Monday, February 23, 2015

As Expected: Obama Administration Fighting-ByPassing Temporary Injunction

The Obama administration does not recognize the lawful check on its power brought about by a Republican Congress, a federal judge in Texas and 26 states.
Last week a Texas judge blocked Obama's amnesty program with an injunction because it is unconstitutional. White House spokesman, Josh Earnest, announced the Justice Department would file for a stay. The commissioner for Customs and Border Protection, Gil Kerlikowske, sent an email to agents telling them to ignore the judge's order because the court:
did not enjoin the Secretary's overall prioritization of DHS enforcement resources or the existing 2012 DACA policy.

In itself, the email demonstrates or counters the point that “enforcement” has not been ensued concerning immigration laws and border security laws by the Obama administration since it began in 2009. This is not saying that previous presidential administrations (including GW Bush) ignored to certain levels immigration laws by not enforcing them, but to date, Barack Obama has the worst record.
As the Patriot Post put it:
...Democrats are open to debate, once Obama’s orders are the de facto law of the land.
This is the way the Democrats operate, like Nancy Pelosi put it – first we'll pass it and then read it and debate it.
That is not the way things work in a constitutional republic and a check-and-balance system.
There isn't any “check” or “balance” in the Obama administration. If Congress does not play along with the Obama progressive socialist program – he'll bypass Congress by “interpretation” of the Constitution that fits his agenda. Unfortunately, the Justices of the US Supreme Court are useless in countering his actions and those of the once congressional majority of the Democrats.
Because there are 240,000 people employed at DHS, Congress is expected, by the Democrats, to be funded – no matter what. All it would take is to remove the funding items from the bill that the majority in House and Senate do not want to approve – and then submit to president for signing. If he then does not sign it, which would be the blame upon him instead of Congress for a change – Congress can, if enough votes are given, override the veto.
Congress is not saying they refuse to fund DHS, they are saying that anything in the funding bill that approves funding for Obama's unconstitutional actions, like DREAM Act and now the blanket amnesty for illegal aliens that will be in the millions, will be deleted or DHS will not get their funding bill approved. It is typical game playing in Congress to the tune of blackmail and temper tantrums.
Presidents have the authority to provide stays of executions, pardons, and even amnesty FOR INDIVIDUALS, on a case-by-case basis – not a blanket amnesty for millions of lawbreakers.
It is insane and detrimental to the rule of law and other factors.
CNN announces that Obama vows to abide by immigration court order, yet the Examiner reported that the Justice Department seeks to lift the injunction and the White House announced they will lift it – AND, worse, the administration involved is going to ignore the injunction because Holder's department told them so. FOX News also reported that Obama seeks stay of ruling. The US Supreme Court needs to step in here, but it complains they are backlogged on cases and it will take awhile. And if it does, those illegal aliens who are under the unconstitutional care of President Obama and company will be held in limbo at taxpayer expense. CNN (I called it Communist News Network in 1990s) seems to be either out of touch or so used to making Obama look good they released their usual propaganda.
Presidents cannot decide who stays or who gets deported – they are, by oath of office, required to obey the rule of law. If they want the law to change they must go through the constitutional process. I guess Obama missed that class (like he missed so many sessions while serving in Congress) about constitutional law and what authority the President of the United States and Commander-in-Chief has.
President Obama, time and again, has stated that he believes in abiding by the will of the People; yet 26 states are up in arms over this unconstitutional act, and polls show that they disfavor Obama's immigration policies that does not enforce laws in place and even breaks them whenever Obama's egotism calls for it.
Lies and corruption and unconstitutional acts is the legacy of this administration - and we all now why he has not been brought before impeachment hearings concerning some actions he took, or inactions as in the case of the Benghazi embassy tragedy.
How very sad, because we should be proud that an African American became president, a symbol that racism is steadily being left to history (or should be) - instead of fighting against the corruption, lies and coverups that have come to be too common - watching this administration get away with ethnic and illegal acts as time goes by.
...he shall have Power to Grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.
In addition to providing illegal immigrants amnesty, Obama and administration plan to provide them with benefits as soon as they bypass the immigration laws. The New York Times reported that could be as much as five million people
Everyone should be more angry at those who put this guy in office and did not pay attention to character and personal history.
The audacity of the Obama administration has made a statement via the White House mouthpiece and stated that the court injunction to stop the illegal amnesty will do irreparable harm to national security. Townhall:
Earnest did not explain why or when exactly the 11 million illegal immigrants currently living in the United States suddenly became so much of a national security threat that the Department of Homeland Security had to give them all background checks.
Someone please awaken me from this nightmare.

1 comment:

  1. Obama doesn't recognize the Constitution, so why would he recognize a legal check against his unlawful order?
    And frankly, who cares about the DHS if his law stands? What will they be needed for?
    Oh, I am angry at every liberal and RINO who put Obama in office. Twice! But at this point, it makes no more sense to be angry than impeaching Obama (way too late for that), only to end up with Biden for President, and whomever he would choose for VP.
    I wish I could remember when and why we went away from the President having the most votes, and the VP having the second most. I am sure it was intended to be that way by the founding fathers, just like our Constitution and Bill of Rights.
    Ah well.
    I will just be happy if we actually get to HAVE an election in 2016 (not poisoned by millions of illegal and/or dead voters); and that the results are abided by. I am still worried that we will either have martial law, or civil war, or both.