The Exexcutive Order---Effective Tool Or Dangerous Threat To Democracy !

originally posted by: kendix1960
a reply to: syrinx high priest

Just generally, based on how the Supreme Court is always so jam packed with cases that it simply takes a a long time for them to get to any individual E.O. issue.

a federal court blocked obama's orders on immigration reform, and then the supreme court heard it later

this is a weak argument at best

a reply to: syrinx high priest

Good to see the judicial branch is doing its job to block an Obama E.O. now and again, but that doesn't change the fact that it is usually a long and winding highway from the date an E.O. is signed and the date a court gets around to setting the E.O. aside.

originally posted by: kendix1960
a reply to: syrinx high priest

Good to see the judicial branch is doing its job to block an Obama E.O. now and again, but that doesn't change the fact that it is usually a long and winding highway from the date an E.O. is signed and the date a court gets around to setting the E.O. aside.

no, the federal court blocked it when texas filed suit

this argument is weak

a reply to: syrinx high priest

More often than not, the President will appeal from a Federal Court Order that blocks an E.O. The time can be shortened in the transfer of the case from Federal Court to the Supreme Court but usually a show cause hearing establishing extenuating circumstances will be required for this to happen and since immigration reform is a hot button item now, that kind of E.O. might qualify for such expedited treatment.

a reply to: syrinx high priest

How much time actually went by before the Supreme Court heard the case following the Federal Court decision on the immigration reform E.O.? Just curious.

originally posted by: kendix1960
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I beg to differ with you. I never let myself be influenced by the media or by the talking heads.

Yet you repeat conservative media talking points with no supporting evidence. Makes it hard to believe this statement.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

I know absolutely that I am never influenced by any conservative media or any talking heads. If you wish to believe otherwise that is your privilege. I'm an independent thinker and an independent person as I hope you are also. Lets just call it a day!

originally posted by: kendix1960
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I know absolutely that I am never influenced by any conservative media or any talking heads. If you wish to believe otherwise that is your privilege. I'm an independent thinker and an independent person as I hope you are also. Lets just call it a day!

If you say so, but your refusal to ever source your claims makes it hard to determine where you get your information from to begin with. i still don't believe you. Enjoy your weekend.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Enjoy yours too.

originally posted by: kendix1960
a reply to: bobs_uruncle

I think she would do that as to the Second Amendment knowing her negative attitude toward the right to bear arms.But not as to the free speech Amendment.

Why not the 1st, prevent people from talking about or protesting her criminal activities as well as circumventing the Constitution on the 2nd.

Cheers - Dave

a reply to: bobs_uruncle

You have a point there,bobs- uruncle. Knowing how Hillary operates, she probably would attack the Free Speech Amendment if by doing so she could quash inquiries into her past Criminal acts committed in the violation of our national security.