Super Dave Loc: Realville, USA

I've had a few deleted for similar curses, or for calling a snowflake "stupid".

It's no biggie. I've been a mod on other boards in the past, and made similar deletions or edits.

eagleye13 Loc: Fl

America has been sooo blessed for electing Trump President.
We were almost down for the count.
We did it! We did it!
Do-it! Just do-it!!! LOLOLOL
https://youtu.be/WJUWdKEKSBI
https://youtu.be/ahkMA6JPOHU
https://youtu.be/eAPv3zIbzmk

straightUp Loc: California

Case No. 18cv0428 DMS : "Order Granting Plantiffs' Motion for Classwide Preliminary Injunction"
https://www.lawfareblog.com/document-federal-judge-orders-government-reunite-families

Trump filed an appeal that went all the way to the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court refused to hear it, which means they allowed the injunction to stand.


1. The separation of children from their parents at the border (under Obama, separation didn't occur until after an initial hearing.)
2. separation for prolonged periods in violation of the 20-day rule (Flores Agreement)
3. no allowances for children under the age of five.
4. not allowing communications between children and their parents.

This injunction does four things...

1. blocks the Trump Administration from separating immigrant parents and children at the U.S.-Mexico border
2. ordered that those who were separated be reunited within 30 days.
3. requires the government to reunite children under the age of five with their parents within 14 days
4. lets children talk with their parents within 10 days.


Now, you might notice that this injunction occurred AFTER Trump signed the executive order to stop the separations, but this only shows the depth of what we are dealing with here. To understand any of it you have to start with the fact that Trump DID introduce policy changes resulting in a significant increase of family separations (At least 2,342 children just between May 5 and June 9) AND and for longer periods of time AND without allowing families to communicate, all of which violates the Flores Agreement.

So naturally, (because we are NOT a nation of barbarians) Trump got a LOT of pressure to reverse these policies... Not just from Democrats but from Republicans too. He even got pressure from his own wife and daughter. So eventually he did what Trump does and right after telling the American people his hands were tied because he had no constitutional authority to change the policy, he changed it anyway (oops), thereby "fixing" the problem he created in the first place and takes a bow.

But it doesn't stop there. Apparently, Trump figured he could sign a policy to get people off his back without actually fixing the issues that people were complaining about as was discovered by the ACLU who found the order riddled with loopholes. So they filed for an injunction to FORCE Trump to stop his vile acts and that's what happened on June 26th.

Note: I'll get to your other questions but I have to break this down. You're last few posts cover way too much considering the detail you are asking for.

straightUp Loc: California

OK... You're right. I was wrong.
I verified the story. Thank you for the CNN article, BTW. I eventually did check several sources and yes, the number was close to 1500 and they were all handed over prior to Trump's zero-tolerance policy. I said "hundreds" because I knew it was more than 200 at least. Obviously, I didn't go through my "due diligence" on this claim. I'll admit that on the issue of immigration it might be easier for me to be caught off-guard and misled by the hatred. I thought it was interesting that you presented a CNN link. I normally avoid CNN because they ARE stoking a fire of hatred. Hatred sells. So it has commercial value. As much as it has political value. Unfortunately.

So, the way I understand it currently, those 1500 children are the ones that haven't responded to periodic checks to see if they're OK and nor have their assigned guardians. It seems the government has literally lost track and the reasons can be varied, ranging from being too scared to report for fear of deportation to just bad people of which there are plenty in our great nation.

And you're right - they all arrived unaccompanied... (which means they were NOT actually separated).

Refugee children are a global problem. Many of them are orphans resulting from war and violence. So, I see this as a slightly different thing as far as what can be blamed. When orphans arrive by themselves what do you do? We're talking about children. Children of immigrants come with parents that can already take care of them (if you just let them work). Or send them back if you must... but together. But orphans? That's a category without easy answers. Under the current process, the choice is to k**l them, send them wherever, imprison them or let them in and find guardians for them, which always presents the risk that the guardians might be wicked.

So, that's why I see the situation differently.

straightUp Loc: California

OK, my turn... How did Obama violate the Constitution? ...And since you said he did it so much that they think it doesn't matter anymore, give me more than just one example, give me three. If he was as bad as you just described that should be easy. OR if you can find one... I'll give you half a point. ;)


I'm counting the refusal to hear his appeals. Off hand, I can think of two rulings by federal judges against the Trump Administration that the SCOTUS refused to hear. The injunction I mentioned a few posts ago and the ruling against Trump's travel ban... it was a federal judge in Hawaii, I can't remember the name.


Oh, I forgot... everyone from Latin America is a rapist and p*******e.


Ugh... you have zero basis for making that accusation.



From the Washington Post...
Attorney General Jeff Sessions is eliminating a requirement that asylum seekers get a full hearing before an immigration judge, part of his effort to cut through a huge backlog of cases in a court system he says is subject to “rampant abuse and fraud.”

So, now that "full hearing" that your dangling in front of me is no longer guaranteed by law but predicated on subjectivity. Nice.

Not every t***sgression I point out is going to be easily explained in official bullet items Joy. Especially, when the politics gets as slimy as it is now. This is how bad people with teams of lawyers take over good republics with gullible citizens.


No, I blame Trump's policies for eliminating the hearings.


First of all, when did Trump "overrule" Sessions? Was is AFTER the court ruling?

Now, think about this for a second... If it was just talk, there wouldn't be any need for the court to issue an order, right? Sessions acted, it wasn't just talk. And think about THIS for second... Who does Session work for? Don't portray this like Trump is some disconnected party who prevented the action... When Sessions acted, Trump was ultimately responsible.



Because I am talking about ANY refugee that comes here, I am referring to ANY refugee-emitting country where U.S. presence does not support immigration services. There are the countries where we have no embassy to start with but that's just Bhutan, Iran and North Korea. But then there are 44 countries, including South Korea, Egypt and Germany where we have embassies that are essentially vacant and nonfunctional.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2018/03/13/south-korea-germany-egypt-these-among-44-countries-dont-have-u-s-ambassador/419438002/






Well, it's good hear you have some virtues. BTW, I never said you weren't interested in the welfare of children.

straightUp Loc: California

...like a turkey shoot.

straightUp Loc: California

heh, heh... you have no idea how active your opposition is right now. You THINK we're sulking because that's what YOU did for 8 years. Little do you know...

JoyV

"So you're actually attempting to equate a child refugee who's parents can't be found and is therefore placed in foster-care with an immigrant child who is forcibly separated from his parents. That's pretty slimy."

No. Not separated from his parents. Separated from the adults falsely claiming to be his parents. Taken from the traffickers and turned over to HHS who then tries to locate actual parents or relatives. Are you a parent? Put yourself in a similar situation. Your child winds up in the hands of child traffickers. The traffickers are apprehended with the child. Would you rather a) the authorities release the child traffickers and turn your child over to them quickly within 20 days despite evidence they are not relatives? Or b) do DNA testing to confirm whether or not the child is theirs, and when they find he is not, to turn him over to HHS where a search is made to locate you, his parent? As a parent and grandparent, I would rather have my child spend the time they needed to find me whether shorter or longer than 20 days, than to have my child handed over to just anyone who lied about being the parent.

"Secondly, what does it matter if the guardian is actually the parent?"

What an appalling thing to say!!!! By using the term "guardian" you make it sound like the person has been given custody by the parent. Now granted, there are parents who care so little for their child that they will sell the child to traffickers. But I do not believe that parents from Central America are inherently any less loving parents than parents from the USA. So I don't believe that is a common occurrence. But by asking the question you obviously are not a loving parent yourself. If you see no reason to try to find the parents, but are happy to turn the kid over without doing a background check or DNA test; then I hope you are never put in charge of any kids.

"The ONLY reason why children are "not separated under Trump" NOW is because unlike Obama, Trump totally ignored the 20-day rule and was separating children for much, much longer, so the courts stepped in to DEMAND a change in policy.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2018/06/27/federal-judge-enjoins-separation-of-migrant-children-orders-family-reunification/?utm_term=.68e481b9a478"

I can't read the article because I refuse to pay for a subscription and without paying, the article is not available. But if it is about the court case where the judge ordered the kids to be turned over to whoever they arrived with and NOT wait for the results of the DNA tests which were in the works (which would mean at most 3 or 4 more days for some); then I think the judge could have granted a stay to give more time for the sake of the kids. I am all for obeying the law. But when doing so puts children at such great risk; it is time for a judge to make a judgement call. No need to overturn the law. Just to grants a 4 day extension. To refuse this sounds like politics is more important than the lives and well being of kids.

I get it that you don't like Trump. I get it that you don't like i*********n l*w enforced. But when kids are involved; can't politics be set to the side for the sake of child safety? Just as if you were to complain that there have been children molested while in processing centers I would not refuse to acknowledge that there are children who have been harmed under the Trump administration zero tolerance policy. I would, and have; demand that ALL adults employed who have access to the children undergo a thorough background check. And any whose background is questionable be fired! I would not put my politics over the safety of children.

JoyV

Yes he did.

JoyV

You wrote, "Case No. 18cv0428 DMS : "Order Granting Plantiffs' Motion for Classwide Preliminary Injunction"
https://www.lawfareblog.com/document-federal-judge-orders-government-reunite-families"

You news link is out of date with the case #18cv428. I've included a link to the court case PDF but here are some pertinent details from pages 1 and 2.

On July 9, 2018, this Court held a status conference, and ordered the parties
to file a joint report on July 10, 2018, “setting forth how many Class Members
have been or will be reunited with their children by the court-imposed deadline,
and how many Class Members may not be reunited with their children by the
court-imposed deadline due to legitimate logistical impediments that render timely
compliance impossible or excusable . . . .” ECF No. 95 at 2. The parties submit this
joint status report in accordance with the Court’s instruction.

I. COMPLIANCE
A. Defendants’ Position
As previously reported to the Court, Defendants have identified 102 children
under age 5 who, upon initial review by the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (“HHS”) were determined potentially to have been separated from a
parent, and who therefore were potentially the children of class members. Upon
Case 3:18-cv-00428-DMS-MDD Document 99 Filed 07/10/18 PageID.1967 Page 2 of 10

18cv428 DMS MDD
further review, and based on the latest available information at the time of filing,
Defendants report the following regarding the reunification scenarios for those 102
children.

Not Eligible For Reunification
• 14 are not eligible for reunification because their parents are not class
members.
o 8 parents had serious criminal history discovered during
background checks (criminal histories identified include child
cruelty and narcotics, human smuggling, a warrant for murder,
and robbery).
o 5 adults were determined not to be the parent of the
accompanying child.
o 1 parent faces credible evidence of child abuse.
• 2 are not eligible for reunification because their parents are not class
members at this time.
o 1 parent has been determined to present a danger to the child at
this time because an adult in the household where the parent
plans to live with the child has an outstanding warrant for
aggravated criminal sexual abuse against a 10 year old girl.
This determination can be reconsidered if the parent identifies a
different living situation.
o 1 parent detained in ICE custody is currently being treated for a
communicable disease. When the parent no longer has a
communicable disease, the reunification process can proceed.
• 10 are not eligible for reunification at this time. They will be assessed
for reunification after they are released from criminal custody,
provided that Defendants are made aware of that release.
o 8 parents are in the custody of U.S. Marshals Service. They will
be assessed for reunification after they are released from
criminal custody and are t***sferred to U.S. Immigration and
Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) custody.
o 2 additional parents are in state or county custody. They will be
assessed for reunification after they are released from criminal
custody, provided that Defendants are made aware of that
release.
• 1 child cannot be reunified at this time because the parent’s location
has been unknown for more than a year. Defendants are unable to
conclusively determine whether the parent is a class member, and
records show the parent and child might be U.S. citizens.

(I will not copy/paste the entire document but have included a link. But note the plaintiffs response to the above list. "Plaintiffs recognize that Defendants cannot yet reunify the parents who are currently being
held in criminal custody. But as to all other Class Members with children under
five, the government is not in compliance with the clear deadline ordered by the
Court. " So they believe children should be released to child abusers, parents who live in the household of a convicted child sexual molester, adults who are NOT the parents or relatives, and a parent who is undergoing hospital treatment for a communicable disease."
https://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/Joint-Status-Report-Regarding-Reunification-July-7-2018.pdf

I used a CNN link because it could not be said it was from a right wing news source. Thanks for admitting to your error. Doing so lets me know you are trying to be reasonable.

JoyV

You wrote, "How did Obama violate the Constitution?"


*Ignoring Federal law requiring that each state be notified when/where refuges are being placed in their state. Article II Section 3
*In direct violation of ACA Law ( Section 36B ) ordered subsidies be paid under Federal Exchange. Article. I. Section. 1; Article II, Section 3.
*Ignored law by taking Iran Deal to UN prior to 60-day review period mandated by Iran Nuclear Agreement Review, and failed to turn over side agreements as outlined. – “he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed,” Article II Section 3
*Ignored Congressional Treaty Powers. Article II Section 1, Article II Section 2
*Operation Choke Point program – Direct infringement on 2nd Amendment.
*Violated statute on “Material Support of Terrorism” by returning top terrorists back to terrorist organizations. Article II Section 3; Dereliction of Duty Article II Section 4
*Violated Appropriations Act (DOD Section 8111) – GAO report; Article II Section 3
*Two Executive actions mandating private health information on patients be turned over to NICS – Violation of HIPPA law.
*Executive Order bypassing Congress on immigration – Article 1 Section 1, ALL Legislative power held by Congress; Article II Section 3; Article I Section 8
*Unilaterally issued new exemptions to immigration restrictions law that bars certain asylum-seekers and refugees who provided “limited material support” to terrorists. – Article 1 Section 1; Article I Section 8 Congress shall have the Power..to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization.
*Issued directive instructing ICE to NOT enforce i*********n l*ws in certain cases. Article 1 Section 1, ALL Legislative power held by Congress; “he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed,” Article II Section 3; Article I Section 8
*Release of convicted i*****l a***ns ordered in direct opposition to law-Article II Section 3
*Expanded executive action for amnesty to i*****l i*******t relatives of DREAM Act beneficiaries. Article 1 Section 1, ALL Legislative power held by Congress; “he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed,” Article II Section 3; Article I Section 8
*Executive action directing DHS that almost all immigration offenses were unenforceable absent a separate criminal conviction. Article 1 Section 1, ALL Legislative power held by Congress; “he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed,” Article II Section 3; Article I Section 8
*Ignoring Law (2006 Secure Fence Act) “he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed,” Article II Section 3
*Used DOJ to ignore section 8 of the V****g Rights Act. ” he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed,” Article II Section 3
*Used DOJ to prevent Arizona and Alabama from enforcing i*********n l*ws. – 10th Amendment
*Information memorandum telling states that they can waive the work requirement for welfare recipients, thereby altering the 1996 welfare reform law. – Article 1 Section 1, ALL Legislative power held by Congress.
Used NLRB to dictate to a business where they can do business. (Boeing Dreamliner Plant). No Constitutional authority to do so.
*NDAA – Section 1021. Due process Rights negated. Violation of 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, and 7th Amendments.
*Executive Order 13603 NDRP – Government can seize anything
*Executive Order 13524 – Gives INTERPOL jurisdiction on American soil beyond law enforcement agencies, including the FBI.
*Executive Order 13636 Infrastructure Cybersecurity – Bypassing Congress Article 1 Section 1, ALL Legislative power held by Congress
*Attempt to tax political contributions – 1st Amendment
*DOMA Law – Obama directed DOJ to ignore the Constitution and separation of powers and not enforce the law. ” he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed,” Article II Section 3
*Dodd-Frank – Due process and separation of powers. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau writing and interpreting law. Article. I. Section. 1
*Drone strikes on American Citizens – 5th Amendment Due process Rights negated
*Bypassed Congress and gave EPA power to advance Cap-n-Trade
*Attempt for Graphic tobacco warnings (under appeal) – 1st Amendment
*Four Exec. appointments – Senate was NOT in recess (Court has ruled unconstitutional yet the appointees still remain)
*Obama took Chairmanship of UN Security Council – Violation of Section 9.
*ACA (Obamacare) mandate – SCOTUS rewrote legislation and made it a tax because there is no Constitutional authority for Congress to force Americans to engage in commerce. SCOTUS has no authority to Legislate or lay taxes. Article I Section 1 & 8.
*Contraceptive, abortifacients mandate violation of First Ammendment
*Healthcare waivers – No president has dispensing powers
*Refuses to acknowledge state’s 10th Amendment rights to nullify Obamacare
*Going after states (AZ lawsuit) for upholding Federal law (immigration) -10th Amendment.
*Chrysler Bailout -TARP – violated creditors rights and bankruptcy law, as well as Takings and Due Process Clauses – 5th Amendment (G.W. Bush also illegally used TARP funds for bailouts)
*The Independent Payment Advisory Board (appointees by the president). Any decisions by IPAB will instantly become law starting in 2014 – Separation of Powers, Article 1 Section 1.
*Congress did not approve Obama’s war in Libya. Article I, Section 8, First illegal war U.S. has engaged in. Impeachable under Article II, Section 4; War Powers Act – Article II Section 3.
*Obama falsely claims UN can usurp Congressional war powers.
*Obama has acted outside the constitutional power given him – this in itself is unconstitutional.
*With the approval of Obama, the NSA and the FBI are tapping directly into the servers of 9 internet companies to gain access to emails, video/audio, photos, documents, etc. This program is code named PRISM. NSA also collecting data on all phone calls in U.S. – Violation of 4th Amendment.
*Directed signing of U.N. Firearms treaty – 2nd Amendment.
*The Senate/Obama immigration bill (approved by both) raises revenue – Section 7. All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives
*Obama altered law – (A president has no authority to alter law) Delayed upholding the Employer Mandate Law (ACA) until 2015 – Individual Mandate will be enforced. A President does not have that authority – Article. I. Section. 1. All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States; The president “shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed” -Article II, Section 3; Equal Protection Clause -14th Amendment.
*Obama altered law – ACA Medicare cuts delayed until 2015. Article. I. Section. 1; Article II, Section 3.
*Obama altered law – Enforcement of eligibility requirements for ACA delayed until 2015. Article. I. Section. 1; Article II, Section 3.
*Obama wavered ACA Income Verification Article. I. Section. 1; Article II, Section 3.
*Obama altered law – Delayed ACA caps on out of pocket expenses until 2015. (when implemented premiums will skyrocket) Article. I. Section. 1; Article II, Section 3.
*Obama ignored judicial order to fulfill legal obligation regarding Yucca Mountain waste. Article II, Section 3
*Waived Federal provision that prevents U.S. From arming terrorist groups – Article I. Section 1; Impeachable under Article III, Section 3.
*Directed State Department HS to ignore law barring entry to U.S. those giving political or charitable aid to known terrorist groups. Article. I. Section. 1; Article II, Section 3.
*Obama shelves part of the ACA Law for Insurers, extending the life of non-qualifying (according to ACA) plans until Jan. 1, 2015. Article. I. Section. 1; Article II, Section 3. Violation of the Take Care Clause, Separation of Powers.
*Obama waved ACA individual mandate for those that lost their insurance. Article. I. Section. 1; Article II, Section 3. Violation of the Take Care Clause, Separation of Powers.
*Obama alters ACA law and exempts companies employing between 50-100 full-time workers from business mandate until 2016. Article. I. Section. 1; Article II, Section 3.
*In total, Obama has unilaterally altered ACA 24 times. Article. I. Section. 1; Article II, Section 3. Violation of the Take Care Clause, Separation of Powers.

JoyV

You wrote, "Oh, I forgot... everyone from Latin America is a rapist and p*******e."

Turning everything into an issue on race might work on liberals and progressives. But it won't work on me. Just because someone who is picked up with a child whose medical examination indicates rape happens to be Hispanic or from Central America; does NOT mean they should be excused!!!! Rapists can be found in any race, religion, income bracket, or political ideology. Laws protecting children from rapists should apply no matter what group the rapist belongs to.

You wrote, "Off hand, I can think of two rulings by federal judges against the Trump Administration that the SCOTUS refused to hear. The injunction I mentioned a few posts ago and the ruling against Trump's travel ban... it was a federal judge in Hawaii, I can't remember the name."

The first I covered two posts ago. The one on the temporary travel restriction might bring us far afield but if you want to pursue it let me know and I will do so in a future post.

You wrote, "{me--I feel the same way if not more that you can make excuses for giving kids to child traffickers, whether for the sex trade or s***e labor!!!!} Ugh... you have zero basis for making that accusation."

While I do not believe it is your intent to have kids turned over to child traffickers. But when you say things like, "And so what if some of the children are accompanied by people unrelated to them?" and approve of court orders which make it impossible to complete background checks and DNA tests on adults who claim they are the parents of a child yet do not know the child's name or age; the implication is that you make excuses for giving kids to child traffickers.

You wrote, "From the Washington Post...
Attorney General Jeff Sessions is eliminating a requirement that asylum seekers get a full hearing before an immigration judge, part of his effort to cut through a huge backlog of cases in a court system he says is subject to “rampant abuse and fraud.”"

I usually take the time to search out the actual words, bills, laws, etc which are alluded to in the news articles you post. I am too tired to make such an extensive search right now. So would you please post what Sessions actually said? So often news articles imply things about a person through misleading statements or partial t***hs. And this is true of both left wing and right wing news.

You wrote, "When Sessions acted, Trump was ultimately responsible. "

I agree. While Trump may not have been to blame, he was responsible. The same is true with anyone in a position of authority over those under their authority.

"Because I am talking about ANY refugee that comes here, I am referring to ANY refugee-emitting country where U.S. presence does not support immigration services. There are the countries where we have no embassy to start with but that's just Bhutan, Iran and North Korea. But then there are 44 countries, including South Korea, Egypt and Germany where we have embassies that are essentially vacant and nonfunctional. "

And what does that have to do with whether or not amnesty seekers illegally crossing our southern border had a legal option available to them?

maryla

Were they EVER wrong!!! Yes, we are very blessed for proving them wrong!! Now, if we could just make them accept reality.....

Bad Bob Loc: Virginia

What is your source on the list?

eagleye13 Loc: Fl

A keeper for future reference.
Thanks JoyV

"You wrote, "How did Obama violate the Constitution?"


*Ignoring Federal law requiring that each state be notified when/where refuges are being placed in their state. Article II Section 3
*In direct violation of ACA Law ( Section 36B ) ordered subsidies be paid under Federal Exchange. Article. I. Section. 1; Article II, Section 3.
*Ignored law by taking Iran Deal to UN prior to 60-day review period mandated by Iran Nuclear Agreement Review, and failed to turn over side agreements as outlined. – “he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed,” Article II Section 3
*Ignored Congressional Treaty Powers. Article II Section 1, Article II Section 2
*Operation Choke Point program – Direct infringement on 2nd Amendment.
*Violated statute on “Material Support of Terrorism” by returning top terrorists back to terrorist organizations. Article II Section 3; Dereliction of Duty Article II Section 4
*Violated Appropriations Act (DOD Section 8111) – GAO report; Article II Section 3
*Two Executive actions mandating private health information on patients be turned over to NICS – Violation of HIPPA law.
*Executive Order bypassing Congress on immigration – Article 1 Section 1, ALL Legislative power held by Congress; Article II Section 3; Article I Section 8
*Unilaterally issued new exemptions to immigration restrictions law that bars certain asylum-seekers and refugees who provided “limited material support” to terrorists. – Article 1 Section 1; Article I Section 8 Congress shall have the Power..to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization.
*Issued directive instructing ICE to NOT enforce i*********n l*ws in certain cases. Article 1 Section 1, ALL Legislative power held by Congress; “he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed,” Article II Section 3; Article I Section 8
*Release of convicted i*****l a***ns ordered in direct opposition to law-Article II Section 3
*Expanded executive action for amnesty to i*****l i*******t relatives of DREAM Act beneficiaries. Article 1 Section 1, ALL Legislative power held by Congress; “he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed,” Article II Section 3; Article I Section 8
*Executive action directing DHS that almost all immigration offenses were unenforceable absent a separate criminal conviction. Article 1 Section 1, ALL Legislative power held by Congress; “he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed,” Article II Section 3; Article I Section 8
*Ignoring Law (2006 Secure Fence Act) “he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed,” Article II Section 3
*Used DOJ to ignore section 8 of the V****g Rights Act. ” he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed,” Article II Section 3
*Used DOJ to prevent Arizona and Alabama from enforcing i*********n l*ws. – 10th Amendment
*Information memorandum telling states that they can waive the work requirement for welfare recipients, thereby altering the 1996 welfare reform law. – Article 1 Section 1, ALL Legislative power held by Congress.
Used NLRB to dictate to a business where they can do business. (Boeing Dreamliner Plant). No Constitutional authority to do so.
*NDAA – Section 1021. Due process Rights negated. Violation of 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, and 7th Amendments.
*Executive Order 13603 NDRP – Government can seize anything
*Executive Order 13524 – Gives INTERPOL jurisdiction on American soil beyond law enforcement agencies, including the FBI.
*Executive Order 13636 Infrastructure Cybersecurity – Bypassing Congress Article 1 Section 1, ALL Legislative power held by Congress
*Attempt to tax political contributions – 1st Amendment
*DOMA Law – Obama directed DOJ to ignore the Constitution and separation of powers and not enforce the law. ” he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed,” Article II Section 3
*Dodd-Frank – Due process and separation of powers. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau writing and interpreting law. Article. I. Section. 1
*Drone strikes on American Citizens – 5th Amendment Due process Rights negated
*Bypassed Congress and gave EPA power to advance Cap-n-Trade
*Attempt for Graphic tobacco warnings (under appeal) – 1st Amendment
*Four Exec. appointments – Senate was NOT in recess (Court has ruled unconstitutional yet the appointees still remain)
*Obama took Chairmanship of UN Security Council – Violation of Section 9.
*ACA (Obamacare) mandate – SCOTUS rewrote legislation and made it a tax because there is no Constitutional authority for Congress to force Americans to engage in commerce. SCOTUS has no authority to Legislate or lay taxes. Article I Section 1 & 8.
*Contraceptive, abortifacients mandate violation of First Ammendment
*Healthcare waivers – No president has dispensing powers
*Refuses to acknowledge state’s 10th Amendment rights to nullify Obamacare
*Going after states (AZ lawsuit) for upholding Federal law (immigration) -10th Amendment.
*Chrysler Bailout -TARP – violated creditors rights and bankruptcy law, as well as Takings and Due Process Clauses – 5th Amendment (G.W. Bush also illegally used TARP funds for bailouts)
*The Independent Payment Advisory Board (appointees by the president). Any decisions by IPAB will instantly become law starting in 2014 – Separation of Powers, Article 1 Section 1.
*Congress did not approve Obama’s war in Libya. Article I, Section 8, First illegal war U.S. has engaged in. Impeachable under Article II, Section 4; War Powers Act – Article II Section 3.
*Obama falsely claims UN can usurp Congressional war powers.
*Obama has acted outside the constitutional power given him – this in itself is unconstitutional.
*With the approval of Obama, the NSA and the FBI are tapping directly into the servers of 9 internet companies to gain access to emails, video/audio, photos, documents, etc. This program is code named PRISM. NSA also collecting data on all phone calls in U.S. – Violation of 4th Amendment.
*Directed signing of U.N. Firearms treaty – 2nd Amendment.
*The Senate/Obama immigration bill (approved by both) raises revenue – Section 7. All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives
*Obama altered law – (A president has no authority to alter law) Delayed upholding the Employer Mandate Law (ACA) until 2015 – Individual Mandate will be enforced. A President does not have that authority – Article. I. Section. 1. All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States; The president “shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed” -Article II, Section 3; Equal Protection Clause -14th Amendment.