I saw this on my buddies site, and realized it belonged here too.

Reasons why Federal District and Appellate Courts Lack Standing to Rule on Trumps EO

Reprinted with permission of author Oren Long;

Here's something I hope you take seriously.   If you like it, perhaps you can post it far and wide and ask readers to forward it to Trump for his perusal.   IF (and it's a big "if") enough people send it to him, sooner or later he will see it.
>
President Trump's Immigration E.O. has been struck down by Federal District and Appellate Courts despite the fact that they lack standing or jurisdiction to hear the case.   Here's why:
>
Article III, Section Two, Paragraph Two, Sentence One of the Constitution states, "In all cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State may be Party, the Supreme Court shall have ORIGINAL (emphasis added) Jurisdiction".  
>
This means that since the States filed suit against the Federal Government, making themselves "Party" to the suit, ONLY the Supreme Court can hear the case, period!   ONLY the Supreme Court has jurisdiction, period!   Federal District Courts and/or Appellate Courts cannot, by Constitutional mandate, hear the case, period!
>
The Founders CLEARLY did not want lower courts ruling on cases that might impact international relations OR cases where States sued the Federal Government, impacting national policy through a hodge-podge of conflicting lower Court rulings.   The Founders clearly believed that such cases should be heard by the Supreme Court -- ONLY!
>
Ergo, under Article III, President Trump is legally and Constitutionally free to ignore the aforementioned lower Court rulings and proceed with his E.O. unless and until the Supreme Court strikes it down.
>
President Trump's legal team should make only one argument before any lower Court hearing the case, "This Court has NO jurisdiction in this matter.   Under Article III, Section Two, Paragraph Two of the Constitution of the United States, ONLY the Supreme Court can hear this case.   Since this case was filed by the State of ________, through that State's Attorney General, the State is, by Constitutional definition, Party to the suit and MUST, therefore, by Constitutional mandate, file directly with the Supreme Court.   That said, the President has instructed me to advise the Court that, regardless of this Court's ruling, he is proceeding with his Immigration Executive Order unless and until the Supreme Court strikes it down."
>
This Constitutional stance, by the President, could go a long way towards bringing the Federal Judiciary back within its Constitutional constraints.  
>
What do you think?   Will you post it far and wide?
Oren Long

Views: 27

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Please send a message to Mr. Long for us, we do miss him, a true patriot, but the United States Supreme Court does not answer to the voice of the American People, according to Parliament of the United Kingdoms Magna Carta, "agreements", they have the finale say so.

 welcome to all most 2/3rds majority vote,

  How big is the problem here in America, United States  Congress has 535 voting members: 435 Representatives and 100 Senators. Connected to Parliament Impalement Infrastructure, which includes Treaties  between nations. The list is below, and hello to 2/3rd of Congress.

David Rockefeller, Chairman Emeritus
            Peter G. Peterson, Chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations
            58 E. 68th St. New York, NY 10021
            Phone (212) 734-0400
            Fax (212) 861-1789

            Paul Volker, North American Chairman of the Trilateral Commission
            345 E. 46 St. New York, NY 10017
            Phone (212) 661-1180

            President of the United States of America
            William Clinton -- CFR, TC, BB

            Asst. Sec. for Administration, United Nations
            Dick Thornburgh -- CFR

            National Security Advisor
            Anthony Lake -- CFR

            Vice President of the United States of America
            Albert Gore, Jr. -- CFR

            Secretary Of State
            Warren Christopher -- CFR

            Secretary Of Defense
            Lee Aspin (Deceased)-- CFR

            Chairman Joint Chiefs Of Staff
            Colin L. Powell -- CFR

            Director Central Intelligence Agency
            James Woolsey -- CFR

            Chairman, Council of Economics Advisors
            Laura Tyson -- CFR

            Treasury Secretary
            Lloyd Bentsen -- Former CFR, BB

            Secretary of Interior
            Bruce Babbitt -- CFR

            Secretary of Housing and Urban Development
            Henry Cisneros -- CFR

            Secretary of Health & Human Services
            Donna Shalala -- CFR, TC

             

            JUDICIARY:


            Sandra Day O'Connor, Assoc. Justice, U.S. Supreme Court -- CFR
            Steve G. Breyer, Chief Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals, First Circuit, Boston -- CFR
            Ruth B. Ginsburg, U.S. Court Of Appeals, Wash., DC Circuit -- CFR
            Laurence H. Silberman, U.S. Court of Appeals, Wash., DC Circuit -- CFR

             

            U.S. INSTITUTE FOR PEACE:

            John Norton Moore, Chairman -- CFR
            Elspeth Davies Rostow, Vice Chairman -- CFR
            Samuel W. Lewis, President -- CFR
            John Richardson, Counselor -- CFR
            David Little, Senior Scholar -- CFR
            William R. Kintner, Director -- CFR
            W. Scott Thompson, Director -- CFR

            

This is only 1% of the information above, the data exceeds 4000 carters....

 

RSS

LIGHTER SIDE

Political Cartoons by Robert Ariail

Political Cartoons by Mike Lester

Political Cartoons by Steve Breen

ALERT ALERT

Romney Handed Shock
Defeat By Own State’s GOP

Mitt Romney is back in state politics, this time in Utah instead of Massachusetts. However, conservatives in The Beehive State aren’t exactly warming up to the 2012 Republican standard-bearer quite the way many people expected they would.

After finishing second in votes at the state GOP convention, Romney will now face a primary in his run for the Senate seat being vacated by Orrin Hatch, Fox News reported.

At the convention in West Valley City on Saturday, Romney polled just behind state lawmaker Mike Kennedy.

Kennedy captured 50.18 percent of the delegate vote compared to Romney’s 49.12 percent.

That means the two will face off in a primary on June 26 to determine who will represent the GOP this fall.

Romney, the first Mormon to head a major party ticket, is considered an extremely popular figure in Utah and was widely expected to have an easy path to the upper chamber.

In a hypothetical matchup with Democrat Jenny Wilson, at least one poll showed Romney up by 46 percent. That’s, uh, slightly more than the margin of error.

However, among party loyalists, Romney isn’t exactly viewed with unalloyed fondness.

The 2012 presidential nominee was always known for being decidedly moderate, particularly on issues of immigration and global trade. There was also the fact that he ran a campaign so bumbling that it almost made Michael Dukakis look good.

And then there was Romney’s war of words with Donald Trump during the 2016 campaign, which likely led many to perceive he secretly wished Hillary Clinton would take the Oval Office.

Trump would later consider Romney as a secretary of state pick, although how serious the president-elect was about appointing him is something we’ll likely never know.

While your average Utah Republican is unlikely to let these slights affect their vote, hardcore party activists probably don’t want another RINO who isn’t exactly known for his rapport with the president in the upper chamber of Congress, no matter how famous he may be.

For his part, Romney tried to put a good spin on the humiliation.

“I’m delighted with the outcome. Did very, very well,” he told KSTU. “On to a good, important primary ahead. This is terrific for the people of Utah.”

Dude, you just lost to a guy nobody has ever heard of. However, Kennedy was happy with the results, and unlike Romney, he had good reason to be.

“I’m a candidate with a compelling life story and a unique set of life circumstances I’d like to use to serve the people of Utah,” Kennedy said.

I have no idea what that story or those circumstances are, but I think the key point here is that he’s not Mitt Romney. If he wants to win, that’s pretty much what he should be focusing on. I can see the billboards now. “Mike Kennedy: Not Mitt Romney.” “Mike Kennedy: He didn’t borrow Ward Cleaver’s haircut.” “Mike Kennedy: Because Utah deserves a senator whose favorite food isn’t buttered noodles.”

Utah’s electorate tends to be less conservative than convention-goers, so it’s unlikely that Romney won’t be the GOP nominee for Senate. However, that’s not a 100 percent certainty — and it wouldn’t be the first time he’s lost to a Kennedy.

What do you think?

YES PATRIOT STORE

© 2018   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service