This is amusing, except that some people will actually believe the AP version of the US Constitution.
When a federal judge shot down a Trump administration policy of holding immigrants without bond last December, it seemed like a serious blow to the president's mass deportation effort.
Instead, a top Justice Department official insisted the ruling wasn't binding, and the administration continued denying detainees around the country a chance for release.
By February, the district court judge, Sunshine Sykes, was fed up. Sykes, a nominee of President Joe Biden, accused Trump officials in a ruling that month of seeking “to erode any semblance of separation of powers,” adding that they could “only do so in a world where the Constitution does not exist.”...
Dear Sunshine:
Article Two, Sentence One of the US Constitution gives the President ALL executive (managerial) powers regarding immigration policy. ALL of them.
By the way, Article Three gives the Courts ZERO executive (managerial) powers over immigration policy.
This is a POLICY issue, not a legislative issue. And it most certainly is NOT a judicial issue.
You can try blowing Sunshine up anyone's ass, honey. But not anyone who has read the Constitution.
1 comment:
The propaganda is all Dad29.
While the President has broad managerial authority over immigration enforcement under Article II, plenary power over immigration policy belongs to Congress, not the President.
Additionally, federal courts (Article III) hold significant power to review executive actions for legality.
Article II, Section 1 vests "executive Power" in the President, but this is not an absolute, limitless grant of authority. Congress holds the plenary power to make immigration laws and rules of naturalization. The President’s power is largely derived from authority delegated by Congress through statutes like the Immigration and Nationality Act.
Now, the President has high discretion regarding enforcement—such as setting priorities for deportation and managing the border, and the Courts do not possess executive or "managerial" power.
However, Article III courts hold the power of judicial review, meaning they determine if the executive branch has acted within the scope of authority granted by Congress and the Constitution. So Courts can (and often do) strike down executive immigration actions that violate the law, the Constitution, or statutory authority.
In summary…
The President has vast, but not absolute, discretion regarding immigration enforcement.
The President cannot ignore or bypass federal immigration laws enacted by Congress.
The courts are the final arbiters of whether the executive branch’s actions are lawful.
Post a Comment