Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Democrats' farfetched, laughable, thoroughly ridiculous and possibly successful DACA lawsuit

  1. #1
    INGSOC GURPS's Avatar
    Member Since
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Peoples Republic Of Maryland
    Posts
    31,969

    Democrats' farfetched, laughable, thoroughly ridiculous and possibly successful DACA lawsuit

    There is one glaring, fundamental problem with their argument. The Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program is a policy -- not law -- imposed by former President Barack Obama solely on his executive authority. At the time it was imposed, in 2012, Obama conceded that a future president could undo it as easily as Obama imposed it. There were serious questions about whether Obama had the authority to act -- many felt the policy was Congress's to make or not make -- but there is no question about a later president's authority to do away with it.

    [clip]

    Some seasoned legal analysts are not impressed. "This lawsuit has no chance," noted John Yoo, the Berkeley law professor who served in the Bush Justice Department, in an email exchange. "The Equal Protection Clause has never been understood to prohibit the U.S. government from making distinctions in whom in chooses to allow into the country."

    "Tellingly, the states spend pages collecting every thing that Trump has said about Mexicans, but they cannot provide a single citation to a single Supreme Court precedent that would support their position," Yoo added.

    The attorneys general appear to have acted, not because they believe their legal argument is airtight, or perhaps even compelling, but because a similar argument worked with the courts that temporarily stopped the Trump travel executive order. So why not try it again with DACA?

    [clip]

    Indeed, the arguments are similar: In the travel cases, states argued that even temporarily delaying entry of some people from some high-terrorism countries would harm the states economically. The DACA suit says the same thing. Indeed, as they did with the travel ban, the attorneys general devote a lot of space to describing the losses they claim they will suffer if DACA is rescinded.


    Byron York: The Democrats' farfetched, laughable, thoroughly ridiculous and possibly successful DACA lawsuit
    Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.
    - Robert J. Hanlon.

    “There is a deeply anti-democratic undercurrent to much of the criticism of the new president, borne aloft by an assumption that democracy is too important to be left to the voters.”

    And if a statue can oppress you, then I submit that you have greater issues. - A West.

  2. #2
    Registered User
    Member Since
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    21,864
    Quote Originally Posted by GURPS View Post
    There is one glaring, fundamental problem with their argument. The Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program is a policy -- not law -- imposed by former President Barack Obama solely on his executive authority. At the time it was imposed, in 2012, Obama conceded that a future president could undo it as easily as Obama imposed it. There were serious questions about whether Obama had the authority to act -- many felt the policy was Congress's to make or not make -- but there is no question about a later president's authority to do away with it.

    [clip]

    Some seasoned legal analysts are not impressed. "This lawsuit has no chance," noted John Yoo, the Berkeley law professor who served in the Bush Justice Department, in an email exchange. "The Equal Protection Clause has never been understood to prohibit the U.S. government from making distinctions in whom in chooses to allow into the country."

    "Tellingly, the states spend pages collecting every thing that Trump has said about Mexicans, but they cannot provide a single citation to a single Supreme Court precedent that would support their position," Yoo added.

    The attorneys general appear to have acted, not because they believe their legal argument is airtight, or perhaps even compelling, but because a similar argument worked with the courts that temporarily stopped the Trump travel executive order. So why not try it again with DACA?

    [clip]

    Indeed, the arguments are similar: In the travel cases, states argued that even temporarily delaying entry of some people from some high-terrorism countries would harm the states economically. The DACA suit says the same thing. Indeed, as they did with the travel ban, the attorneys general devote a lot of space to describing the losses they claim they will suffer if DACA is rescinded.


    Byron York: The Democrats' farfetched, laughable, thoroughly ridiculous and possibly successful DACA lawsuit
    Frosh is involved in this thing so Maryland is involved.
    I believe economically we can stand the loss.

  3. #3
    Let me guess, this suit will be presented to the 9th Circuit.
    "Pain heals. Chicks dig scars. Glory... lasts forever." - Shane Falco

Members who have read this thread: 19

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Search:     Advanced Search
Search HELP

| Home | Help | Contact Us | About somd.com | Privacy | Advertising | Sponsors | Newsletter |

| What's New | What's Cool | Top Rated | Add A Link | Mod a Link |

| Announcements | Bookstore | Cafe | Calendar | Classifieds | Community |
| Culture | Dating | Dining | Education | Employment | Entertainment |
| Forums | Free E-Mail | Games | Gear! | Government | Guestbook | Health | Marketplace | Mortgage | News |
| Organizations | Photos | Real Estate | Relocation | Sports | Survey | Travel | Wiki | Weather | Worship |