Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals Upholds Injunction Against Obama's Executive Amnesty, Blocking Enforcement of the Amnesty Until a Full Trial on the Merits

A lower court had issued an injunction staying enforcement of the amnesty. The Obama Administration appealed that injunction, seeking to go ahead with the amnesty until/unless a full hearing confirmed the amnesty as unconstitutional.

The Obama Administration's efforts resulted in, get this, failure.

A federal appeals court upheld an injunction against President Obama's new deportation in a ruling Tuesday that marks the second major legal setback for an administration that had insisted its actions were legal.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled in favor of Texas, which had sued to stop the amnesty, on all key points, finding that Mr. Obama’s amnesty likely broke the law governing how big policies are to be written.
"The public interest favors maintenance of the injunction," the judges wrote in the majority opinion.
...
The full amnesty had been scheduled to begin last week, while an earlier part had been slated to accept applications on Feb. 18....

This is not a final ruling on the merits, but it is reason for optimism.

Here's hoping.

Posted by: Ace at 03:31 PM

Comments

(Jump to bottom of comments)

1 Pffft
I'll do what I want.

Posted by: Barry Obama at May 26, 2015 03:33 PM (sQzB6)

2 The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled in favor of Texas, which had sued to stop the amnesty, on all key points, finding that Mr. Obama's amnesty likely broke the law governing how big policies are to be written.
___
Oh, when the President does it, that means that it is not illegal.

Posted by: President Richard Mihous Obama at May 26, 2015 03:33 PM (78TbK)

3 Does it matter? I was under the impression they were going forward with the amnesty regardless of the court rulings.

Posted by: Hal at May 26, 2015 03:33 PM (hmPdt)

4 if Obama gets his way on this. all bets are off

( code for the sh(t hits the fan )

( code for get out the non-rape mattresses )

Posted by: Lou Reed, life coach to the stars at May 26, 2015 03:33 PM (8CdUx)

5 Two months from now: DHS accidentally let in 100,000 "workers" after 5th Circuit decision.

Posted by: Jukin, Former Republican at May 26, 2015 03:34 PM (TV9BR)

6 I imagine it's "all hands on deck" attempting to grant amnesty, etc. to every last illegal they can regardless of this ruling.

Posted by: Lizzy at May 26, 2015 03:35 PM (XTnol)

7 Racist judge. Obviously.

Posted by: Pappy O'Daniel at May 26, 2015 03:35 PM (oVJmc)

8
Won't slow Sir Golfsalot down for a second.

"How many divisions does the Fifth Circuit Court have?"

Posted by: Krebs v Carnot: Epic Battle of the Cycling Stars(TM) at May 26, 2015 03:35 PM (95CzI)

9 Texas our Texas. Oh hail the mighty state.

Posted by: SH at May 26, 2015 03:35 PM (gmeXX)

10
Racist judges. Obviously.

Posted by: Jukin, Former Republican at May 26, 2015 03:36 PM (TV9BR)

11 We can probably be certain that this won't matter.

Posted by: Werner Heisenberg at May 26, 2015 03:36 PM (cgxNI)

12 Ho-hum. Pen and a phone, phone and a pen.

Posted by: President Narcissus at May 26, 2015 03:36 PM (XVOlz)

13 Any possibility the lying cocksucka will obey the injunction?

Posted by: Mr. Wu at May 26, 2015 03:36 PM (FdTDf)

14 Once again the constitutional scholar has shown what a half-wit he is. What a Bozo.

Posted by: Hank at May 26, 2015 03:36 PM (mb+j8)

15 I am the law! Just not today.

Posted by: King Barry at May 26, 2015 03:36 PM (ty633)

16 The Regime will just ignore the order because it is what they do. The destruction of America continues apace.

Posted by: Truck Monkey is a Mime..... Serious at May 26, 2015 03:36 PM (fLKzW)

17 YES!!!

Posted by: Carol at May 26, 2015 03:36 PM (rcXrZ)

18 Posted by: SH at May 26, 2015 03:35 PM (gmeXX)

Yes but our Dream Act is such a contradiction.

Posted by: Cruzinator at May 26, 2015 03:36 PM (8cSVB)

19 Okay where's the "it's only a three-judge panel of troglodytes" meme from the usual suspects...

Posted by: The Devoceleraptor at May 26, 2015 03:37 PM (o+SC1)

20 I fully expected the 5th circuit to do this. They haven't been adequately packed by Obamanite corrupt judges yet and he thumbed his nose at the court continuing his amnesty despite a court order to stop. Not only that he essentially said "fvck you" to the judges by lying about it (via the DOJ lawyers) and was caught. The original judge was literately exploding in court.

And I am sure he will continues defying the court while he spends our tax dollars taking it to the Supremes.

And impeachment is still off the table.

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at May 26, 2015 03:37 PM (GpgJl)

21 The Fifth Circuit Court acted stupidly.

Posted by: King Barky the Liar of Fecal Touch at May 26, 2015 03:37 PM (TV9BR)

22 Aaaaand TFG's administration will ignore this ruling like all the others he doesn't like.

Posted by: RedMindBlueState at May 26, 2015 03:37 PM (h4vJk)

23 Posted by: SH at May 26, 2015 03:35 PM (gmeXX)

Yes but our Dream Act is such a contradiction.

-----

I'm not advocating for or against it, but I do not see a contradiction at all.

Posted by: SH at May 26, 2015 03:37 PM (gmeXX)

24 Nice Federal Highway project you got there.

Be a shame if someone cut the funding to it.

Posted by: President Narcissus at May 26, 2015 03:37 PM (XVOlz)

25 Won't slow Sir Golfsalot down for a second.

"How many divisions does the Fifth Circuit
Court have?"

See #9. As many as they want/ask for.

Posted by: rickb223 Straight, Conservative Clinger at May 26, 2015 03:38 PM (t4NMo)

26 That wont hold up in the court of Supreme Leader and his cult.

Posted by: JD at May 26, 2015 03:38 PM (TzeLs)

27 Any possibility the lying cocksucka will obey the injunction?

Posted by: Mr. Wu at May 26, 2015 03:36 PM (FdTDf)
Slim and none

Posted by: Velvet Ambition at May 26, 2015 03:38 PM (R8hU8)

28 "
I fully expected the 5th circuit to do this. They haven't been adequately packed by Obamanite corrupt judges yet"
------------------------

We are working on that. Whatever our president needs we will work for.

Posted by: John Boehner and Mitch McConnell at May 26, 2015 03:39 PM (TV9BR)

29 I saw Executive Fiat open for the Cars at the Spectrum. Did not see Paula unpronounceable.

Posted by: Shanghai Noodle and Rocking Chair Factory at May 26, 2015 03:39 PM (xQX/f)

30 Two judges voted to uphold the injunction. Those judges were appointed by Reagan and Bush the younger.

The dissenting judge is an Obama appointee.

Elections matter in all sorts of ways.

Posted by: JackStraw at May 26, 2015 03:39 PM (g1DWB)

31 How many infantry divisions does the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit have?

Posted by: Barky O'Beefcake at May 26, 2015 03:39 PM (4CBaM)

32 Obama, the Eric Cartman President. "Whatevah, I do what I want".

Posted by: puddleglum not at work at May 26, 2015 03:40 PM (Igmmh)

33 The double negative, triple reverse has me lost and confused. Obama is not deporting border crossers, but he can't give them 'amnesty'. The injunction stops Obama from declaring the violators not in violation, but the injunction doesn't say that Obama has to deport anyone found to be in violation of immigration regulations. Right?

So Obama can continue to use prosecutorial discretion in which cases he will pursue and which violators he will ignore. So what's the point? Obama's bureaucracy can't hand out green cards to people in violation of immigration regulations? And what if he does anyway? How many Federal Marshals does this judge command?

We're going to need more lawyers.

Posted by: James Kruptstone at May 26, 2015 03:40 PM (nMu6r)

34 Elections matter in all sorts of ways.

------

True dat.

Posted by: SH at May 26, 2015 03:40 PM (gmeXX)

35 Five bucks says Zero breaks the law again. Constitutional Scholar my Ass.

Posted by: subhuman taxpayer at May 26, 2015 03:40 PM (Ph45J)

36 Shit.

Never be afraid to be an optimist. I'm uncool like that.

Posted by: River Guide at May 26, 2015 03:40 PM (RJMhd)

37
"The Fifth Circuit Court acted stupidly."

Well said, Mr. President

Posted by: Jeb Bush at May 26, 2015 03:40 PM (OD2ni)

38 Damn you, Rick!!!

And, Off, idiot affirmative action sock.

Posted by: chiefjaybob at May 26, 2015 03:40 PM (4CBaM)

39 Whoa whoa whoa... amnesty is being threatened... now this is a hill we can die on.

Posted by: GOP monkeys, fucking a football at May 26, 2015 03:40 PM (dkfG0)

40 @30 - The Obama injection of toxic bacteria into the judicial bloodstream will remain for forty years.

Posted by: The Devoceleraptor at May 26, 2015 03:41 PM (o+SC1)

41 Oh wow The Kudzu Kid isn't here yet.

Posted by: River Guide at May 26, 2015 03:41 PM (RJMhd)

42 So, all you constitutional scholars, what happens when Obama echos Jackson and says, "you have made your ruling, so now you can enforce it."

Posted by: Kindltor at May 26, 2015 03:41 PM (t//F+)

43 Five bucks says Zero breaks the law again.

And a lot of GOP leadership and the entire Chamber of Commerce will be right there with him.

Posted by: Pappy O'Daniel at May 26, 2015 03:42 PM (oVJmc)

44 I am reminded of this. NY Slime.....

http://tinyurl.com/ok9zzbq

Posted by: Nip Sip at May 26, 2015 03:42 PM (0FSuD)

45 In the meantime, illegals stream into the country, having been told that Obama will give them all amnesty....I don't think they keep up with current judiciary proceedings.

Posted by: West at May 26, 2015 03:42 PM (1Rgee)

46 The fact that this will just be another court order that this administration can ignore is an indication of failure alright...

Just not a failure on the administration's part.

Honeslty, I'm not sure why the government even shows up to court for these. Wouldn't be the first time they no-showed.

Posted by: Burn the Witch at May 26, 2015 03:42 PM (xSCb6)

47 Avenge me!!!

Posted by: the court order to lift the Gulf oil drilling moratorium at May 26, 2015 03:42 PM (dkfG0)

48 Don't want to sound to cynical, but there is never going to be a fair trial on the merits of anything political again!

Judges, especially up at the appointment level, have an agenda and a bias. They are willing pawns in politics, and their job is to advance "their side".

They have their minds made up beforehand, and it takes forever to make a decision because they have to justify their opinion with "some" basis in law.

I know, I besmirched a lot of lawyers and judges here.
Tough.
Prove me wrong.

Posted by: OneEyedJack at May 26, 2015 03:42 PM (XmOA9)

49 I think it was Andrew Jackson, one of the founders of the Democratic Party who established the Democratic policy of dealing with Supreme Court decisions that they don't like when he said, "He has is decision. Let us see him enforce it."

Posted by: Obnoxious A-Hole at May 26, 2015 03:42 PM (QHgTq)

50 I was talking with Brent Cochran about this. I don't think it matters, the administration is going to go ahead with amnesty anyway. I firmly believe that Obama's attitude is "If the judge wants to make that ruling, let him enforce it".

It's a weakness of the system. The executive is tasked with enforcing the rulings of the judiciary. The founders never dreamed of an executive that would refuse to do so.

Posted by: Weirddave at May 26, 2015 03:43 PM (WvS3w)

51 There's NO WAY this is going down. Way too much $$ stacked up behind it. All the f'ng progs, all the f'ng GOPe, all the chambers o'cronyism, big bidness. Way, way too big to fail. This didn't put in hitch in Barky's swing. Val-Jar has Horse-Heads-In-Beds on speed dial.

Posted by: Brave Sir Robin at May 26, 2015 03:43 PM (5buP8)

52 Sadly, Judge Andrew S. Hanen fell prey to Commancheros.

Posted by: Grump928(c) at May 26, 2015 03:43 PM (evdj2)

53 Ho-hum. Pen and a phone, phone and a pen.

Posted by: President Narcissus

Plus, armored divisions and drones.

Posted by: Moderate Salami at May 26, 2015 03:43 PM (/Ho8c)

54 I won. Bitches.

Posted by: President NPD at May 26, 2015 03:43 PM (NPgvx)

55 Statement from the WH:
These imperialist Anti-American jackals will soon feel the full wrath of my people.

Posted by: JD at May 26, 2015 03:43 PM (TzeLs)

56 After hearing of the 5th Circuit's decision, all I can say is, how can we help, Mr. President?

Posted by: Mitch McConnell at May 26, 2015 03:44 PM (O7MnT)

57 Pappy O'Daniel at May 26, 2015 03:42 PM

No doubt they all should be HUNG, then SHOT.

Posted by: subhuman taxpayer at May 26, 2015 03:44 PM (Ph45J)

58 Ah. This is supposed to stop me, right?

Posted by: Emperor Clusterfuck I at May 26, 2015 03:44 PM (YFFpo)

59 @35 - Look, you often study something in order to learn how to oppose it.

The Germans were by far the most assiduous scholars of Fuller and Liddell Hart.

Posted by: The Devoceleraptor at May 26, 2015 03:44 PM (o+SC1)

60 why not just deport Obama?

Posted by: Bigby's Pregnant Hands at May 26, 2015 03:44 PM (Cq0oW)

61 "35
Five bucks says Zero breaks the law again. Constitutional Scholar my Ass.

Posted by: subhuman taxpayer at May 26, 2015 03:40 PM (Ph45J)"

That is a sucker bet.

Posted by: Obnoxious A-Hole at May 26, 2015 03:44 PM (QHgTq)

62 Awwwww.

How can we help?

Posted by: GOP /e at May 26, 2015 03:44 PM (XVOlz)

63 Five reasons why democrat presidents can ignore judicial orders.

1. They are democrat.
2. They are not republican.
3. Jews run the courts.
4. White judges dissin' our cool black president.
5. Separation of powers was written over 80 years ago.

Posted by: Matt Yglesias at May 26, 2015 03:44 PM (TV9BR)

64 After the last six years, the Constitution needs to carry around a rape mattress.

Posted by: Jollyroger at May 26, 2015 03:44 PM (t06LC)

65 Law and court decisions mean nothing to a nation whose body politic feeds on the logical fallacy of appeal to pity. " Deport little Jose?!? Just for breaking the immigration laws? What kind of monster are you that you would do THAT?

Posted by: Lenny at May 26, 2015 03:44 PM (PQnna)

66 So does this mean that the DHS will have additional judges to apologize to when it's discovered that they are still doing the amnesty again?

Posted by: Buzzion at May 26, 2015 03:45 PM (z/Ubi)

67 Here's what's going to happen:

Nothing.

The Obama administration from the very start have been contemptuously ignoring not only judges and Inspectors General, but even ignoring clearly stipulated black-letter law, including black-letter law in laws _that they themselves pushed through_.

The courts have by turns either ignored this habit, or actively enabled it (cough "It's a tax" cough), or in a few rare cases such as this one, have said, "No, you can't do that. Knock it off."

When a court DOES say to Obama that he can't do something, Obama just arrogantly keeps on doing it. At that point, courts are abruptly realized to be powerless. They don't have the muscle to confront an executive run riot and gone lawless.

The executive branch by tradition is supposed to do the right thing for the country, and observe the separation of powers, and follow the orders of the judicial branch. When an executive fails to do so, it falls to the legislative branch to restrain the abuses of the executive. Via the "power of the purse", or via impeachment.

Agent Orange and the Shy Turtle have made it repeatedly clear that there will be no Congressional recourse to either of these remedies on their watch.

What's left? A military coup? That's pretty much what we're down to.

Posted by: torquewrench at May 26, 2015 03:45 PM (noWW6)

68 @64 - threadwinner

Posted by: The Devoceleraptor at May 26, 2015 03:45 PM (o+SC1)

69 Posted by: SH at May 26, 2015 03:37 PM (gmeXX)

Texas passing law that allow illegals to remain and provides them ability to get in state tuition rates is not contradictory to Texas opposition to similar illegal amnesty?

Posted by: Cruzinator at May 26, 2015 03:46 PM (8cSVB)

70 I firmly believe that Obama's attitude is "If the judge wants to make that ruling, let him enforce it".

All it means then is that any amnestied illegals have what amounts to forged documents. Barry won't enforce against them, but the next executive can. Their papers are without legal basis.

Posted by: Grump928(c) at May 26, 2015 03:46 PM (evdj2)

71 50 It's a weakness of the system. The executive is
tasked with enforcing the rulings of the judiciary. The founders never
dreamed of an executive that would refuse to do so.

Posted by: Weirddave at May 26, 2015 03:43 PM (WvS3w)

They did expect it could occur I think. I don't think they expected congress to abandon its prerogatives and take impeachment off the table.

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at May 26, 2015 03:46 PM (GpgJl)

72 90 million unemployed and Zero and the GOP igmo's want 12 million more. WTF?

Posted by: subhuman taxpayer at May 26, 2015 03:46 PM (Ph45J)

73 http://tinyurl.com/nn4h5k2

Amnesty Granted To Child Molesting Camp Counselor Known As ‘Papa Bear’

"The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) knew last year that an illegal alien California camp counselor known as "Papa Bear" was being investigated on child molestation and child pornography charges but did nothing about it, Iowa U.S. Sen. Chuck Grassley claims in a letter sent to DHS Sec. Jeh Johnson on Wednesday.

Edgar Covarrubias-Padilla was arrested May 7 and charged with four felonies including child molestation and the distribution of child pornography. According to local news reports, authorities believe that Covarrubias-Padilla also produced child pornography."

...

The whistleblowers claim that on Oct. 8, 2012, Covarrubias-Padilla applied for amnesty protection under President Obama’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. His amnesty and work eligibility were scheduled to last through this month, at which point he would have been allowed to re-apply for the program."

No Human Being is Illegal!!!1!11!!!

Posted by: zombie at May 26, 2015 03:46 PM (jBuUi)

74 Well this would be the THIRD injunction to stop the amnesty policy, will the Obama administration listen?

The more I learn about Andrew Jackson, the more I realize that's who President Obama is. Wide popular support, contempt for congress, ignores the courts, has a vision of America that requires massive destruction of peoples in the way, and uses the press to appeal to the people to get his way when congress won't go along.

The major differences of course being that Jackson was 10x the man that Obama ever would dream of being and would kick him up and down Pennsylvania Avenue, but policy-wise and how he governs... many similarities.

Posted by: Christopher taylor at May 26, 2015 03:47 PM (39g3+)

75 O/T

Just got back from a funeral for a 91 year old vet, who happened to own a lot of department stores and liked to chase ass, mostly his own buyers.

A really neat guy. The entire ownership of CLT attended. Sad that a lot of really really cool old guys are heading out.

Shit, 91! I guess screwing around keeps you young?

God Bless him.

Posted by: Nip Sip at May 26, 2015 03:47 PM (0FSuD)

76 Be patient everyone. There's time to save everything.

We just have to start working our way up from the bottom, i.e. putting conservatives in city councils and school boards.

Posted by: Clueless GOPologist at May 26, 2015 03:47 PM (xSCb6)

77 "After the last six years, the Constitution needs to carry around a rape mattress."

Golf Clap

Posted by: Jukin, Former Republican at May 26, 2015 03:48 PM (TV9BR)

78 "The executive is tasked with enforcing the rulings of the judiciary. The founders never dreamed of an executive that would refuse to do so."

Article 2, Section 4 called while you were out. It said it would call back.

Posted by: torquewrench at May 26, 2015 03:48 PM (noWW6)

79
@73 - I thought that was Deferred Action for Child Abusers.

Posted by: The Devoceleraptor at May 26, 2015 03:48 PM (o+SC1)

80 "Covarrubias has now been charged with making child pornography, not just possession of it. That will no doubt send shivers up the spines of hundreds of South Bay parents, wondering if he took photos or video of their children."

-----

"Walden West employee in child porn case now charged with child molestation...

---

Amnesty!!!!! Yay!

Posted by: zombie at May 26, 2015 03:48 PM (jBuUi)

81 So who's going to stop him?

Posted by: PJ at May 26, 2015 03:48 PM (cHuNI)

82 Wasn't there already an injunction in place, and the O admin just ignored it? And the judge got all angry with O's lawyers?

Or was that a different immigration case?

Posted by: mynewhandle at May 26, 2015 03:49 PM (AkOaV)

83 They did expect it could occur I think. I don't think they expected congress to abandon its prerogatives and take impeachment off the table.

Correct. The system is supposed to allow the executive and congress to ignore the judicial branch if they believe it is constitutional and necessary (such as with, for example, campaign finance reform or Roe v Wade) but the other branch is supposed to act as a check if they are wrong.

In this case, congress should be stepping up to overrule the president, and impeach if he goes too far. but that will never, ever, ever, ever, (repeat 5000 times) ever happen.

Posted by: Christopher taylor at May 26, 2015 03:49 PM (39g3+)

84 They (the founders) did expect it could occur I think. I don't think they expected congress to abandon its prerogatives and take impeachment off the table.
Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at May 26, 2015 03:46 PM

This applies to judges also. It was
thought/said/expected at the time that judges would be removed who did strange things. Congress's power to remove judges was expected to be a check on the judge's lifelong appointment.

That didn't happen either.

Posted by: James Kruptstone at May 26, 2015 03:49 PM (nMu6r)

85 67 Posted by: torquewrench at May 26, 2015 03:45 PM (noWW6)

The courts do have the power to hold whoever is in charge of the program in contempt and jail them forever if they want. They just have not done this with anything Obama has done yet.

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at May 26, 2015 03:49 PM (GpgJl)

86 71. 50. Actually, the Founders never envisioned a federal judiciary issuing so many rulings for a President to enforce.

Posted by: Lenny at May 26, 2015 03:49 PM (PQnna)

87 >>>I was talking with Brent Cochran about this. I don't think it matters,
the administration is going to go ahead with amnesty anyway. I firmly
believe that Obama's attitude is "If the judge wants to make that
ruling, let him enforce it".<<<

That sounds like an intriguing conversation. If only there was some sort of way to record those ideas, and broadcast them over the internet, maybe on a weekly basis.

Posted by: Capt. Oblivious at May 26, 2015 03:50 PM (dkfG0)

88 "Covarrubias has now been charged with making child pornography"

So he's an artist! Freedom of artistic expression! /liberal

Posted by: Jay Guevara at May 26, 2015 03:50 PM (oKE6c)

89
From the link:

A federal appeals court upheld an injunction against President Obama's new deportation

Which sucks, because he should totally be deported.

Posted by: Bandersnatch at May 26, 2015 03:50 PM (JtwS4)

90 We just have to start working our way up from the bottom, i.e. putting conservatives in city councils and school boards.

That's not wrong... it just had to start in, say, 1983.

Posted by: Christopher taylor at May 26, 2015 03:50 PM (39g3+)

91 Shit, 91! I guess screwing around keeps you young?

I guess it's true, you really are only as old as the woman you feel.

Posted by: Brother Cavil, down with Eph 6:12 at May 26, 2015 03:50 PM (DT3rQ)

92 Barack Obama, the greatest facilitator of human trafficking in American history.

How many little girls (or boys) have been raped and forced into prostitution because of him?

How many families are separated by ransom because of him?

How many foreigners here are working for no wages because of him?

Illegal immigration is the single-most contributing factor to human trafficking in America.

Barack Obama, the greatest facilitator of human trafficking in American history.

Posted by: Adirondack Patriot at May 26, 2015 03:51 PM (iAUf+)

93 To get a preliminary injunction, you typically have to show a strong likelihood of success at trial. And so very often, in an injunction case, the Motion for preliminary injunction is the ball game.

knocks on wooden head

Posted by: bystander at May 26, 2015 03:51 PM (hKyl0)

94 We'd love to comply, but you see, we've just lost track of them after they entered the country and/or ditched their deportation hearings.

Which ones?

All of them, you honor. We could probably use more funding....

Posted by: DHS at May 26, 2015 03:52 PM (XTnol)

95 The courts do have the power to hold whoever is in charge of the program in contempt and jail them forever if they want.

Courts can hold someone in contempt, and they can sentence someone to jail time, but cannot make that happen because they do not have executive power. The bailiffs, etc are all under the control of the executive department. Its like the Justice Department being asked by congress to look into Lois Lerner. Yeah, that's gonna happen.

Posted by: Christopher taylor at May 26, 2015 03:52 PM (39g3+)

96 Texas passing law that allow illegals to remain and provides them ability to get in state tuition rates is not contradictory to Texas opposition to similar illegal amnesty?
Posted by: Cruzinator at May 26, 2015 03:46 PM (8cSVB)

-----

Again, without arguing the merits of the law, I do not see a contradiction.

One provides a pathway to illegal amnesty beyond the Constitutional power of the Presidency. The other merely offers persons within the state the same discounted tuition.

But I would agree it does certainly create an appearance of a contradiction.

Posted by: SH at May 26, 2015 03:52 PM (gmeXX)

97 " Deport little Jose?!? Just for breaking the immigration laws? What kind of monster are you that you would do THAT?

The worst fvcking kind. FYNQ.

Posted by: rickb223 Straight, Conservative Clinger at May 26, 2015 03:53 PM (t4NMo)

98 I believe that the courts should respect the prerogative of the sovereign, I mean the President.

*hic*

Posted by: John Boehner at May 26, 2015 03:53 PM (8ZskC)

99 " Deport little Jose?!? Just for breaking the immigration laws? What kind of monster are you that you would do THAT?

Enforcing laws makes one a monster? Next question.

Posted by: Christopher taylor at May 26, 2015 03:54 PM (39g3+)

100 ***"That's not wrong... it just had to start in, say, 1983."***

Hence the preface about "time". The current Left started their shit before WWI

Posted by: Burn the Witch at May 26, 2015 03:55 PM (xSCb6)

101 95 Courts can hold someone in contempt, and they can
sentence someone to jail time, but cannot make that happen because they
do not have executive power. The bailiffs, etc are all under the
control of the executive department. Its like the Justice Department
being asked by congress to look into Lois Lerner. Yeah, that's gonna
happen.

Posted by: Christopher taylor at May 26, 2015 03:52 PM (39g3+)

Neigh neigh, a judge can order a person jailed for contempt on his own say so alone and there is no limit to how long they can be held. And he can order federal marshals to enforce it by arresting them.

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at May 26, 2015 03:55 PM (GpgJl)

102 Offer in state tuition rates.
When they show up to school arrest and deport.
Rinse. Repeat.

Posted by: teej at May 26, 2015 03:55 PM (qyZxC)

103 Ogabe can't just sit around and wait for the obstructionists at the judicial branch to act.

Posted by: JD at May 26, 2015 03:56 PM (TzeLs)

104 How can someone with no qualifications fail?

Posted by: Boss Moss at May 26, 2015 03:56 PM (QRBvR)

105 Hi,

You might know me as ' H1b, H2b visa ' but I have been around much longer than both of those silly programs.

I built the pyramids and served as a houri in the tents of the sheiks. I
I have the official US Grade A stamp of approval. I am legalized alien smuggling. I babble in barely recognizable English when you call for tech support. I work for 3 dollars a day and a bowl of rice making white plastic electronic toys for American students to buy with student loans.

I am pouring over your borders,watering down wages, taking the jobs that W wouldn't want you to do and bringing disease and corrupt third world ideology to your weakened nation every day. And having lots and LOTS of tax-free babies.

So please spare me with the 'Amnesty' theater.

I am cheap labor.

I am here.

Posted by: Indentured Servitude and Human Trafficking at May 26, 2015 03:57 PM (XVOlz)

106 Judicial Theater in which something something not constitutional magically turns into Ain't this ckufing great and oh yeah it's legal as hell!

Posted by: Dack Thrombosis at May 26, 2015 03:58 PM (oFCZn)

107 Well, that is good news.

"No it is not, you Pollyanna! Obama will just ignore everything and do whatever he wants because he can!" - Mikey NTH from the Bearded Spock universe.

Posted by: Mikey NTH - The Outrage Outlet Buy A Malediction, Get an Imaginary Insult Half Off! at May 26, 2015 03:58 PM (hLRSq)

108 Offer Amnesty. When they show up for their free stuff nail them. After they pull their 20 years at hard labor mining uranium with a spoon drop them off at the southernmost tip of Chile.

Posted by: Boss Moss at May 26, 2015 03:59 PM (QRBvR)

109 @75

I will tell you the difference in our generation and theres. The man was a VERY rich guy and was at Duke. Pearl Harbor happened, he dropped out and joined the Navy.

They played this at the service. Of course, I cried.

http://tinyurl.com/qbm988a

Posted by: Nip Sip at May 26, 2015 03:59 PM (0FSuD)

110 Does it matter? I was under the impression they were going forward with the amnesty regardless of the court rulings.
***
And then Gov Abbott needs to actually do something on the border beyond show and start enforcing the law at the border himself.

If Obama ignores the judges on amnesty, why not the governor?

Hell, if I was a southern governor I'd call it an invasion, demand the US army come to the border, call him the Guard and start planting land mines...but that's just me.

Posted by: 18-1 at May 26, 2015 03:59 PM (78TbK)

111 Article regarding contempt power:

http://bit.ly/1J3hUZy

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at May 26, 2015 04:00 PM (GpgJl)

112 Nip - I rather doubt that Jean and the family would appreciate your observations.

Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at May 26, 2015 04:01 PM (F2IAQ)

113 Hell, if I was a southern governor I'd call it an invasion, demand the
US army come to the border, call him the Guard and start planting land
mines...but that's just me.

Go on...

Posted by: Blanco Basura at May 26, 2015 04:01 PM (YEelc)

114 It's not as though decrees from men in black dresses are binding. Who will enforce it?

Posted by: Boss Moss at May 26, 2015 04:01 PM (QRBvR)

115 I like that even better Boss Moss.
Actually they could both be used in a two pronged attack.

Posted by: teej at May 26, 2015 04:01 PM (qyZxC)

116 More Navy pron.

http://tinyurl.com/kyltnow

Posted by: Nip Sip at May 26, 2015 04:02 PM (0FSuD)

117 114
It's not as though decrees from men in black dresses are binding. Who will enforce it?

Posted by: Boss Moss at May 26, 2015 04:01 PM (QRBvR)

The originating case judge who ordered the halt can order that idiot head of DHS jailed for contempt until they start enforcing the law. AND he can personally order federal marshals to arrest him w/o going though the corrupt DOJ.

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at May 26, 2015 04:03 PM (GpgJl)

118 The Germans were by far the most assiduous scholars of Fuller and Liddell Hart.
Posted by: The Devoceleraptor at May 26, 2015 03:44 PM (o+SC1)

I make it a point to re-read Liddell-Hart's 'Strategy' every year or so. Liddell-Hart's in-depth analysis of Sherman's 'horns of a dilemma' approach as Sherman conductedhis famous march to the sea is one of the most insightful ever written.

I am such a nerd. Geez Louise.

Posted by: troyriser at May 26, 2015 04:03 PM (XHR9b)

119 Well, we know that whatever happens, Chief Justice Roberts will stand like a stonewall. Now, pass me that bong.

Posted by: The Great White Snark at May 26, 2015 04:04 PM (LNbgN)

120 The major differences of course being that Jackson was 10x the man that Obama ever would dream of being and would kick him up and down Pennsylvania Avenue, but policy-wise and how he governs... many similarities.
Posted by: Christopher taylor
______________________

The other major differences are that Jackson was considerably more knowledgeable about the world and had a much higher IQ.

Posted by: Furious George at May 26, 2015 04:04 PM (UlJ3l)

121 Offer Amnesty. When they show up for their free stuff nail them. After they pull their 20 years at hard labor mining uranium with a spoon drop them off at the southernmost tip of Chile.

After 20 years, you can track them at night by their soft afterglow.

Posted by: rickb223 Straight, Conservative Clinger at May 26, 2015 04:04 PM (t4NMo)

122 The other merely offers persons within the state the same discounted tuition.

It's not 'offers persons' . It offers illegals.

Posted by: Cruzinator at May 26, 2015 04:06 PM (8cSVB)

123 121 After 20 years, you can track them at night by their soft afterglow.

Posted by: rickb223 Straight, Conservative Clinger at May 26, 2015 04:04 PM (t4NMo)

After 20 years of mining Uranium with a spoon and no protective gear they will mostly all be dead anyway.

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at May 26, 2015 04:06 PM (GpgJl)

124 14 Once again the constitutional scholar has shown what a half-wit he is. What a Bozo.

Posted by: Hank at May 26, 2015 03:36 PM (mb+j

You're giving him too much credit.....at least 50% too much.

Posted by: BignJames at May 26, 2015 04:06 PM (HtUkt)

125 120 The major differences of course being that Jackson was 10x the man that Obama ever would dream of being and would kick him up and down Pennsylvania Avenue, but policy-wise and how he governs... many similarities.
Posted by: Christopher taylor
______________________

The other major differences are that Jackson was considerably more knowledgeable about the world and had a much higher IQ.
_____________________

And had better manners and more class.

Posted by: Furious George at May 26, 2015 04:07 PM (UlJ3l)

126
The dissenting obama appointed judge said the decision was political.

heh.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at May 26, 2015 04:07 PM (ODxAs)

127 What's to stop Obama et al from just going ahead? It's not like they're scrupulous about following the law.

Posted by: Null at May 26, 2015 04:08 PM (xjpRj)

128 126

The dissenting obama appointed judge said the decision was political.

heh.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at May 26, 2015 04:07 PM (ODxAs)

IOW he doesn't know the law or doesn't give a shit. I go with both.

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at May 26, 2015 04:08 PM (GpgJl)

129 The dissenting obama appointed judge said the decision was political.

Progressive meme: It's only political when the decision goes against ya. If they rule in your favor, it's the right decision?

Asshole

Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 26, 2015 04:09 PM (rDqRv)

130 127
What's to stop Obama et al from just going ahead? It's not like they're scrupulous about following the law.

Posted by: Null at May 26, 2015 04:08 PM (xjpRj)

See #117

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at May 26, 2015 04:09 PM (GpgJl)

131 What's to stop Obama et al from just going ahead?

A 2PM Tee Time

Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 26, 2015 04:10 PM (rDqRv)

132 The dissenting obama appointed judge said the decision was political.

Think about that one for a minute, folks.

Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at May 26, 2015 04:10 PM (659DL)

133 Why I never joined the Navy. Barf bags ready? Vic is a better man than I am.

http://tinyurl.com/psbdw89

Posted by: Nip Sip at May 26, 2015 04:12 PM (0FSuD)

134 de facto amnesty instead of de jure amnesty

Posted by: brak at May 26, 2015 04:12 PM (/LZdt)

135 Obama's Amnesty is upheld as it is a tax!

Posted by: Justice Roberts at May 26, 2015 04:12 PM (JOG+K)

136 Obama will go right ahead and nothing will fucking happen!
The judge will not order anyone jailed. The next Prez will not reverse any fucking Obama shit!

Posted by: Velvet Ambition at May 26, 2015 04:12 PM (R8hU8)

137 Think about that one for a minute, folks.

Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at May 26, 2015 04:10 PM (659DL)

Yep. Just the way it is now.

Posted by: OneEyedJack at May 26, 2015 04:12 PM (XmOA9)

138 132
The dissenting obama appointed judge said the decision was political.

Think about that one for a minute, folks.

Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at May 26, 2015 04:10 PM (659DL)

His was

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at May 26, 2015 04:12 PM (GpgJl)

139 "The public interest favors maintenance of the injunction,"

OK ace, or others, correct me here.

WTF is it any court's business or competence to even use the concept "public interest"? That is not their ambit, that is not their expertise, that is not their actual charge under the constitution.

Policy is debated and made by accountable, electable officials. That is where "the public interest" is defined, in practice, or takes on it are tried out, etc., all in the context of an electable, changeable, accountable branch of guvamint.

Courts should rule on constitutional principles, and laws - as written by their superiors (in this respect), the legislature.

Right there we have, in an otherwise (duh!) and favorable decision, an expression of the essential arrogance and lawlessness of the judiciary. The only obvious "public interest" of concern to any court is that the laws be faithfully upheld and applied, within the confines of the constitution.

Posted by: rhomboid at May 26, 2015 04:12 PM (QDnY+)

140 Hard as it is to believe, it is almost like the president is blatantly breaking the law on immigration. But that can't be right.

Posted by: PT Barnum at May 26, 2015 04:12 PM (/EkKm)

141 As if Obama will give a fuck what a judge says.

Posted by: HUCK / AKIN 2016 at May 26, 2015 04:13 PM (0LHZx)

142 Thieves used an online service provided by the IRS to gain access to information from more than 100,000 taxpayers, the agency said Tuesday.

The information included tax returns and other tax information on file with the IRS.

The IRS said the thieves accessed a system called "Get Transcript." In order to access the information, the thieves cleared a security screen that required knowledge about the taxpayer, including Social Security number, date of birth, tax filing status and street address.

------

IRS needs billions more for net security

Posted by: RWC - Team BOHICA at May 26, 2015 04:13 PM (fWAjv)

143
The dissenting obama appointed judge said the decision was political.
Posted by: Guy Mohawk

Judge Stephen Higginson dissented....

The Senate confirmed Higginson's nomination by a vote of 88-0 on October 31, 2011

You're welcome.

Posted by: The Senate Republicans

Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at May 26, 2015 04:14 PM (kdS6q)

144 Time for an EBT card glitch.

Posted by: eman at May 26, 2015 04:14 PM (9O4M4)

145 133
Why I never joined the Navy. Barf bags ready? Vic is a better man than I am.

http://tinyurl.com/psbdw89

Posted by: Nip Sip at May 26, 2015 04:12 PM (0FSuD)

I requested a Tin Can out of Charleston. I got an Aircraft Carrier out of Alameda, CA.

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at May 26, 2015 04:14 PM (GpgJl)

146 Hey - court opinions don't apply to dreams...

Posted by: PT Barnum at May 26, 2015 04:14 PM (/EkKm)

147 Ace: "This is not a final ruling on the merits, but it is reason for optimism."

Oh, we'll stomp on that ASAP. The fight doesn't stop until the illegal wins.

Posted by: GOPe, The Stupid and Increasingly Evil Party at May 26, 2015 04:14 PM (1CroS)

148 And yet, through the miracle of diversity/equality, they, from abuela to bambina, will all vote in 2016.

Posted by: Eromero at May 26, 2015 04:14 PM (go5uR)

149
We have oil in Texas

We have a trench in the Rio Grande, just need to extend it a little in places.

We have matches.

A flaming moat should be a no-brainer.

Although on the down side, the flames are going to hard on the crocodiles.

Posted by: IllTemperedCur at May 26, 2015 04:15 PM (lpeQC)

150 Neigh neigh, a judge can order a person jailed for contempt on his own say so alone and there is no limit to how long they can be held. And he can order federal marshals to enforce it by arresting them.

Yes, he can order[i/] it. But the federal marshals answer to the executive department, not the judicial. Courts have no power to execute their will, on purpose.

They can rule, but someone else carries out their rulings. We can hope that the marshals would agree, but if ordered not to by their bosses?

Posted by: Christopher taylor at May 26, 2015 04:15 PM (39g3+)

151 The Senate confirmed Higginson's nomination by a vote of 88-0 on October 31, 2011

You're welcome.

Posted by: The Senate Republicans
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at May 26, 2015 04:14 PM (kdS6q)

__________

And he's only 54 years old, which means he'll be around for at least another 20 years.

Hooray!!

Posted by: HUCK / AKIN 2016 at May 26, 2015 04:15 PM (0LHZx)

152 A United States Marine was convicted at a court-martial for refusing to remove a Bible verse on her computer a verse of Scripture the military determined could easily be seen as contrary to good order and discipline.

The plight of Lance Corporal Monifa Sterling seems unbelievable a member of the Armed Forces criminally prosecuted for displaying a slightly altered passage of Scripture from the Old Testament: No weapon formed against me shall prosper.

Sterling, who represented herself at trial, was convicted February 1, 2014 in a court
martial at Camp Lejune, North Carolina after she refused to obey orders from a staff sergeant to remove the Bible verses from her desk.

She was found guilty of failing to go to her appointed place of duty, disrespect toward a superior commissioned officer, and four specifications of disobeying the lawful order of a noncommissioned officer.

Sigh.

Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 26, 2015 04:15 PM (rDqRv)

153 In order to access the information, the thieves cleared a security
screen that required knowledge about the taxpayer, including Social
Security number, date of birth, tax filing status and street address.

Which they could have gotten from anyone selling data from the Anthem breach. Hrm.

Posted by: HR braucht ein Bier at May 26, 2015 04:15 PM (ZKzrr)

154 Obama ignoring law and ruling by executive decree. He brags about it. Said he would do it, and is doing it, and is daring anyone to do anything about it.

Now he is taking over local police departments. We're not going to make it to 2017.

Posted by: James Kruptstone at May 26, 2015 04:16 PM (nMu6r)

155 Well poop

Posted by: Christopher taylor at May 26, 2015 04:16 PM (39g3+)

156 We're not going to make it to 2017.
Posted by: James Kruptstone at May 26, 2015 04:16 PM (nMu6r)

And THAT's the good news

Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 26, 2015 04:16 PM (rDqRv)

157 Perry should sell a tshirt with dic shooters and a bolo tie

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at May 26, 2015 04:16 PM (rNMmS)

158 Six shooters

SIX shooters!!

Notice autocorrect didn't fix that eff up!

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at May 26, 2015 04:17 PM (rNMmS)

159
The other major differences are that Jackson was considerably more knowledgeable about the world and had a much higher IQ.

Posted by: Furious George

Plus, instead of just getting all butthurt when somebody insults him, Jackson would just shoot them.

Posted by: Moderate Salami at May 26, 2015 04:17 PM (/Ho8c)

160 143 Judge Stephen Higginson dissented....

The Senate confirmed Higginson's nomination by a vote of 88-0 on October 31, 2011
------------------------------------------------

Figures, liberal locust, born in Boston, moved to LA now on federal appeals court.

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at May 26, 2015 04:17 PM (GpgJl)

161 I don't think I want to buy a dic shooter.

Posted by: Moderate Salami at May 26, 2015 04:18 PM (/Ho8c)

162
I guess they have not managed to threaten the right people or the right people will not be threatened at this point.
Full amnesty is critical to progressives so it would not surprise me if they stoop to any level to get what they want.

Zombie Nixon blushes at this crew.

Posted by: Cheri at May 26, 2015 04:18 PM (oiNtH)

163 We're not going to make it to 2017.
Posted by: James Kruptstone at May 26, 2015 04:16 PM (nMu6r)

Oh I'm pretty sure some of us will make it, along with some of them. Interesting times ahead.

Posted by: drill_thrawl at May 26, 2015 04:19 PM (JOG+K)

164
Judge Stephen Higginson dissented....

Higginson? Sounds like a homo.

And I mean that in the generically insulting manner.

Posted by: IllTemperedCur at May 26, 2015 04:19 PM (lpeQC)

165 150 They can rule, but someone else carries out their
rulings. We can hope that the marshals would agree, but if ordered not
to by their bosses?

Posted by: Christopher taylor at May 26, 2015 04:15 PM (39g3+)

As I said, they can order the marshal service to make the arrest on their own.

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at May 26, 2015 04:19 PM (GpgJl)

166 Dutch textbook: Jews murdered Arabs, Begin was a terrorist
Required high school schoolbook says that during Israel's founding, Jewish militias committed murder against Palestinians, and that Menachem Begin 'was known as a terrorist and a radical'.

Isn't that just precious.

Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 26, 2015 04:19 PM (rDqRv)

167 Niedermeyer's Dead Horse: "Perry should sell a tshirt with dic shooters and a bolo tie"

They make those? Dude!

Posted by: Cartman at May 26, 2015 04:19 PM (1CroS)

168 Heeeeerrre I come to save the Daaaaaayyyy!!!!

Don't worry!

While we're making sure Obamacare sticks around,

we'll just add a few quickie amendments to the bill to get amnesty going again!

Now, time for a martooni....

Posted by: John Boneless, Duh Squeaker of Duh Hawse at May 26, 2015 04:19 PM (0cMkb)

169
I don't think I want to buy a dic shooter.

But they're so handy for salads.

Posted by: HR braucht ein Bier at May 26, 2015 04:19 PM (ZKzrr)

170 They can rule, but someone else carries out their rulings. We can hope that the marshals would agree, but if ordered not to by their bosses?

They don't want it left up to the citizens.
"How many divisions does the 5th Circuit have?"

As many as they ask for.

Posted by: rickb223 Straight, Conservative Clinger at May 26, 2015 04:20 PM (t4NMo)

171 @145

Vic, Like this?

http://tinyurl.com/o2vhhzh

Posted by: Nip Sip at May 26, 2015 04:20 PM (0FSuD)

172
I don't think I want to buy a dic shooter.

But they're so handy for salads.

Posted by: HR braucht ein Bier at May 26, 2015 04:19 PM (ZKzrr)

Self-tossing?

Posted by: IllTemperedCur at May 26, 2015 04:20 PM (lpeQC)

173 Nevergiveup @ 152 - Do you know what her punishment was?

Posted by: Cheri at May 26, 2015 04:20 PM (oiNtH)

174 Nevergiveup @ 152 - Do you know what her punishment was?
Posted by: Cheri at May 26, 2015 04:20 PM (oiNtH)

The Christian Marine was given a bad conduct discharge and a reduction in rank from lance corporal to private.

Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 26, 2015 04:21 PM (rDqRv)

175 As I said, they can order the marshal service to make the arrest on their own.

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at May 26, 2015 04:19 PM (GpgJl)
Vic, you know that is not going to happen. Sad but true.

Posted by: Velvet Ambition at May 26, 2015 04:23 PM (R8hU8)

176
>>>I don't think I want to buy a dic shooter.

Posted by: Moderate Salami at May 26, 2015 04:18 PM (/Ho8c)<<<

I almost had one of those.

Posted by: Plaxico Burress at May 26, 2015 04:23 PM (dkfG0)

177 Halbig is it?

Posted by: Grampa Jimbo at May 26, 2015 04:24 PM (V70Uh)

178 Worlds Largest Hotel About To Open Lib Rag Guardian Omits Fact Non Muslims Cant Even Step Foot In The Building

In Saudi Arabia

Weasel Zippers

WHo want's to?

Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 26, 2015 04:24 PM (rDqRv)

179 So, Vic did you guys ever do this???

http://tinyurl.com/psbzhn4

Posted by: Nip Sip at May 26, 2015 04:24 PM (0FSuD)

180 64 After the last six years, the Constitution needs to carry around a rape mattress.

Posted by: Jollyroger at May 26, 2015 03:44 PM (t06LC)

Threadwinner!

Posted by: the Butcher at May 26, 2015 04:24 PM (fUjxW)

181 Judge 'igginson?

Posted by: Grump928(c) at May 26, 2015 04:25 PM (evdj2)

182 Speaking of court martials, when is a deserting piece of shit who slobbed Taliban knobs get his day in court?

Guess a Marine with a bible is more of a threat...

Posted by: SMFH at it all at May 26, 2015 04:25 PM (OsWis)

183 Oh, terrific. I posted on the wrong thread too.

Checking out now.

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at May 26, 2015 04:25 PM (rNMmS)

184 WHo want's to?

Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 26, 2015 04:24 PM (rDqRv)

Hey, you can't get a drink, but you can marry nine year olds.

It's a trade off.

Posted by: Mohamed, the goat fucker at May 26, 2015 04:26 PM (0FSuD)

185 I almost had one of those.

Posted by: Plaxico Burress

lol

Posted by: Moderate Salami at May 26, 2015 04:26 PM (/Ho8c)

186 After the last ninety six years, the Constitution needs to carry around a rape mattress.

FIFY

Posted by: Grampa Jimbo at May 26, 2015 04:27 PM (V70Uh)

187 Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 26, 2015 04:15 PM (rDqRv)

I'm sure there is another side to the story but from the side you gave, good for her standing up for her beliefs and her first amendment right. Having a innocuous scripture on a desk or wearing a cross shouldn't be considered a cause of disorder. It's God, Family and the Corp in that order.

Posted by: Cruzinator at May 26, 2015 04:28 PM (8cSVB)

188 Halbig is it?

It's a henway.

Posted by: rickb223 Straight, Conservative Clinger at May 26, 2015 04:28 PM (t4NMo)

189 Another aspect of contempt charges: the executive department also runs the jails. Even if the court managed to find Marshals with enough dignity and honor to carry out the sentence, the jails could be ordered to just let people go.

That's on purpose. So the courts cannot simply dominate the country with the will of a small group of unelected all-powerful officials. The other two bodies are supposed to check the third, if they will. But they don't.

As someone pointed out above, judges were supposed to be carefully chosen by the executive, and removed if they did wrong by congress, but that just is not even on the table.

Posted by: Christopher taylor at May 26, 2015 04:28 PM (39g3+)

190 This is what you get when the DOJ sends in the JV team

Posted by: Islamic Rage Boy at May 26, 2015 04:28 PM (MVVO/)

191 117 Posted by: Nip Sip at May 26, 2015 04:20 PM (0FSuD)

That has to be a modern carrier because it has an F-18 on the flight deck. It means the waves are breaking at least 60 to 65 feet up. It also means stand clear of the sponsons and weather decks due to high winds and heavy seas.

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at May 26, 2015 04:28 PM (GpgJl)

192 Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 26, 2015 04:15 PM (rDqRv)

Too bad but rules are rules: that is a work place, and a superior officer gave her an order regarding her work place and she refused to obey that order.

Again - too bad.

Posted by: Mikey NTH - The Outrage Outlet Buy A Malediction, Get an Imaginary Insult Half Off! at May 26, 2015 04:28 PM (hLRSq)

193 3 to 4 pounds.

Posted by: Grampa Jimbo at May 26, 2015 04:29 PM (V70Uh)

194 I'm sure there is another side to the story but from the side you gave, good for her standing up for her beliefs and her first amendment right. Having a innocuous scripture on a desk or wearing a cross shouldn't be considered a cause of disorder. It's God, Family and the Corp in that order.
Posted by: Cruzinator at May 26, 2015 04:28 PM (8cSVB)

It's at FOX NEWS. I am sure we are only getting one side. And look this is the Military and when your ordered to do something, just do it and smile. But the Military is becoming very PC and that is NOT good

Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 26, 2015 04:30 PM (rDqRv)

195 Hillary takes the ice bucket challenge.

http://tinyurl.com/nd4n4m5

OK its a cheap joke but it made me laugh

Posted by: Christopher taylor at May 26, 2015 04:30 PM (39g3+)

196 Nevergiveup - sad. Meanwhile - Bergdahl remains free and will probably receive his back pay after deserting.

Posted by: Cheri at May 26, 2015 04:30 PM (oiNtH)

197
Too bad but rules are rules: that is a work place, and a superior officer gave her an order regarding her work place and she refused to obey that order.

Again - too bad.
Posted by: Mikey NTH - The Outrage Outlet Buy A Malediction, Get an Imaginary Insult Half Off! at May 26, 2015 04:28 PM (hLRSq)

yeah i agree. But still things are getting out of hand.

Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 26, 2015 04:31 PM (rDqRv)

198 Too bad but rules are rules: that is a work place, and a superior officer gave her an order regarding her work place and she refused to obey that order.

And she had a right do refuse that order and pay the price, bringing attention to the order and forcing the brass to address it. It worked out as intended, hopefully with that jackass getting a reprimand and the policy clarified.

But with all the Obama appointees and retirements... I wonder.

Posted by: Christopher taylor at May 26, 2015 04:33 PM (39g3+)

199 175 Vic, you know that is not going to happen. Sad but true.

Posted by: Velvet Ambition at May 26, 2015 04:23 PM (R8hU

I think I mentioned that in the first post on the subject. If they didn't do when they caught the DHS lawyers in a blatant lie in court they are not going to do it at all. Of course perjury would be a "criminal contempt" and thus they would have to specify a time limit for jail.

But there is hope since it appears that originating judge is getting fed up with their crap.

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at May 26, 2015 04:33 PM (GpgJl)

200 Speaking of the military, my gawd they don't deserve Hillary.
The Clintons hate the military there are plenty of back stories about that.

Posted by: River Guide at May 26, 2015 04:33 PM (RJMhd)

201 It's a henway.
Posted by: rickb223 Straight, Conservative Clinger at May 26, 2015 04:28 PM

Not a chance, Buckaroo.

Posted by: MrScribbler at May 26, 2015 04:33 PM (P8YHq)

202 196 Nevergiveup - sad. Meanwhile - Bergdahl remains free and will probably receive his back pay after deserting.
Posted by: Cheri at May 26, 2015 04:30 PM (oiNtH)

Also, Major Hisan received a paycheck while in prison. And had "Soldier of Allah" on his business cards.

Army is letting turbans in on uniforms, too.

"Disobeying an order" is about 99% worthless to me as a justification for the Christian Marine's treatment. The game is obvious here when differing groups are examined.

Posted by: Hawkins1701 at May 26, 2015 04:33 PM (lwx4E)

203 They didn't deserve the JEF either.

But here we are.

Posted by: SMFH at it all at May 26, 2015 04:34 PM (OsWis)

204 The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled in favor of Texas

Obama, upon hearing about the Court's decision, wiped his ass with the original U.S. Constitution, taken that morning from the national archives, and then urinated on it before flushing the floating remnants. After watching the foundation for all law in the United States disappear without a trace, Obama ordered his minions to keep on approving illegals at a record pace. "After all, what the fcuk is the Court going to be able to do about it?"

Posted by: physics geek at May 26, 2015 04:34 PM (MT22W)

205
Too bad but rules are rules: that is a work place, and a superior officer gave her an order regarding her work place and she refused to obey that order.

Again - too bad.
Posted by: Mikey NTH - The Outrage Outlet Buy A Malediction, Get an Imaginary Insult Half Off! at May 26, 2015 04:28 PM (hLRSq)

I agree. When I was Active Duty I would have removed it under orders. The fact remains that it seems that the military is becoming more PC by the day and is focused on the wrong things.

Posted by: Cheri at May 26, 2015 04:34 PM (oiNtH)

206 @191

Another video of that says it's the Kitty Hawk.

Posted by: Nip Sip at May 26, 2015 04:34 PM (0FSuD)

207 Never sign up for the military when a Democrat is in the presidency. Never re-up if one is elected.

Posted by: Christopher taylor at May 26, 2015 04:35 PM (39g3+)

208 Posted by: rhomboid at May 26, 2015 04:12 PM (QDnY+)

Public interest is a standard prong in the test for a grant of preliminary injunctions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preliminary_injunction

I think the article just takes that out of context to make it appear somehow salacious or a newsworthy point. It isn't.

Posted by: flounder at May 26, 2015 04:35 PM (ecDRv)

209 yeah i agree. But still things are getting out of hand.

Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 26, 2015 04:31 PM (rDqRv)

You got to obey orders no matter how stupid, petty, insane, or counter-productive that order actually is. You can disobey illegal orders but you better be pretty darn sure that order is very illegal before doing so.

It was a small, petty order but it was a valid order. Refusing to obey it was stupid squared.

Posted by: Mikey NTH - The Outrage Outlet Buy A Malediction, Get an Imaginary Insult Half Off! at May 26, 2015 04:36 PM (hLRSq)

210 SMFH

True, trust me I fought that tooth and nail.

The thing is Hillary after Obama...

Posted by: River Guide at May 26, 2015 04:36 PM (RJMhd)

211 Posted by: PT Barnum

I don't trust PT Barnum. He told me there's a sucker born every minute but that has not been my experience.

Posted by: The Great White Snark at May 26, 2015 04:36 PM (vk+Kb)

212 Without knowing all the facts, The Female Marine was stupid for disobeying a direct Order, The NCO Officer was stupid and a bad Officer for allowing it to get to that point, and the Officer over the NCO should have had better supervision over all of them. EVERYONE of them dropped the ball.

Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 26, 2015 04:36 PM (rDqRv)

213 Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 26, 2015 04:30 PM (rDqRv)

Or you don't have to do it and suffer the known consequences. That's what she did and I respect that. I don't know if it's the same in the Jewish religion but something as simple as telling someone they have to remove their cross can be serious for a Christian. To do so would be like denying Christ to many. They would gladly suffer the consequences than to deny Christ. And when I say they it mean me too.

Posted by: Cruzinator at May 26, 2015 04:37 PM (8cSVB)

214 This will insure the hispanic vote for hillary she now wins easy in 2016 as 5,000,000 minority kids will have turned 18 voting age and another million republicans will have died 2016 slogans democrats citizenship! republiscum we will deport your family!

Posted by: captain*arizona at May 26, 2015 04:37 PM (f9z8R)

215 NGU: I would think (if she can get the legal backing) that this would be a BEST time to push back, The Texas Mizzi shooter could post HIS crap, Therefore there is a precedent) If not, open season, no apologies.

Posted by: Freddyv the Freeloader at May 26, 2015 04:37 PM (FIvdS)

216 I go to google, I see a weird thing with a space shuttle and some lady. So I decide, what stupid google shit is this and click on it. Lo and behold, it's Sally Ride. Libs found out she was a lesbian after she died. So naturally its time to overly celebrate her.

Posted by: JD at May 26, 2015 04:38 PM (TzeLs)

217 If you are a Christian and in the military you will be made to compromise your convictions.

A Christian has no obligation to serve man over God, get out while you can.

Posted by: Ken at May 26, 2015 04:38 PM (LXJ1e)

218 161
I don't think I want to buy a dic shooter.

Posted by: Moderate Salami at May 26, 2015 04:18 PM (/Ho8c)
Our previous iteration was a commercial disaster, but we're seeing evidence among the men-hating left that there may yet be an untapped market.

Posted by: Remington, Inc. at May 26, 2015 04:39 PM (ecDRv)

219 In today's political system and un-media, obeying laws is a losing political strategy..
Signed,
Your Ungrateful King

Posted by: King 0 --doing it in broad daylight at May 26, 2015 04:39 PM (7GI9v)

220 Or you don't have to do it and suffer the known consequences. That's what she did and I respect that. I don't know if it's the same in the Jewish religion but something as simple as telling someone they have to remove their cross can be serious for a Christian. To do so would be like denying Christ to many. They would gladly suffer the consequences than to deny Christ. And when I say they it mean me too.
Posted by: Cruzinator at May 26, 2015 04:37 PM (8cSVB)

Yeah I don't think that is what happened here. Poor Leadership all around and bad decision by the Lance Corp.

Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 26, 2015 04:39 PM (rDqRv)

221 179
So, Vic did you guys ever do this???

http://tinyurl.com/psbzhn4

Posted by: Nip Sip at May 26, 2015 04:24 PM (0FSuD)

That was only 15 degrees. We healed over further one time when a jet jockey idiot was getting bridge qualified and made a hard left at flank speed. We went over so far the waves from our wake washed over the sponsons into the ship and set off a flare locker fire. He damn near capsized the ship. I was on the mess decks at the time and it scared the shit out of me.

There is a set speed limit for the degree of turn you can make vs the speed. The qualified guy was relieved and the trainee got a black letter.

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at May 26, 2015 04:39 PM (GpgJl)

222 182
Speaking of court martials, when is a deserting piece of shit who slobbed Taliban knobs get his day in court?

Guess a Marine with a bible is more of a threat...

Posted by: SMFH at it all at May 26, 2015 04:25 PM (OsWis)

I think he has already had it???

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at May 26, 2015 04:40 PM (GpgJl)

223 Posted by: captain*arizona at May 26, 2015 04:37 PM (f9z8R)

Insure or Ensure?

Since we're talking about Hillary, I'd say that regardless of context we should use "Ensure" to show solidarity with the elderly who can no longer handle solid foods.

Posted by: mynewhandle at May 26, 2015 04:40 PM (AkOaV)

224 There is a set speed limit for the degree of turn
you can make vs the speed. The qualified guy was relieved and the
trainee got a black letter.

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at May 26, 2015 04:39 PM (GpgJl)

Two words.
HOLY FCUK!

Posted by: Nip Sip at May 26, 2015 04:40 PM (0FSuD)

225 Yet a Muslim major can go around with a fucking business card stating he's down with Jihad and presenting PowerPoint presentations about how evil the troops are.

What happened to him again?

Oh yeah, he was sent to Ft Hood to be another command's headache.

Posted by: SMFH at it all at May 26, 2015 04:41 PM (OsWis)

226 Lawfull order??? Where is that definitively defined before trial. I will refer you to Lt. Calley ??)

Posted by: Freddyv the Freeloader at May 26, 2015 04:41 PM (FIvdS)

227 Speaking of court martials, when is a deserting piece of shit who slobbed Taliban knobs get his day in court?

Guess a Marine with a bible is more of a threat...
Posted by: SMFH
------------------------

Sgt. Bergdahl served with honor and distinction.

Posted by: Susan Rice at May 26, 2015 04:42 PM (F2IAQ)

228 No Vic, he has not even had his Article 32 hearing yet.

That is in July.

Posted by: SMFH at it all at May 26, 2015 04:43 PM (OsWis)

229 Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 26, 2015 04:36 PM (rDqRv)

I agree with everything here. However, once a direct order was given by the sergeant and refused the officer was in a jam. He had to back up the sergeant no matter how irritating he found the situation.

(I don't think I would like to be that sergeant when it comes time for a performance review - something about "lacking judgment" is likely pending.)

Posted by: Mikey NTH - The Outrage Outlet Buy A Malediction, Get an Imaginary Insult Half Off! at May 26, 2015 04:43 PM (hLRSq)

230 Susan Rice kan suck a stogie

Posted by: Freddyv the Freeloader at May 26, 2015 04:43 PM (FIvdS)

231 I think it was Andrew Jackson, one of the founders
of the Democratic Party who established the Democratic policy of dealing
with Supreme Court decisions that they don't like when he said, "He has
is decision. Let us see him enforce it."

Posted by: Obnoxious A-Hole at May 26, 2015 03:42 PM (QHgTq)
Andrew
Jackson and other early Democrats largely continued the spirit and
viewpoints of the anti-federalists (Thomas Jefferson, James Madison) and
the Democratic Party up until the beginning of the Progressive Era in
the 1890s were staunch limited government/strong currency advocates.
Andrew Jackson did not believe the national bank was constitutional.
The Supreme Court, which during the 1830s still consisted mostly (I
think) of Hamiltonian-type appointees who opposed the concept of
"original intent" or "strict construction" in interpreting the
Constitution, thought the national bank was constitutional. There are
no Constitutional enforcement mechanisms to force the President to do
what the Supreme Court deems legal if it is a Constitutional question
which is why Jackson "got away" with not enforcing a decree from the
Supreme Court (aside from Jackson being extraordinarily popular).
Basically what Thomas Jefferson and other early Anti-federalists
believed was that each branch of the federal government could decide
what was and was not Constitutional. There is nothing in the
Constitution that gives the Supreme Court the sole right of judicial
review and to be final arbiter of what is and is not Constitutional.
John Marshall literally gave himself that extra-constitutional power
although some state governments at the time did have their own courts
decide the constitutionality of some laws which is why when Marshall did
give himself and the Supreme Court this extra-constitutional power that
the Federalists were able to convince their base of supporters that it
was totally okay while the anti-federalists were generally opposed as
they supported what the Constitution actually says rather than what some
judges can interpret it implies.
And by the
way Andrew Jackson was one of the last Presidents who actually believed
in limited government in the Jeffersonian sense of the word so do not
equate Democrats of the 1830s/40s to today's filth. He vetoed a
national highway bill while in office, arguing that nothing in the
Constitution's list of enumerated powers gave the federal government
that power. He was right.

Posted by: Jordan at May 26, 2015 04:43 PM (jsYc/)

232 The appeals court granted Texas the ability to deny drivers licenses or welfare (or any other public benefit the states touch) to illegals including those with paperwork that was issued in violation of an injunction. And to 25 other states who bothered to join the suit. The ramifications will become more visible shortly. So Obama spites the states over it. He already has been and he only has a year and a half left.

Posted by: Lester at May 26, 2015 04:43 PM (2UPXV)

233 Barry has probably Sucked a stogie.

Posted by: Freddyv the Freeloader at May 26, 2015 04:44 PM (FIvdS)

234 Look at the lockdown Hillary has on the Democrat nomination process.

It defies all meaning of the term Democratic.

How the hell is that even natural?

Without an incumbent has the field ever been that narrowed before?

Considering the sheer ego of politicians, how is she able to do this?

This kind of supercontrol is what is in store for everyone.

Posted by: River Guide at May 26, 2015 04:44 PM (RJMhd)

235 There is a set speed limit for the degree of turn you can make vs the speed.
------

Does Amtrak know about this?

Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at May 26, 2015 04:44 PM (F2IAQ)

236 Hillary probably went with a blunt.

Posted by: Freddyv the Freeloader at May 26, 2015 04:45 PM (FIvdS)

237 flounder, thanks for the edumucation.

Hmmm. Still extremely, extremely uncomfortable with any court having anything close to policy-making discretion - which is generally associated with defining the public interest. I suppose in the case of injunctions and stays, there are process, incl. judicial process, considerations engaged that are not strictly speaking policy questions.

But on substantive rulings, no court should, ever, have even a pinky's worth of influence or authority based on its reading of the public interest. That's what legislatures and executives are for.

Posted by: rhomboid at May 26, 2015 04:45 PM (QDnY+)

238 At this point, what difference does it make!!!

Posted by: The parasitic host otherwise known as the American taxpayer at May 26, 2015 04:45 PM (48QDY)

239 I agree with everything here. However, once a direct order was given by the sergeant and refused the officer was in a jam. He had to back up the sergeant no matter how irritating he found the situation.

(I don't think I would like to be that sergeant when it comes time for a performance review - something about "lacking judgment" is likely pending.)
Posted by: Mikey NTH - The Outrage Outlet Buy A Malediction, Get an Imaginary Insult Half Off! at May 26, 2015 04:43 PM (hLRSq)

No I get that. I am just saying that I'm pretty high up in my Unit and I think I have a pretty good idea what's going on all the way down the line. And while I do NOT micro manage my Chiefs at all, on really important things, they come to me before they were to take a such a serious step. For it to have gotten that far, the Chain of Command broke down somewhere.

Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 26, 2015 04:46 PM (rDqRv)

240 I make it a point to re-read Liddell-Hart's 'Strategy' every year or so.
Posted by: troyriser at May 26, 2015 04:03 PM (XHR9b)
---
If we're going completely OT, I'd like to give a fist-pump to Liddell-Hart's "The Rommel Papers".

Posted by: All Hail Eris at May 26, 2015 04:46 PM (jR7Wy)

241 This whole administration, along with their minions, can suck a neuk, neuc, er, a big one.

Posted by: Freddyv the Freeloader at May 26, 2015 04:47 PM (FIvdS)

242 206
@191

Another video of that says it's the Kitty Hawk.

Posted by: Nip Sip at May 26, 2015 04:34 PM (0FSuD)

Could be. Kitty Hawk was not decommissioned until 2009 so the F-18s were out then. Still a modern carrier.

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at May 26, 2015 04:47 PM (GpgJl)

243 I should be clear that Jackson vetoed a federal highway bill pertaining to what was only a local-single state issue and because the United States still had a national debt to pay off. If it was a national (coast-to-coast) type of project as opposed to a local or state level Jackson, like Jefferson, would have supported that.

Posted by: Jordan at May 26, 2015 04:48 PM (jsYc/)

244 In those carrier ops videos there is one on 'pitching deck' flight ops that is worth the fifteen minutes.

Posted by: James Kruptstone at May 26, 2015 04:48 PM (nMu6r)

245 I'll see your 2 judges, and raise 10,000 bureaucrats.

Posted by: Texas Hold'em (Presidential Poker) at May 26, 2015 04:48 PM (+jijM)

246 Considering the sheer ego of politicians, how is she able to do this?

"Black" files.

Posted by: rickb223 Straight, Conservative Clinger at May 26, 2015 04:48 PM (t4NMo)

247 He should have also written The Romney Paper. This was mistake, that was a fvckup, and this was just stupid.

Posted by: The Great White Snark at May 26, 2015 04:49 PM (vk+Kb)

248 Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 26, 2015 04:46 PM (rDqRv)

Again - agreed.

"Sergeant - why did you take this step without consulting with someone else first? JAG now has to come in here and interview all witnesses. Did you really want to spend your time talking to JAG officers about whatever they decide to talk about?"

Posted by: Mikey NTH - The Outrage Outlet Buy A Malediction, Get an Imaginary Insult Half Off! at May 26, 2015 04:50 PM (hLRSq)

249 Lester, not to drill too deeply here, but how does the federal ruling on CA's Prop 187 (which negated the referendum to deny welfare benefits to illegals - yes, folks, CA easily passed such a proposition in living memory) related to this new ruling?

You mentioned that it gives TX and participating states the right to deny various benefits to illegals - but perhaps that only concerns the specific limited group of illegals who have obtained some kind of status under the disapproved executive order?

Posted by: rhomboid at May 26, 2015 04:51 PM (QDnY+)

250 228
No Vic, he has not even had his Article 32 hearing yet.

That is in July.

Posted by: SMFH at it all at May 26, 2015 04:43 PM (OsWis)

I had remembered something on it. Maybe it was that they had decided to court marshal him.,

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at May 26, 2015 04:51 PM (GpgJl)

251 OT:
Got a question for y'all, I have stopped two people from going into neighbors trash cans. I understand "dumpster diving" and scrap collecting, but is it really ok to rip open trash bags? Family argument about this one....oh and alot of the trash gets blown around the neighborhood to boot.
Opinions welcome!

Posted by: FCF at May 26, 2015 04:52 PM (kejii)

252 Still extremely, extremely uncomfortable with any court having anything close to policy-making discretion - which is generally associated with defining the public interest

Wait 'till see the fun that'll ensue when some municipal or state employee pension fund goes backrupt and in response to the inevitable lawsuits from retirees, some judge orders to state to pay, only there's no money, and then here come the contempt charges, and oh, it'll be just WONDERFUL.

Posted by: OregonMuse at May 26, 2015 04:52 PM (I8YZX)

253 NGU: The OFFICER is commissioned for a reason, I've been out for a while, but anything less than a capt. (in the Air Force) better have his ducks in line or the Chief Master will kick him in the buttocks. Newbies are learning, unless they are really arrogant assholes.

Posted by: Freddyv the Freeloader at May 26, 2015 04:53 PM (FIvdS)

254 246. Maybe she has videos. ugh.

Posted by: River Guide at May 26, 2015 04:53 PM (RJMhd)

255 I had remembered something on it. Maybe it was that they had decided to court marshal him.,
Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at May 26, 2015 04:51 PM (GpgJl)

King Putt will pardon him. I can almost guarantee it.

Posted by: Bob's House of Flannel Shirts and Wallet Chains at May 26, 2015 04:53 PM (vgIRn)

256 235 Does Amtrak know about this?

Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at May 26, 2015 04:44 PM (F2IAQ)

Yes, and 107 mph is way above that limit and almost certainly had to be intentional or gross misconduct.

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at May 26, 2015 04:54 PM (GpgJl)

257 Wait 'till see the fun that'll ensue when some municipal or state employee pension fund goes backrupt and in response to the inevitable lawsuits from retirees, some judge orders to state to pay, only there's no money,...
-----------------

Not really a problem, is it? I mean, the municipality declares bankruptcy, creditors get in line, assets divided up.

Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at May 26, 2015 04:54 PM (F2IAQ)

258 Got a question for y'all, I have stopped two people from going into neighbors trash cans. I understand "dumpster diving" and scrap collecting, but is it really ok to rip open trash bags? Family argument about this one....oh and alot of the trash gets blown around the neighborhood to boot.
Opinions welcome!

In Texas, once it hits the curb, it's public property. Used to do trash detail for a private investigator. One or two nuggets for a ton of trash.

Posted by: rickb223 Straight, Conservative Clinger at May 26, 2015 04:54 PM (t4NMo)

259 Yep, pretty amazing that one of the two major parties in the US, with no incumbent, essentially has no contest for its presidential nomination.

Nice summary indicator of how lost and degraded the Dems are. Given all the relevant facts and context, there is no reason for the Haggard Queen to be a presumptive nominee. Yet the Dem party, and most of the electorate, and most of the institutions shaping that part of the electorate (press, etc.) are all so degraded that this spectacle proceeds.

Imaginea GOP aspirant so soaked in corruption and actual failure in office even being considered for the presidential bid, much less being the de facto favorite.

Posted by: rhomboid at May 26, 2015 04:54 PM (QDnY+)

260 Hillary to Bill "You kiss the asians and blacks and I will kiss the mexicans and jews and we will win the white house as often as we choose!" Hillary now wins easy! And by the way what are the republican candidates going to if minorities start demonstrating against them at every campaign stop? Remember in 2006 when immigration demonstrations put a million people in the streets of LA and 500,000 in chicago ny and dallas along with many hundreds of thousands in other cities all on the same day. They only stopped when told they were scaring white people it is now time they started scaring white republicans again!

Posted by: captain*arizona at May 26, 2015 04:54 PM (f9z8R)

261 That is what the Article 32 hearing is for.

To decide if the evidence is enough to bring to a court martial.

Sorta like a grand jury.

And no, that has not happened yet.

And no, he's not in custody.

Maybe his dumb ass drowned in the floods.

Posted by: SMFH at it all at May 26, 2015 04:55 PM (OsWis)

262 The OFFICER is commissioned for a reason, I've been out for a while, but anything less than a capt. (in the Air Force) better have his ducks in line or the Chief Master will kick him in the buttocks. Newbies are learning, unless they are really arrogant assholes.
Posted by: Freddy
----------------------

The company-grade officers in my outfit wisely showed a lot of deference to our Sgt Major.

Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at May 26, 2015 04:56 PM (F2IAQ)

263 They probably put George Stephanapolous in the "play room" and then leave the cameras rolling.

Posted by: River Guide at May 26, 2015 04:56 PM (RJMhd)

264 Overwhelmed sock off.

Posted by: Golfman at May 26, 2015 04:56 PM (48QDY)

265 Amnesty? Ha! We don' need no steenking amnesty!! *pockets 0Bama/DNC $$, sips from gov't-supplied beer, fills out California voting ballot*

Posted by: Juan Rodriguez at May 26, 2015 04:57 PM (sUMfc)

266 IAANM SC has always denied welfare and other benefits to illegals and still does.

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at May 26, 2015 04:58 PM (GpgJl)

267 Thanks Rickb223,
I can accept that, but I do think I will be spreading a liberal amount of my dog's errr *produce* in amoungst the bags now.

Posted by: FCF at May 26, 2015 04:59 PM (kejii)

268 Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at May 26, 2015 04:58 PM (GpgJl)

Perhaps. But the ninos are citizens.

Posted by: Golfman at May 26, 2015 04:59 PM (48QDY)

269 Rhomboid it's chilling, and probably proof that something highly unnatural is going on and yet very few are pointing it out.

Posted by: River Guide at May 26, 2015 04:59 PM (RJMhd)

270 Got a question for y'all, I have stopped two people
from going into neighbors trash cans. I understand "dumpster diving" and
scrap collecting, but is it really ok to rip open trash bags? Family
argument about this one....oh and alot of the trash gets blown around
the neighborhood to boot.

Opinions welcome!

In Texas, once it hits the curb, it's public property. Used to do
trash detail for a private investigator. One or two nuggets for a ton of
trash.

Posted by: rickb223 Straight, Conservative Clinger at May 26, 2015 04:54 PM (t4NMo)

Yeah, I don't care about legal. If people in the neighborhood are tearing open trashbags, and throwing it around the neighborhood, I'd move to a different neighborhood, because I don't want to live among savages. If I had family members who condoned it, I would get new family members.

Posted by: BurtTC at May 26, 2015 04:59 PM (TOk1P)

271 SC EBT requirements

Eligibility Requirements

South Carolina SNAP is for low-income families living in South
Carolina. The program requires applicants to meet certain program
requirements:

Be a U.S citizen or a qualified alienBe a resident of South CarolinaHousehold income must be below income limitHousehold resources must be within resource limit for the program

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at May 26, 2015 05:00 PM (GpgJl)

272 SMDH why can't you STFU, you little momzer!!

Why? WHY didn't I use birth-control or abortion?!?

Posted by: captain*arizona's mom at May 26, 2015 05:00 PM (sUMfc)

273 WTF is it any court's business or competence to even use the concept "public interest"? That is not their ambit, that is not their expertise, that is not their actual charge under the constitution.

The four elements considered for an injunction are likelihood of success on the merits, irreparable harm, public policy and a balancing test between the parties.

The first two are usually the most important, and must generally be successfully presented in every injunction case. The last two often go along for the ride, but can be important in some circumstances.

Posted by: Blacksheep at May 26, 2015 05:01 PM (bS6uW)

274 A Good SM will have the troops willing to walk thru Hell for him. This does not seem up to the task, but I am not in the story, You know?

Posted by: Freddy the Freeloader at May 26, 2015 05:02 PM (FIvdS)

275 The company-grade officers in my outfit wisely showed a lot of deference to our Sgt Major.
Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at May 26, 2015 04:56 PM (F2IAQ)

It's about respect both ways. I have a great relationship with my Master Chief.

Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 26, 2015 05:02 PM (rDqRv)

276 people in the neighborhood are tearing open trashbags, and throwing it around the neighborhood

You got people doing it for free? We have to pay Waste Management for that.

Posted by: SpongeBobSaget at May 26, 2015 05:02 PM (zauWW)

277 Sorry, public policy = public interest. Also, by balancing test between the parties they mean a comparison of what harm will be done to the party being enjoined if the injunction is granted vs. what harm will occur to the movant if it is not granted.

Posted by: Blacksheep at May 26, 2015 05:04 PM (bS6uW)

278 You got people doing it for free? We have to pay Waste Management for that.
Posted by: SpongeBobSaget

LMAO, I called to ask them since we cannot get them to pick up anything but their fancy automatic trash cans!

Posted by: FCF at May 26, 2015 05:06 PM (kejii)

279 I'm in favor of appointing TFG to the International Court of LGBTQ Rights, and giving him the chance to be productive.

Oh wait, that's not what we're voting on?

Posted by: MTF at May 26, 2015 05:07 PM (FCsIb)

280 The Department of Homeland Security is now accepting employment authorization applications for certain H-4 dependent spouses of H-1B visa holders.

In February, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) Director Leon Rodriguez announced that, come May, the Obama administration would be extending employment authorization eligibility to a category of immigrant previously ineligible to work in the U.S. dependent spouses of H-1B immigrants.

???

There are no jobs, no good jobs, and Fredo and the progressives want to give more away? Why?

Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 26, 2015 05:07 PM (rDqRv)

281 Precedent Obama will completely ignore this ruling and any subsequent Supreme Court ruling - the same way the EPA and the IRS completely ignore rulings against them. Obeying the law is something conservatives do - not something progressives do. Here is the thing - criminals don't care what the law is - they're gonna do what they do. If you refuse to stop them with force - nothing will stop them.

If impeachment is off the table what is going to be done to this regime? Is it going on Obama's permanent record? Will he get a sternly worded letter of reprimand? Perhaps the GOPe will give him Double secret probation.

Posted by: An Observation at May 26, 2015 05:08 PM (Xqhl+)

282 I have a Nephew that was at Camp David under Clinton, "Mikey Wunderfull" still keeps on touch.
A good Sgt. Major keeps EVERYTHING on line. Unfortunately, It is like all professions, and we few Warriors left in the upper echelon.

Posted by: Freddy the Freeloader at May 26, 2015 05:08 PM (FIvdS)

283 Number one trend on Twitter?

Thick Girl Appreciation Day. Big booties of color

Posted by: Thunderb at May 26, 2015 05:08 PM (zOTsN)

284 >>is it really ok to rip open trash bags?

No. If I leave old chairs/furniture/etc on the corner, people always take it. But I have never seen anyone go through a trash bag.

Of course, if you put your trash out the morning the trash people come (and they come to my house around 830am usually) you probably won't have that problem either.

Posted by: Lea at May 26, 2015 05:08 PM (lIU4e)

285
Here's hoping.

----

Awwwwwww.... ins that cute..... you thinking Obama is gonna listen to the courts at all.

Posted by: fixerupper at May 26, 2015 05:10 PM (8XRCm)

286 As long as we keep bashing Democrats, we can avoid the truth about Republicans.

(Psst--- it's all kabuki.)

The truth is that the two parties (sic, it's one) agree on all the basic issues, and they love the divide-and-conquer strategy.of illegal immigration. Why win the hearts and minds of Americans when you can hypenate them out of existence?

Posted by: Jeff Gannon/Reggie Love at May 26, 2015 05:10 PM (gP1eR)

287
This will insure the hispanic vote for hillary she now wins easy in 2016 as 5,000,000 minority kids will have turned 18 voting age and another million republicans will have died 2016 slogans democrats citizenship! republiscum we will deport your family!
Posted by: captain*arizona

Now this is a Hector post.

Note the garbled phrasing and overwrought language. And that unmistakable eau de Serb that reminds one of an old sneaker full of warm sauerkraut.

Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at May 26, 2015 05:11 PM (kdS6q)

288 Posted by: Lea at May 26, 2015 05:08 PM (lIU4e)

I used to live in a state that charged a bottle deposit -- $.05 a can, refundable if you returned them.

In the city I lived, there were a fair amount of homeless people.

They would go through the garbage can, rip open bags, go through the recycling... everything. Looking for cans and bottles (and probably paper with your social security number on it to steal your ID, although I don't know that part for sure).

They'd sometimes leave the bags ripped next to the cans, and the garbage men would just leave the bags there.

Was kind of a problem.

Posted by: mynewhandle at May 26, 2015 05:12 PM (AkOaV)

289 Yeah, I don't care about legal. If people in the neighborhood are tearing open trash bags, and throwing it around the neighborhood,

Yeah. That's no bueno. We would have to grab the bags, go back to the office, go thru them, then put them in OUR dumpster. That's what the client paid for. Usually in divorce cases.

Posted by: rickb223 Straight, Conservative Clinger at May 26, 2015 05:12 PM (t4NMo)

290 FCF: "I understand 'dumpster diving' and scrap collecting, but is it really ok to rip open trash bags?"

I don't know what's legal, but I have an expectation of privacy even for my trash. Go to the dump and scavenge there. Granted, I don't retain my privacy if I've left addresses somewhere in the refuse, but I have a better chance of it.

Now, you may have what I leave out on the curb with a sign that says, "If you want this, it's yours." I have done that on maybe, possibly desirable content that I don't bother taking to Salvation Army or other. Otherwise, hands off. And get off my lawn!

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at May 26, 2015 05:12 PM (1CroS)

291 >>Awwwwwww.... ins that cute..... you thinking Obama is gonna listen to the courts at all.

Probably not but I think it will still slow the flood. If Obama illegally processes some of these illegals then I would think they would remain illegal.

If I'm here illegally I might think twice about coming out of the shadows.

Posted by: JackStraw at May 26, 2015 05:12 PM (g1DWB)

292 Lea, I wish that were the case, they are waiting for the cans to come out, this is the second one in a month and he threatened to rob us and burn my house down. Daughter got the video. We live in a nice neighborhood which is *I assume* why they come here.

Posted by: FCF at May 26, 2015 05:13 PM (kejii)

293 CORRECTED # to "Very" few warriors, I am a peon, but dedimucated to something I thought was indestructible all my life.

Posted by: Freddy the Freeloader at May 26, 2015 05:13 PM (FIvdS)

294 Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at May 26, 2015 05:12 PM (1CroS)

Court ruled anything put out in the trash is free game.

I'm sure a lawyer would know the actual case, but I think it involved cops searching a suspects trash on the curb without a warrant.

But yeah, homeless people are allowed to go through your trash, assuming its placed out at the curb and not in your back yard or something.

Posted by: mynewhandle at May 26, 2015 05:14 PM (AkOaV)

295 Russian authorities want to use prison labor to drive down the costs of holding the 2018 World Cup.
The Russian prison service is backing a bid by Alexander Khinshtein, a lawmaker from the ruling United Russia party, to allow prisoners to be taken from their camps to work at factories, with a focus on driving down the costs of building materials for World Cup projects.

Well I think that is very "Russian" of them?

Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 26, 2015 05:15 PM (rDqRv)

296 And a thank you all, I just couldn't believe this was even a discussion in my house lol!

Posted by: FCF at May 26, 2015 05:15 PM (kejii)

297 A Good SM will have the troops willing to walk thru Hell for him.
----------------

Well this particular guy (RIP) was a strac troop. He was nicknamed "Mr. Clean" because he resembled the guy. No earring, of course, and you would probably would have died an ugly death trying to put one on him.

Anyhow, he was a tough SOB, and walked among the EM as though he was a god..., which in a way he was, in the context that he could quite literally change your life if you gained his attention in any malefactory way.

He was demanding, but fair. On the whole he was respected for being what a Sgt. Major should be. As much as the men avoided any unnecessary contact, no one actively disliked the guy.

Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at May 26, 2015 05:15 PM (F2IAQ)

298 But yeah, homeless people are allowed to go through your trash, assuming its placed out at the curb and not in your back yard or something.
Posted by: mynewhandle at May 26, 2015 05:14 PM (AkOaV)

Don't know about yall but here the curb is city property plus about the first 12 feet of my yard. City right of way.

Posted by: Golfman at May 26, 2015 05:16 PM (48QDY)

299 >>>IRS needs billions more for net security<<<

Have you ever noticed that IRS Commissioner John Koskinen looks like a fcuking alien? And not the illegal kind, the spooky off-planet kind. And he seems to be totes clueless like this is his first close encounter.

Posted by: Fritz at May 26, 2015 05:17 PM (ty633)

300
I have stopped two people from going into neighbors trash cans. I understand "dumpster diving" and scrap collecting, but is it really ok to rip open trash bags?

Real trash pickers tend to not go into bags. Low marginal returns for having to handle week old wet garbage.

Bag rippers tend to be looking for information bills for identity theft or discarded prescriptions.

Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at May 26, 2015 05:17 PM (kdS6q)

301 Blacksheep, you describe the way things are, which may simply reflect the constitutional lawlessness and branch-overlap I decry.

In one of the rulings leading up to the O-care case now being decided at SCOTUS, I believe one of the dissenters offered the astonishing view that deciding against the govt. (i.e. going ahead with the slam-dunk recognition that the law and the legislative history are what they are, and not some imaginary alternatives) was unacceptable because (paraphrasing) "so many beneficiaries would lose their health care coverage".

I think this case was on the merits, not an injunction, but ..... wow.

Congress passes a disastrous law with clear built-in incentives for states (common practice), the states do not behave as hoped, so the govt. just ignores the law and does something anyway, the govt. is challenged on that, and a "judge" decides that implementing the law as clearly worded and incontestably intended would be too harmful, so .... the govt. just gets to do whatever it wants.

This is the sort of policy-making arrogation I have in mind. It quite literally renders the const. structure moot, makes legislation and the language of laws irrelevant, and shifts as much legislative and even executive authority to the judiciary as the judiciary, in its caprice, decides to exercise.

Posted by: rhomboid at May 26, 2015 05:18 PM (QDnY+)

302 Have you ever noticed that IRS Commissioner John Koskinen looks like a fcuking alien? And not the illegal kind, the spooky off-planet kind. And he seems to be totes clueless like this is his first close encounter.
Posted by: Fritz at May 26, 2015 05:17 PM (ty633)

All I know he looks like the kind of guy I want to put my fist in his face

Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 26, 2015 05:18 PM (rDqRv)

303 Posted by: Golfman at May 26, 2015 05:16 PM (48QDY)

Errr... We had an easement or something. I forget what it was called. Basically it went street, small lawn (maybe 3-4 feet wide), sidewalk, then yard.

Trash had to be on the small lawn in a city owned garbage can to get picked up by the machine.

I had to mow the small lawn and shovel snow from the sidewalk, but both were city property.

Where I live now I *believe* that my property ends at the street, but I'm not sure to be honest. No sidewalks here though.

Posted by: mynewhandle at May 26, 2015 05:18 PM (AkOaV)

304 "Congress passes a disastrous law with clear built-in incentives for states (common practice), the states do not behave as hoped, so the govt. just ignores the law and does something anyway, the govt. is challenged on that, and a 'judge' decides that implementing the law as clearly worded and incontestably intended would be too harmful, so .... the govt. just gets to do whatever it wants."

It's the little-noticed But Fairness clause of the Constitution.

Does that thing ever have emanations. And penumbras to die for!

Posted by: torquewrench at May 26, 2015 05:20 PM (noWW6)

305 >>FCF

That sucks. It seems like you could report them for the threat, or littering or breaking county/city code (I know we have rules about trash set out and how it has to be handled although ours aren't too strict).

If I see somebody making a mess I am going to report them, regardless.

I'm amazed that stealing trash is still allowed considering the potential for theft of identity...

Posted by: Lea at May 26, 2015 05:21 PM (lIU4e)

306 mynewhandle: "Court ruled anything put out in the trash is free game."

Yeah, I don't know the law here, but I think the law is an ass on this one. I simply disagree with the decision.

If someone with a warrant comes to my house to acquire "evidence", then that's one thing. Everyone and his brother, including Authority Without A Warrant, scavenging even my identifiable refuse is another.

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at May 26, 2015 05:23 PM (1CroS)

307 On the dumpster-diver issue:

Bear in mind that a lot of ostensible dumpster divers and trash can rummagers are members of burglary rings, who are using this "harmless and legal" practice to quietly case the surrounding structures for later visits.

Sharp beat cops in some jurisdictions will bring up creating-a-nuisance or disturbing-the-peace statutes to move these guys along for just that reason.

Posted by: torquewrench at May 26, 2015 05:24 PM (noWW6)

308 Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at May 26, 2015 05:23 PM (1CroS)

Yeah. I shred everything before I toss it. Just in case.

I think identity theft online is a more realistic threat, but I don't put anything with my social or any other identifying information (bank account info, utility bills, etc) in the trash without running it through a shredder first.

Posted by: mynewhandle at May 26, 2015 05:26 PM (AkOaV)

309 Shred, shred, shred. Works for the Clintons.

Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at May 26, 2015 05:26 PM (F2IAQ)

310 >>
Thick Girl Appreciation Day. Big booties of color

Holla!

#uppitythickhurlzunite

Posted by: Michelle Obama's Landing Strip at May 26, 2015 05:27 PM (heJs4)

311 JackStraw, your point actually has much wider implications on the "what is to be done" side of the illegal immigration crisis.

As AZ's experience with their own law showed, and as many more serious and reasonable people here recognize, there is tremendous leverage and impact from any - any - actual enforcement of immigration laws. That is, what some (wrongly) term a gigantic, unfixable, complex challenge is anything but.

Illegal immigrants are mostly rational actors. Almost platonic ideals of rational actors, from an economics perspective. They will self-deport when that's what the incentives suggest. Flat economy, or actual enforcement of laws, will do the trick. The "shadows" are just the lawless space created by the conscious abandonment of the rule of law. That space vanishes the instant the country decides it does.

Posted by: rhomboid at May 26, 2015 05:27 PM (QDnY+)

312 Posted by: torquewrench at May 26, 2015 05:24 PM (noWW6)

The homeless guys where i lived seem to know the law inside and out. I saw a cop challenge a lady with no teeth one time and she started quoting the law and the SCOTUS ruling.

I thought it was hilarious, to be honest.

But yeah, the cops tried to shoo the homeless people away whenever they could.

Posted by: mynewhandle at May 26, 2015 05:27 PM (AkOaV)

313 Where I live now I *believe* that my property ends at the street, but I'm not sure to be honest. No sidewalks here though.
Posted by: mynewhandle at May 26, 2015 05:18 PM (AkOaV)

Most I've seen in NC are something like 60 foot right of ways with 36 foot wide streets. I guess the extra 12 on each side are for utilities and etc.

Posted by: Golfman at May 26, 2015 05:27 PM (48QDY)

314 Also, you wouldn't believe how many people will go buy something like costly new electronics and then leave the packaging sitting out at curbside for collection.

That's a big flashing neon sign that says COME STEAL OUR SHIT.

Posted by: torquewrench at May 26, 2015 05:28 PM (noWW6)

315 Shred, shred, shred. Works for the Clintons.

Burn, baby, burn.

Posted by: rickb223 Straight, Conservative Clinger at May 26, 2015 05:28 PM (t4NMo)

316 Just got here...
I have no doubt the administration will ignore the injunction as it has to date.
^..^(___)~~~

Posted by: Cheshirecat at May 26, 2015 05:29 PM (e8vZc)

317 I'm amazed that stealing trash is still allowed considering the potential for theft of identity...
Posted by: Lea at May 26, 2015 05:21 PM (lIU4e)

But where would the Mexicans get those pesky SSN's?

Posted by: Golfman at May 26, 2015 05:30 PM (48QDY)

318 Nood Barky telling us how great he is.

Posted by: Buzzsaw at May 26, 2015 05:30 PM (wrS2o)

319 Also, you wouldn't believe how many people will go buy something like costly new electronics and then leave the
packaging sitting out at curbside for collection.

That's a big flashing neon sign that says COME STEAL OUR SHIT.

Winner winner chicken dinner!!

Posted by: rickb223 Straight, Conservative Clinger at May 26, 2015 05:30 PM (t4NMo)

320 >>Illegal immigrants are mostly rational actors. Almost platonic ideals of rational actors, from an economics perspective. They will self-deport when that's what the incentives suggest. Flat economy, or actual enforcement of laws, will do the trick. The "shadows" are just the lawless space created by the conscious abandonment of the rule of law. That space vanishes the instant the country decides it does.

Which is why I am a proponent of the dusty old fashioned idea of enforcing the law.

Posted by: JackStraw at May 26, 2015 05:31 PM (g1DWB)

321 314 Also, you wouldn't believe how many people will go buy something like costly new electronics and then leave the packaging sitting out at curbside for collection.

That's a big flashing neon sign that says COME STEAL OUR SHIT.
Posted by: torquewrench at May 26, 2015 05:28 PM (noWW6)

Right-o. That's why my big purchase boxes go in the dumpster at work.

Posted by: Golfman at May 26, 2015 05:32 PM (48QDY)

322 mynewhandle: "Yeah. I shred everything before I toss it. Just in case."

Good tip and I do that already. There's still a risk I miss something, though. It's a real nuisance because so much is labeled specifically for tracking. Shipping boxes have at least two tracking labels and usually a packing list, for example. Mail? Even if I remove the address, the content is evident and the scavenger just notes the address.

Shredding is a must but I can still miss something... especially the stuff I may not know is even there.

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at May 26, 2015 05:33 PM (1CroS)

323 Right-o. That's why my big purchase boxes go in the dumpster at work.

Posted by: Golfman at May 26, 2015 05:32 PM (48QDY)

I just put them over by my asshole neighbor's trashcan.

Posted by: Colorado Alex at May 26, 2015 05:33 PM (wImdA)

324 Posted by: Colorado Alex at May 26, 2015 05:33 PM (wImdA)

Heh. Glad I came back. Mine would have to go down the street a bit.

Posted by: Golfman at May 26, 2015 05:38 PM (x5cWD)

325 Remember, the whole reason for the illegal immigrants being here is the Democrats want more votes. I suspect that they realize they are vulnerable to losing the black vote and want replacements. How long can you expect the KKK + NAACP coalition to hold together?

Posted by: An Observation at May 26, 2015 06:05 PM (Xqhl+)

326 "Blocking enforcement of the amnesty..."

WTF?! 'Blocking enforcement of not-enforcing the laws...'

How 'bout the PYUS does not have the authority to grant blanket pardons for unknown persons violating any law.

Posted by: Burnt Toast at May 26, 2015 08:46 PM (NaeCR)

327 The Administration claims it is merely allowing immigration officers to apply routine "prosecutorial discretion" on a case by case basis not to deport illegals. But the court noted that if this were true "we would expect to find an explicit delegation of authority" to implement the Obama rule -- "a program that makes 4.3 million otherwise removable aliens eligible for lawful presence, work authorization, and associated benefits -- but no such provision exists."

Posted by: Islamic Rage Boy at May 26, 2015 09:34 PM (e8kgV)

328 Texas passing law that allow illegals to remain and provides them ability to get in state tuition rates is not contradictory to Texas opposition to similar illegal amnesty?
Posted by: Cruzinator at May 26, 2015 03:46 PM (8cSVB)

No, most Texans strongly oppose amnesty and automatic citizenship for those born here.

However, most of us have worked with illegals in one way or another and we have compassion for their plight. If I lived in Mexico and had any ambition, I would flee it, too.

The benefits of in-state tuition far outweigh the costs of paying them welfare and medical care. On Monday, we're attending the high school graduation of young man that we helped. I'll call him Joshua and he was awarded a full merit-based scholarship to SMU.

Joshua was born here but his parents fled the cartels in Monterrey and came here on work visas. Now, everyone in the family is legal and they vote Republican.

We would prefer to complement in-state tuition with a guest-worker program, but we'll take what we can get in the current political environment.

Posted by: Michael the Hobbit at May 28, 2015 01:22 PM (0RdKg)

Processing 0.04, elapsed 0.0446 seconds.
15 queries taking 0.0155 seconds, 337 records returned.
Page size 178 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.