Can a Judge do that?

[outsidethebox]

I don't know anything about the power Judge's hold. I know they have blocked several orders from the president with the latest being sanctuary cities receiving money from the government. I have two questions, when did judge's get the power to overturn a presidents order, and why didn't any judge's block Obamacare? Obamacare seems more of a infringement on the rights of the citizens of the US. I'm asking because I really don't know.

And what kind of precedence is this sending? Will the next democrate president be blocked by right leaning judge's. I find this kind of scary!

[/dev/null]

#1: 1787

#2: Obamacare was passed thru Congress, not Presidential order. Granted it was a terrible piece of legislation rammed thru on a parliamentary trick, but still Congressional legisltation.

 

As Congress continues to cede it's authority to the Executive branch we will see more and more of judges appointed by one party fighting orders issued by Presidents of the other party, until our Government is run via Regulation, Executive fiat, and Judicial oversight of the Executive branch by judges appointed by the Executive branch

 

Forward!

Edited April 26, 2017 by /dev/null

[outsidethebox]

Thanks Dev, can a judge block legislation thats been approved by congress?

[DC Tom]

I don't know anything about the power Judge's hold. I know they have blocked several orders from the president with the latest being sanctuary cities receiving money from the government. I have two questions, when did judge's get the power to overturn a presidents order,

 

Marbury v. Madison, basically. 200+ years ago.

 

 

and why didn't any judge's block Obamacare? Obamacare seems more of a infringement on the rights of the citizens of the US. I'm asking because I really don't know.

 

Because the ACA wasn't challenged on any point that was technically illegal or unconstitutional, except on states' right grounds with respect to forcing the states to set up exchanges, which is why some 2/3 the states use the federal exchange. (The Little Sisters of the Poor contraception case has yet to be heard, of course.)

 

 

And what kind of precedence is this sending? Will the next democrate president be blocked by right leaning judge's. I find this kind of scary!

 

That the courts can block an executive order is a long-standing precedent (google "Truman steel industry" for an example). That they're blocking actions not on points of law, but on points of political doctrine, is the scary part. Too many people want to use the courts to rewrite laws they disagree with, rather than actually legislate (because it takes too long.)

Thanks Dev, can a judge block legislation thats been approved by congress?

 

Yes, if it's unconstitutional. Again, Marbury v. Madison.

[outsidethebox]

Thanks Tom

[Tiberius]

At least a judge can't get in the way of Mexico paying for our awesome wall that is going to be built! We will keep them away!

[DC Tom]

[For those of you with gatorman on ignore, ridiculous verbiage removed courtesy of DC Tom-bot, beta version 0.10. You're welcome.]

[This is an automated response.]

 

 

Created by DC Tom-bot, beta version 0.10.

[Keukasmallies]

Yea, I just placed Tiberius on ignore status. The air is clearer already!!

[Tiberius]

Yea, I just placed Tiberius on ignore status. The air is clearer already!!

The worse it gets for Trump the more people put me on ignore

[Nanker]

The House of Representatives should impeach several of the judges on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. They have the power to remove them from office and should do that. They have overstepped their bounds too many times. Instead of having the country ruled by Executive fiat, we have a worse situation where an Appellate court is running the country by Judicial fiat. :thumbs down:

[Bray Wyatt]

The House of Representatives should impeach several of the judges on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. They have the power to remove them from office and should do that. They have overstepped their bounds too many times. Instead of having the country ruled by Executive fiat, we have a worse situation where an Appellate court is running the country by Judicial fiat. :thumbs down:

 

I didn't see where the judge was that blocked this most recent order, I assumed though that it was the 9th circuit, has that been confirmed?

[row_33]

They can find a judge to agree to anything.

[Tiberius]

The House of Representatives should impeach several of the judges on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. They have the power to remove them from office and should do that. They have overstepped their bounds too many times. Instead of having the country ruled by Executive fiat, we have a worse situation where an Appellate court is running the country by Judicial fiat. :thumbs down:

Checks and balances stinks, huh?

[row_33]

The process is fully intended to make progress a slow and deliberate process through Congress.

 

Sometimes it needs a kick in the behind, more often it really hasn't.

 

The best readable history on the process of the Senate is probably Caro's volume on LBJ's years there, and the skills he learned to bend it and later get through legislation as POTUS.

[Koko78]

The House of Representatives should impeach several of the judges on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. They have the power to remove them from office and should do that. They have overstepped their bounds too many times. Instead of having the country ruled by Executive fiat, we have a worse situation where an Appellate court is running the country by Judicial fiat. :thumbs down:

 

Judges can only be impeached and removed for bad behavior, not for being loony libs deciding cases with gatortard levels of illogic. The 9th Circuit is well known for being nuts, and I believe they are still the court most often overturned by the Supreme Court.

 

The whole purpose behind making it incredibly hard to remove judges is so that judges aren't removed because they made an unpopular decision.

[TH3]

The House of Representatives should impeach several of the judges on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. They have the power to remove them from office and should do that. They have overstepped their bounds too many times. Instead of having the country ruled by Executive fiat, we have a worse situation where an Appellate court is running the country by Judicial fiat. :thumbs down:

 

YES!

 

Then the GOP could develop voting laws that specifically pinch minorities unlikely to vote for them, then they could block a SCOTUS candidate for an entire year to get their guy on the bench, then they could get a fringe group in the house to run the country, then they could effectively gerrymander seats to dilute democracy....add it to the list!

[TakeYouToTasker]

 

YES!

 

Then the GOP could develop voting laws that specifically pinch minorities unlikely to vote for them, then they could block a SCOTUS candidate for an entire year to get their guy on the bench, then they could get a fringe group in the house to run the country, then they could effectively gerrymander seats to dilute democracy....add it to the list!

How is it possible that you're not too embarrassed to show your face around here anymore?

[Bray Wyatt]

 

Judges can only be impeached and removed for bad behavior, not for being loony libs deciding cases with gatortard levels of illogic. The 9th Circuit is well known for being nuts, and I believe they are still the court most often overturned by the Supreme Court.

 

The whole purpose behind making it incredibly hard to remove judges is so that judges aren't removed because they made an unpopular decision.

 

Last I heard/saw something like 80% of their cases are overruled by the SCOTUS, that's ridiculous, there is obviously something flawed on their end, I did see that they may perhaps break the court up into two smaller circuits as that one has a huge case load.

 

Side note: I wish you would join our WWE thread in Off the wall, I know you and I would discuss it over on BBMB and we got a couple contributors here since I started the thread

[DC Tom]

Checks and balances stinks, huh?

 

Remember when you called them "obstructionism?"

 

You Democrats are unbelievable hypocrites. How does it not cause you physical pain?

[Koko78]

 

Last I heard/saw something like 80% of their cases are overruled by the SCOTUS, that's ridiculous, there is obviously something flawed on their end, I did see that they may perhaps break the court up into two smaller circuits as that one has a huge case load.

 

Side note: I wish you would join our WWE thread in Off the wall, I know you and I would discuss it over on BBMB and we got a couple contributors here since I started the thread

Did not know there was one here, I shall check it out!

 

I don't know what the percentage is of 9th Circuit cases overturned, but it really would not surprise me if it were as high as 80%.