upholding it as interpreted by the judicial branch.

I am also a lawyer. If you are one, you are an embarrassment to the profession and your law school. Or a troll. Your pick.

Ok, let's look at your logic. If the Supreme Court issued a decision that was clearly unconstitutional, for example a decision that it is legal for congress to pass a law ordering that all left-handed people be summarily executed, would executive branch officers be upholding their oath by following that decision? Or would they have a duty to ignore it and follow the constitution?

WTF? This is absurd. People think Roe vs Wade is unconstitutional. People think gay mattiage is unconstitutional. If you don't agree with a Supreme Court decision, and you cannot in good conscience uphold it, then you don't take the job, or you resign. You do not get to overrule the Supreme Court. You do not get to be one of those religious zealot county clerks refusing to issue marriage license to same sex couples.

As an example, I was once offered a job as a death penalty law clerks in the federal courts. Now, I am against capital punishment, and could not in good conscience help Judges write decisions upholding capital cases. So I declined the job, which I was free to do. I was not free to take the job and then refuse to perform it because I believe that capital punishment is unconstitutional.