Axios is out with a piece that reports that Trump could be accepting a view that the US Supreme e Court has indirectly put out a way that Presidential power maybe unchecked by Congress in the area of Immigration and other actions…
We ALL know that Donald Trump’s days in office maybe only another 6 months …
Congress and the Courts take time to do ANYTHING and Trump thru Atty Gen Barr owns the so called Justice Department…
The memo to Trump is from John Yoo, who wrote out how Bush II could get around Congress after 9/11….
Trump HAS hinted that he may try to go his own way on several policy moves that he KNOWS would NOT get thru Congress….
This could ALARMING ….
And MAJOR job for a President Joe B den to untangle….
For 10 weeks after the election?
A President Trump would STILL be office…..
One hopes cooler and more sensible heads will prevail…..
President Trump and top White House officials are privately considering a controversial strategy to act without legal authority to enact new federal policies — starting with immigration, administration officials tell Axios.
Between the lines: The White House thinking is being heavily influenced by John Yoo, the lawyer who wrote the Bush administration’s justification for waterboarding after 9/11.
Yoo detailed the theory in a National Review article, spotted atop Trump’s desk in the Oval Office, which argues that the Supreme Court’s 5-4 DACA ruling last month “makes it easy for presidents to violate the law.”
- The president has brought up the article with key advisers, two Trump administration officials tell Axios.
Yoo writes that the ruling, and actions by President Obama, pave the way for Trump to implement policies that Congress won’t.
- Some could remain in force for years even if he loses re-election.
- Yoo — who next week will be out with a new book, “Defender in Chief,” on Trump’s use of presidential power — tells Axios that he has met virtually with White House officials about the implications of the ruling.
What’s next: The first test could come imminently. Trump has said he is about to unveil a “very major” immigration policy via executive order, which he says the Supreme Court gave him the power to do.
- The order could include some protections for immigrants who traveled to the U.S. illegally as children, something most Americans support.
- That could be a political olive branch to Latino voters, though the Trump administration moved to end the Obama-era Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, which led to the Supreme Court’s involvement.
- The order could also include significant new restrictions on immigration that couldn’t get through Congress but are favored by the president, Jared Kushner and hardline adviser Stephen Miller.
Driving the news: Yoo told Axios that Chief Justice John Roberts’ opinion “sets out a roadmap about how a president can use his prosecutorial discretion to under-enforce the law.”
- The recourse would be if the next president tries to reverse what’s set in motion….
image…Alex Wong / Getty Images
My Name Is Jack says
I noted last week George Wills characterization of Trumps Administration as “gangster.”
I found that very apt.
When Courts are confronted by Major matters that directly and presently present a threat they can act very quickly.(See Nixon’s tapes and the Bush /Gore election of 2000) .
Further, the Supreme Court would likely look on extralegal actions by Trump vis a vis Congress with a clearly concerned eye.
If the Seperation of powers is challenged ?Guess what branch may be next?
My point Jack?
What if says ‘screw’m’!
Too says i can do WTF i want until they kick me out of the White House?
And WHO is actually gonna make me go?
Barr and his/my people?
My Name Is Jack says
I was replying t your statement,
“Congress and the Courts take time to do anything…”
I was simply pointing out that Courts can and have moved quickly.
If someone is going to commit a criminal act as you’re now implying?I would yield to DSDs explanation on this thread.
Democratic Socialist Dave says
No, I think we have to put our faith in the deep state, i.e. career military and civilian executives who have sworn (as have many of us) to uphold and defend the Constitution.
One can still debate on a theoretical or philosophical basis John Marshall’s rationale in Marbury vs Madison (1807), but for the last two centuries almost everyone in government has acceded to the Supreme Court’s judgements.
There have, of course, been exceptions such as Andrew Jackson’s reported response to the Court’s invalidation of the Indian Removal Act (“Mr. Marshall made the law; now let him enforce it!”), but you could only get away with it if you have the support or at least acquiescence of those who work in the Executive Branch — especially, of course, in its military and police branches.
And without insubordination or any direct threats, the military leadership (e.g. Gen. Milley, Chairman of the J.C.S.) has made it clear that they see their duty (and that of their commands) as obeying the Constitution, not the current President.