Trump says he will sign order to provide road to citizenship for ‘Dreamers’

Oh my, a Trump criticism? Isn’t the POTUS appointed by God....’The Chosen One’

 

So you got one guy agreeing with it and you insist that is "some of you are willing to praise"?

 

Supreme court said that Obama's Executive Order was constitutional. Would you support Trump pulling a Jackson?

 

Oh you want legality .... there are places all through the Pine Barons in NJ for that. Helps being Italian.

 

Trump tried to get them to do it but they refused. Instead the added an open borders plan to this thing currently sitting in the house.

 

Joe Biden is the guy who will do that... not trump.

 

No he wont. He is an open borders guy. Further, Trump has been trying to get them to do it and they ignore it.

 

The article's presentation of the matter is as clear as mud, which may be true of SCOTUS also.

First, regarding an executive order, Trump says it will be in then out.

“I’m going do a big executive order, I have the power to do it as president and I’m going to make DACA a part of it,” Trump said in an interview with Telemundo anchor Jose Diaz-Balart.

“But we’ll put it in and then we’re probably going to be taking it out. We’re working out the legal complexities right now,” Trump added, but did not expand on what he meant.​

Next, is reference to a bill, not an executive order.

While it is unclear whether the president can grant DACA recipients a path to citizenship through executive powers, he stated it is his intention Friday.

“One of the aspects of the bill is going to be DACA. We are going to have a road to citizenship,” Trump told Daiz-Balart.

Trump added that “one of the aspects of the bill that you will be very happy with and that a lot of people will be, including me and a lot of Republicans by the way, will be DACA.”​

But more to the point, the SC decision is being interpreted to extend presidential powers.

In his interview Friday with Diaz-Balart, Trump said that the decision actually empowered him.

"If you look at the Supreme Court ruling, they gave the president tremendous powers when they said that you could take in, in this case, 700,000 or so people, so they gave powers," Trump said.​

 

Peace to you

 

It's not handling the issue in a constitutional manner. President Trump is not allowed to make a new immigration law all by himself just like Obama wasn't able to do such a thing either.

 

If you are referencing the recent Supreme Court ruling on the matter, all they said was that in order to cancel Obama's DACA EO, President Trump had to go through the lengthy established procedures, like a time period for citizen input. They never said DACA was constitution in itself.

 

I've called out President Trump for the way he acts and has handled certain issues in the past. I hold all politicians to the same standard of actually obeying the Constitution.

 

You do realize that when President Trump first decided to end DACA, he begged the Congress to send him a bill revising the situation and he would sign it into law. DACA would have already been done in a legal and constitutional manner but for Democrat inaction. They (the Democrats) wanted the issue for political advantage, not a resolution of it.

 

See my post #32.

 

What do you live on some south sea island?!? Of course they do... Girl you need to come to the North East ... even Miami Florida.

 

If DACA were unconstitutional, the Supreme court could have simply overturned it as the minority opinion said should happen. By requiring the same procedures to reverse as any other regulation, the Supreme Court did declare DACA to be constitutional.

 

Smart

 

Of course Congress is at fault, but the problem goes all the way back to the 13th Amendment and its subsequent interpretation. In other words, we can blame slavery for our immigration issues.

 

Since when does the minority opinion rule? But the minority explicitly and repeatedly called it unlawful.

There is nothing in the Court decision that suggests constitutionality, rather they agreed it was illegal but claimed that, because of APA, it became complicated by its wrongful enactment.

Kavanaugh further explained why the decision to reject the Nielson Memorandum as post hoc was unnecessary, unwarranted delay. It could more properly be called political football.