Texas Politicians Plot Immigration Retaliation Against Obama
(NY Post) – Don’t mess with Texas.
Infuriated with President Obama for allowing up to 5 million undocumented immigrants to stay here legally?, a trio of Texas Republican politicians are plotting retaliation at separate levels of government.
Governor-elect Greg Abbott pledged the state would sue Obama over the executive order, alleging it’s illegal and will cost the border state more money to deal with a likely influx of immigrants through Mexico.
“ We have? ?a president who feels completely unconstrained by the constitution,”? ?Abbott, who already sued Obama 30 times as ?his state’s ?attorney general, said on Fox News Sunday.
Texas Sen. Ted Cruz said the n??ew GOP-led Congress should ?retaliate by ?block?ing? Obama’s executive and judicial nominees in the Senate, which would include Obama’s attorney general pick, Loretta Lynch, the US Attorney for the Eastern District of New York.
“It is a stunning and sad display of a president declining to honor his constitutional obligation to take care that the laws be faithfully executed,” Cruz said on Fox News Sunday.
?”?It would impose real consequences on the president and the administration.”
?Holding up Lynch’s nomination ?might not sit well with many Republicans as the move would likely keep current AG Eric Holder — someone who Republicans loathe? — in office longer?.
Cruz led the effort last year to de-?fund Obamacare through the budget process, which led to a 17-day shutdown that most Republicans acknowledged was a mistake – except for Cruz. ?Asked about the shutdown, he responded: ?“Let me point out we just had a historic election where we won.”
He suggested a similar move to de?-?fund the immigration order by restricting ?money for the Department of Homeland Security. Republicans need to “honor” pledges to voters to block amnesty.
“We need to actually do what we said two weeks ago on the campaign trail,” Cruz said.
In the US House, Rep. Mike McCaul (R-Texas) said they are reviewing various options to block the president. Congress must pass a budget bill by Dec. 11 or risk another shutdown.
“We are not going to shut the government down, but we are going to shut down this president and his actions,” McCaul, chair of the Homeland Security Committee, said on CBS’ Face the Nation.
Democrats and Obama defended his executive action as legal and necessary since the Republicans in the House failed to advance the bipartisan Senate bill. Obama downplayed the move as “restrained.”
“Take a look at the track records of the modern presidency, I’ve actually been very restrained,” Obama said on ABC’s “This Week.” “And I’ve been very restrained with respect to immigration. I bent over backwards and will continue to do everything I can to get Congress to work because that’d my preference.”
His repeated his message to incensed Republicans: “Well my response is pass a bill.”
Found at the Tea Party.
Even if they decide to go through with it, the European Commission has no authority to force Google to comply. Joaquin Almunia, the former EU competition commissioner, spent four years investigating Google at the request of Microsoft.
Obama Brazenly Lies, Stirs Up Ferguson, Justifies Violating the Constitution on ABC News
Barack Obama wants a legislative solution as long as it agrees with his ideology and encourages endless illegal immigration. If not, he will legislate from the White House and then he will lie about it, hoping Americans really are stupid.
In the ABC News video clip at the end of this post, Barack Obama lies and says he didn’t say what he said. He’s not changing immigration law, he’s “prioritizing”, according to him.
In fact, he is absolutely changing the law. He’s halting deportations and deciding who gets amnesty for starters. He clearly promised he wouldn’t.
More video found HERE.
Barack Obama used to teach constitutional law at the law school in which I am presently enrolled. He was by all accounts well-liked by his students, though perhaps somewhat aloof to his then-fellow faculty members. I currently have class three days a week in then-Professor Obama’s old favorite classroom, Room V, and each time I enter I see a photo near the door commemorating his teaching legacy. White House Press Secretaries Jay Carney and Josh Earnest — not to mention the president’s usual media apologists — oftentimes like to remind us “stupid” and inferior plebeians of the president’s uniquely germane academic pedigree. In 2008, in fact, this erstwhile constitutional law scholar sought the presidency in no small part to reverse what he considered an unprecedented usurpation of executive authority away from a complicit Congress. To his credit, earlier in his presidency Obama repeatedly kept his word on the proper bounds of the executive branch/legislative branch tug-of-war, in the context of immigration enforcement — much to the dismay of his largely open-borders and anti-sovereignty donor base. This should not much surprise us; after all, it does not take a constitutional law scholar to make sense of the Vesting Clause of Art. I (“All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States…), the specifically enumerated power delegated by the States to the Congress in Art. I, § 8, cl. 4 to “establish a uniform rule of naturalization…”, and the president’s Art. II, § 3 prerogative to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed”.
And yet, somehow, here we are, with a unilateral amnesty of an unprecedentedly massive scope and scale. In what amounts to a quasi-monarchical temper tantrum following an election night shellacking in which nationwide Republicans — who collectively ran on very little substance other than near-unanimous rejection of precisely this type of ukase — effected a historical repudiation of his party’s agenda, Obama has essentially stuck his middle finger to the voting populace and decided that his “pen” and “phone” will themselves suffice to suspend and rewrite large portions of our codified immigration law. Do not believe what liberals may tell you about there being any kind of presidential precedent for stretching the doctrine of “prosecutorial discretion” this far; as Professor Josh Blackman details, there are very real and substantive distinctions between this amnesty and the unilateral amnesties of some of Obama’s Republican predecessors. Whereas President Reagan’s and H.W. Bush’s amnesties werestopgap measures largely pursuant to the (highly flawed) statutory amnesty of 1986, Obama’s amnesty flies in the face of Congress’s repudiation of the DREAM Act (which directly led to Obama’s similarly lawless and UAC crisis-inducing Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (“DACA”) program), as well as the House’s (proper) decision to kill the Senate’s Gang of Eight “comprehensive immigration reform” bill. In effect, then, whereas Presidents Reagan and Bush may have been acting in the safe “first category” of executive power as described in Justice Jackson’s famous concurrence in the 1952 Supreme Court decision, Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, President Obama is almost certainly in the infamous “third category” of directly defying implied congressional intent. Although a decades-long systemic abdication of congressional power and vitiation of the “nondelegation doctrine” has degraded our separation of powers framework so wildly beyond the original Madisonian/Montesquievian intent as to render a unilateral decree of this nature even plausible enough where its constitutionality is a live question, Obama’s own Office of Legal Counsel concedes in its way-too-“clever” apologia that deferred action of this nature must retain an inherent element of individual case-by-case analysis, and that by coming awfully close to declaring a whole class of illegal immigrants immune from deportation threats the president is skating on very thin ice.
Read it all HERE.
Black congressman on the warpath. Why do we allow asswipes like this to be in congress?
Congressional Black Caucus Leader THREATENS #Ferguson Grand Jury
In an audio interview with WUNC, the new leader of the Congressional Black Caucus called for Darren Wilson to be indicted and prejudiced the Ferguson grand jury.
Former judge and new leader of the Congressional Black Caucus G. K. Butterfield called for the grand jury to indict Officer Darren Wilson in the shooting death of Michael Brown and warned that there would be consequences if the jury “turn their back on justice.”
More to read HERE.