18 U.S. Code § 2381-Treason Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.
From what I'm reading it DOES appear that the supremacy clause applies to federal laws and such passed by congress. I don't see why the states cannot overrule an executive order, as it completely bypasses congress. Would be a good argument for the courts should a state tell the feds to F off on this issue.
“You know the world is going crazy when the best rapper is a white guy, the best golfer is a black guy, the tallest guy in the NBA is Chinese, the Swiss hold the America's Cup, France is accusing the U.S. of arrogance, Germany doesn't want to go to war, and the three most powerful men in America are named "Bush", "Dick", and "Colin." Need I say more?” - Chris Rock
That's why we have courts.
None of that addresses the issue. We have a process in this country.
Your bigoted prattle aside, BO is not really the subject of this thread.
I stand against him all the time. It doesn't mean you've proven your premise however.
Yes. BO sucks. And so does the unsound Constitutional logic you employ.
EOs are generally couched in previous legislation that has passed Congress so are still presumably supreme. If they don't, or are an overreach, they can be challenged in court as with his immigration EO; successful so far IIRC.
"when socialism fails, blame capitalism and demand more socialism." - A friend
"You know the difference between libs and right-wingers? Libs STFU when evidence refutes their false beliefs." - Another friend
“Don't waste your time with explanations: people only hear what they want to hear.” - Paulo Coelho
Presumably being the key word. It's not often that gun regulation is done via EO's. And not all EO's are "federal laws passed by congress". Can go a lot of different directions. Generally speaking, they're rarely contested. I'm confident that any gun regulations issued via EO will end up in court. Immigration and gun control are very different. Lots of laws based around immigration, not so much with gun regulation. With that said - I don't see what he is doing being reversed.
“You know the world is going crazy when the best rapper is a white guy, the best golfer is a black guy, the tallest guy in the NBA is Chinese, the Swiss hold the America's Cup, France is accusing the U.S. of arrogance, Germany doesn't want to go to war, and the three most powerful men in America are named "Bush", "Dick", and "Colin." Need I say more?” - Chris Rock
There isn't any presumably about a duly passed law, it is supreme. Generally was more key IMO if his orders do rely on previous legislation. I do think BO has set a record with his orders being contested, rightly of course, but the good thing is that they can be reversed in one year and 11 days.
"when socialism fails, blame capitalism and demand more socialism." - A friend
"You know the difference between libs and right-wingers? Libs STFU when evidence refutes their false beliefs." - Another friend
“Don't waste your time with explanations: people only hear what they want to hear.” - Paulo Coelho
How is an executive order a "passed" law? I think it's just that, an order, but one that carries the full weight of the law - but wasn't a "passed" law via congress as laws are supposed to be made. Either that, or have some sort of prior authorization or similar within prior laws, which I am unaware of for these particular regulations.
“You know the world is going crazy when the best rapper is a white guy, the best golfer is a black guy, the tallest guy in the NBA is Chinese, the Swiss hold the America's Cup, France is accusing the U.S. of arrogance, Germany doesn't want to go to war, and the three most powerful men in America are named "Bush", "Dick", and "Colin." Need I say more?” - Chris Rock
I don't know the prior authorization either but if it is present then the order stands for 1 year and 11 days or it gets challenged.Executive orders have the full force of law when they take authority from a legislative power which grants its power directly to the Executive by the Constitution, or are made pursuant to Acts of Congress that explicitly delegate to the President some degree of discretionary power (delegated legislation).[1]
"when socialism fails, blame capitalism and demand more socialism." - A friend
"You know the difference between libs and right-wingers? Libs STFU when evidence refutes their false beliefs." - Another friend
“Don't waste your time with explanations: people only hear what they want to hear.” - Paulo Coelho
That's kinda what I just said, fucker! Full force of the law, but just not "passed" law like your typical laws via congress. Different, but maybe the same "power"?
But my next thing is - I'm confident that the supremacy clause fits 100% in most cases, federal law superceding state law. But has an EO ever been challenged, where just one state wants to ignore it? I honestly don't know.
“You know the world is going crazy when the best rapper is a white guy, the best golfer is a black guy, the tallest guy in the NBA is Chinese, the Swiss hold the America's Cup, France is accusing the U.S. of arrogance, Germany doesn't want to go to war, and the three most powerful men in America are named "Bush", "Dick", and "Colin." Need I say more?” - Chris Rock
Sanctuary cities are given leeway to tell Feds(Federal law to f-off) , why can't states?
Answer is states can and should. Especially to this treasonous piece of shit prez...-Tyr
obama wins either way it seems as he either gets his way in illegal orders or else he causes disunity, distrust, greater discord and hatred.
He does not think this stuff up--his handlers do-- the globalists(and allies-muslims., etc) and their agenda...
Last edited by Tyr-Ziu Saxnot; 01-09-2016 at 12:34 PM.
18 U.S. Code § 2381-Treason Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.
"The social contract exists so that everyone doesn’t have to squat in the dust holding a spear to protect his woman and his meat all day every day. It does not exist so that the government can take your spear, your meat, and your woman because it knows better what to do with them." - Instapundit.com
Sorry, wasn't sure. I'm not sure the answer either but this law goes beyond EOs and anything passed in the past 7 years.
Answer is neither states nor cities can and/or should be able to violate the Constitution. It's a rule of law thing.
You'll fall short in translating when you don't speak AWESOME-ese. The correct question though for you to answer is what Constitutional laws are they going to ignore?
"when socialism fails, blame capitalism and demand more socialism." - A friend
"You know the difference between libs and right-wingers? Libs STFU when evidence refutes their false beliefs." - Another friend
“Don't waste your time with explanations: people only hear what they want to hear.” - Paulo Coelho
18 U.S. Code § 2381-Treason Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.
Apparently I'm the only one between the two of us not confused.
-----
... It reads, in part:
All federal acts, laws, executive orders, administrative orders, court orders, rules, and regulations, whether past, present, or future, which infringe on the people’s right to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the United States I and Section 23 of the Missouri Constitution shall be invalid in this state, shall not be recognized by this state, shall be specifically rejected by this state, and shall be considered null and void and of no effect in this state.
...
http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2014...control-23-10/
"when socialism fails, blame capitalism and demand more socialism." - A friend
"You know the difference between libs and right-wingers? Libs STFU when evidence refutes their false beliefs." - Another friend
“Don't waste your time with explanations: people only hear what they want to hear.” - Paulo Coelho
Last edited by Surf Fishing Guru; 01-11-2016 at 11:21 AM.
You can not truly call yourself “peaceful” unless you are capable of great violence.
If you are incapable of violence, you are not peaceful, you are just harmless.
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott calls for Convention of States to take back states’ rightsMore ...Updated at 3:45: Revised to include response to Gov. Abbott’s speech and add reference to the Convention of States.
Updated at 1:54: Revised to include comments from Gov. Abbott’s speech.
<aside class="DMNReferWrapper pull-right panel-flat-medium content-aside sld tf1f1">Related
- Abbott's call for a convention of the states is a recipe for mayhem
- Editorial: Why Abbott's call for a constitutional convention sets a dangerous precedent
- Obama rips into NRA at televised town hall on gun safety
- Texas Republicans take aim at Obama over executive order on guns
- Armed group not ready to end wildlife refuge occupation
- Floyd: No handouts for anti-government militia zealots
- Jesse Walker: No, the Oregon occupiers are not ‘terrorists’
</aside> Gov. Greg Abbott, aiming to spark a national conversation about states’ rights, said Friday that he wants Texas to lead the call for a convention to amend the U.S. Constitution and wrest power from a federal government “run amok.”
“If we are going to fight for, protect and hand on to the next generation, the freedom that [President] Reagan spoke of … then we have to take the lead to restore the rule of law in America,” Abbott said during a speech at the Texas Public Policy Foundation’s Policy Orientation that drew raucous applause from the conservative audience. He said he will ask lawmakers to pass a bill authorizing Texas to join other states calling for a Convention of States.
http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.c...s-rights.html/
“When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle.” Edumnd Burke