Seattle
Valued Senior Member
A veto is something that a President can do to a bill submitted to him by Congress. This makes no sense in the case of an executive order as it would mean that the President was vetoing himself.
The Muslim Ban Has Begun!
- Thread starter ElectricFetus
- Start date
so what happens if the president orders something that is unconstitutional? ( as in immediate)
Or
How can an unconstitutional executive order be stopped?
Or
How can an unconstitutional executive order be stopped?
Seattle
Valued Senior Member
Someone with standing has to bring it before a judge and the judge can issue an injunction pending a count date for both sides to present their arguments.
so injunction it is then.... Ok I get it...
Not mistaken but
Unfortunately, while Congress can pass laws to override executive orders, those laws are subject to presidential veto. And even if the Republican-controlled House and Senate somehow decided to defy their party's own president, it's just not all that difficult to imagine Trump exercising his veto power.
There is another way, though. The Supreme Court can declare an executive order to be unconstitutional, which has a rather strong record of precedents. Recent history, for instance, saw the Supreme Court block Obama's executive order to delay deportations of certain undocumented immigrants. Reaching further back, the Supreme Court actually struck down President Lincoln's suspension of habeas corpus, an executive order the president issued during the Civil War. His government ignored the Supreme Court sanction.
more rocky than the moon landscape to get over
Do you think Congress or the Supreme Court want such a bun fight?
No one wants a bun fight... but it may be that there will be no choice in it...
They contain populations that came from such countries - and thus are a source of people of people from such countries. So they meet your criteria. Iran does not.
1) Executive orders are not laws. They may or may not be "delegated legislation" - that would be something a court would decide if the matter came up. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_order
2) They may not conflict with existing law - again, if the matter comes up a court would make that ruling.
Incorrect
Congress can pass laws to override Executive Orders
When these laws come before him it's Congress laws he vitos
Doubtful very
Seattle
Valued Senior Member
Of course Congress can pass a law about anything. When was the last time Congress passed a law overriding an Executive Order?
The more likely course of action would be to find an Executive Order unconstitutional and that would involve the judiciary obviously.
say trump goes even more nutso and starts launching many incursions hunting down terrorists under his bed.
And the body bag count just grows and grows and grows to the point of almost being a sad farce...
say also he repeatedly lies to the pubic about how successful they are
what then?
Does not compute'
Can't find one if one exists
However I was correcting the misunderstanding POTUS was vetoing his own Order by stating POTUS would be vetoing Congress laws which were attempting to OVERRIDE his Order
Agree but as I noted elsewhere would any Court want that bun fight?
Wouldn't the temporary ban be well back in history by the time it gets to the Bench?
Again, in my opinion, the flight of fancy you have just outlined is even less likely to happen than me winning the next Miss Universe contest
Seattle
Valued Senior Member
I don't know what a "bun" fight is. That must be some Australia verbiage.
The court isn't going to looking at the temporary ban. That's what an injunction is for and that court isn't looking at the merits of the constitutionality. If it becomes a more permanent ban, long enough to still be in effect by the time the case makes it to court then a court can address the constitutional issues.
Seattle
Valued Senior Member
What if it turns out that you are the one with the delusions and not Trump?
Kids in school canteen throwing buns at each other
In other words the adults are acting like kids
Injunction is a hold (pause) on the order
After both sides put their cases before the court the court decides
if the pause should be permanent (effectively cancelling the Order) or
cancel the pause allowing the Order to operate
First choice would be subject to appeals keeping the Order paused awaiting further decisions as would appeals to the second choice
By the time the dust settles Barron would be standing to be POTUS
What if it turns out that you are the one with the delusions and not Trump?
Only us in this thread would know
Sure it does. Take Germany - lots of war refugees without status confirmation from their home governments, some becoming documented Germans. And the US has been attacked by terrorists from Germany, traveled through Canada, etc. So if the US lets people immigrate from Germany, they might get some of these people. Just because Germany was careless, see. Likewise Canada and France and Sweden. We can't be too careful, in dealing with these slipshod countries.
But Iran, now, doesn't have anyone like that. So Iran is ok, by your criteria - odd that it's on Trump's list - and Canada is not.