- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Supreme Court Live re Birthright Citizenship and Nationwide Injunctions
Posted on 5/15/25 at 5:42 pm to SammyTiger
Posted on 5/15/25 at 5:42 pm to SammyTiger
Ok, is that how the constitution works?
Well the issue is validity of nationwide injunctions correct?
So if that gets shot down then Trump’s EO stands until they can litigate it.
Well the issue is validity of nationwide injunctions correct?
So if that gets shot down then Trump’s EO stands until they can litigate it.
1
Posted on 5/15/25 at 5:52 pm to EphesianArmor
quote:
Are we pretending the Admiralty Law is not in effect?
And are we still pretending the USA is not in fact a "Corporation"?
I only recognize Moorish sov cits
Posted on 5/15/25 at 6:05 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
I only recognize Moorish sov cits
I'll allow it.
Posted on 5/15/25 at 6:14 pm to EphesianArmor
So, someone explain to me what’s going on. Be nice I’ve been up all night making grilled cheese sandwiches.. yes, I have down syndrome
Posted on 5/15/25 at 6:22 pm to 14&Counting
Probably technically both but the SCOTUS will always punt back to the lower courts in procedural issues if they can
Posted on 5/15/25 at 6:34 pm to GeekedUp
Most welcome
Posted on 5/15/25 at 6:42 pm to 14&Counting
quote:
Well it doesn’t make sense in this day and time. It’s not the 19th century when we needed people to realize Manifest Destiny
There is a mechanism for modifying the Constitution, but it is difficult for a reason. The slope of "it is not the 19th" century or, more apropos, it is not the 18th century now, is practically ice-covered in its lack of friction. This logic can be applied to every tenet of the Constitution. It could be the impetus for a complete rewriting of said document.
I think the administration's signals that it might disregard judicial branch checks on its power was a tactical error. The moment that was given breath, they lost two votes on principle: ACB and JCR.
Posted on 5/15/25 at 6:51 pm to Obtuse1
quote:
I think the administration's signals that it might disregard judicial branch checks on its power was a tactical error. The moment that was given breath, they lost two votes on principle: ACB and JCR.
As it should. Stephen Miller is going to drive the Administration off a cliff. They need an adult in the room to rein him in.
Posted on 5/15/25 at 6:58 pm to Obtuse1
quote:
I think the administration's signals that it might disregard judicial branch checks on its power was a tactical error. The moment that was given breath, they lost two votes on principle: ACB and JCR.
When did this happen?
Posted on 5/15/25 at 7:04 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
I think the administration's signals that it might disregard judicial branch checks on its power was a tactical error. The moment that was given breath, they lost two votes on principle: ACB and JCR.
That could be the case but not absolute.
quote:
As it should. Stephen Miller is going to drive the Administration off a cliff. They need an adult in the room to rein him in.
Why would you say that? He is pushing the envelope to the scotus. What else would you expect him to do? He is one of the smartest constitutional law people out there. The court may not rule in his favor but to say they need an adult in the room is laughable. There is an agenda that the fricking voting public supported. You may disagree and that is fine. Too say he is an infant is disingenuous.
Posted on 5/15/25 at 7:09 pm to hogcard1964
quote:
When did this happen?
While the fruit has not been born yet, IMO the flower has been pollinated. Both ACB (today) and JCR (last week) gave not-so-subtle hints in public about how they feel about the court's check power being limited or circumvented.
Posted on 5/15/25 at 7:23 pm to Warboo
quote:
Why would you say that? He is pushing the envelope to the scotus.
Because intentionally disobeying SCOTUS or even a lower court would be going off the cliff. Maryland gangbanger was an honest mistake with an extenuating circumstance that he was sent to his home country.
Intentionally disregarding the judiciary would be a whole different animal.
quote:
He is one of the smartest constitutional law people out there. The court may not rule in his favor but to say they need an adult in the room is laughable.
Link me to any of his academic writing on constitutional issues. His North Star is politics and policy, not the law. He may have smart lawyers around him, but he is a political animal to his core.
quote:
There is an agenda that the fricking voting public supported
The Founders called this the tyranny of the majority and it is the exact reason we’ve elevated the rule of law over the whims of the populace for centuries. The populace can change the law, but we don’t blow in the wind of whatever the most recently- elected politician says. For a reason.
quote:
You may disagree and that is fine. Too say he is an infant is disingenuous.
He’s not an infant. He’s dangerous because his fealty is to nothing but Trump’s political ambitions. Blatantly disregarding SCOTUS or even a lower-level court would be touching the third rail.
This post was edited on 5/15/25 at 7:27 pm
Posted on 5/15/25 at 7:29 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
He’s not an infant. He’s dangerous because he’s fealty is to nothing but Trump’s political ambitions. Blatantly disregarding SCOTUS or even a lower-level court would be touching the third rail.
The Biden administration announced it was canceling $39 billion in student loan debt due to the changes just two weeks after the Supreme Court knocked down Biden’s signature loan forgiveness program – drawing some skepticism about whether the move was legal.
Posted on 5/15/25 at 7:52 pm to hogcard1964
quote:
The Biden administration announced it was canceling $39 billion in student loan debt due to the changes just two weeks after the Supreme Court knocked down Biden’s signature loan forgiveness program – drawing some skepticism about whether the move was legal.
Whataboutism has zero place in a debate about the Constitution. There are no points for the lesser evil when discussing the fabric of our country. It is a logical fallacy swallowed by a herring of the crimson variety.
Posted on 5/15/25 at 8:02 pm to hogcard1964
quote:
The Biden administration announced it was canceling $39 billion in student loan debt due to the changes just two weeks after the Supreme Court knocked down Biden’s signature loan forgiveness program – drawing some skepticism about whether the move was legal.
You kinda made my point. They got shot down, abided by it, regrouped and tried another avenue. That’s fair game within our constitutional order. The political branches exist to enact policy. It just has to be within the parameters of what the law-deciding branch says. There are mechanisms to change the law if the judiciary has run amock.
Analogy here would be AEA invocation is shot down and they abide by it, staff immigration courts to the max, and fast track exports within existing due process.
No problem if that’s the way it shakes out.
The system has to be bigger and stronger than any one man, moment, or epoch.
This post was edited on 5/15/25 at 8:12 pm
Posted on 5/15/25 at 8:52 pm to Obtuse1
As of June 2023, approximately 43.4 million student loan recipients had $1.63 trillion in outstanding loans, according to the Federal Student Aid website.
"We're delivering as much relief as possible for as many borrowers as possible, as quickly as possible," U.S. Education Secretary Miguel Cardona said.
Biden has vowed to continue pushing student debt relief to as many borrowers as possible following the Supreme Court's decision blocking his earlier plan to cancel hundreds of billions of dollars in debt, and administration officials said they studied the 6-3 ruling in crafting the new plans.
Other administration officials were set to tout the new plans in events across the United States on Monday, including Vice President Kamala Harris in Philadelphia.
"We're delivering as much relief as possible for as many borrowers as possible, as quickly as possible," U.S. Education Secretary Miguel Cardona said.
Biden has vowed to continue pushing student debt relief to as many borrowers as possible following the Supreme Court's decision blocking his earlier plan to cancel hundreds of billions of dollars in debt, and administration officials said they studied the 6-3 ruling in crafting the new plans.
Other administration officials were set to tout the new plans in events across the United States on Monday, including Vice President Kamala Harris in Philadelphia.
Posted on 5/15/25 at 8:57 pm to hogcard1964
he didn't ignore the Supreme Court ruling in any way
The Supreme Court ruled one specific path was illegal. That does not mean that there were not other potential options, which is what the administration did. That is not an example of defying a Supreme Court order.
The Supreme Court ruled one specific path was illegal. That does not mean that there were not other potential options, which is what the administration did. That is not an example of defying a Supreme Court order.
Posted on 5/15/25 at 9:00 pm to SlowFlowPro
Yes it was clearly [D]ifferent.
Posted on 5/15/25 at 9:00 pm to hogcard1964
Holy shite
Posted on 5/15/25 at 9:03 pm to hogcard1964
quote:
Yes it was clearly [D]ifferent.
But if you don’t want to read, why are you on a message board where people write and cite words?
This post was edited on 5/15/25 at 9:04 pm
Page 6 of 12
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News