DACA program should be fully restarted, federal judge rules

[Keith & Arileidi 437]

 

"A federal judge on Friday ordered a total restart of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, in a hit to the Trump administration." -Fox News 

 

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/08/03/daca-program-should-be-fully-restarted-federal-judge-rules.html

 

So DACA is legal.

[Dashinka 23,318]

So a president can create a law through EO, and now a judge says the government needs a rational explanation as to why it needs to be ended?  Apparently this judge isn’t well versed in the Constitution as to who has the power to make laws.

 

As to DACA being legal, I think that is still a big TBD.

[Keith & Arileidi 437]

47 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

So a president can create a law through EO, and now a judge says the government needs a rational explanation as to why it needs to be ended?  Apparently this judge isn’t well versed in the Constitution as to who has the power to make laws.

 

As to DACA being legal, I think that is still a big TBD.

Well he is a judge. 

He's probably been practicing for at least 30 years. 

So Im pretty sure the judge has a good grasp of the material. 

 

And it looks like trump and his administration was given plenty of time to provide a legal argument for the ending of DACA. 

Have you ever thought that trump just might be wrong on this one? 

 

 

Note... I beleive DACA was an executive action. 

Edited August 4, 2018 by Keith & Arileidi

[Dashinka 23,318]

1 hour ago, Keith & Arileidi said:

Well he is a judge. 

He's probably been practicing for at least 30 years. 

So Im pretty sure the judge has a good grasp of the material. 

 

And it looks like trump and his administration was given plenty of time to provide a legal argument for the ending of DACA. 

Have you ever thought that trump just might be wrong on this one? 

 

 

Note... I beleive DACA was an executive action. 

What I believe is that Congress has the power to write the proposed laws and the president has the power to approve or reject any bill that is sent to him.  I do not believe a president, any president, has the power to do something like DACA through and EO or EA.  Apparently this judge feels otherwise, so onward and upward I guess.  The thing that is interesting is that EOs or EAs by any administration can be easily canceled by the next administration, but for some reason this judge feels otherwise effectively giving the president the power to make their own law.

[Keith & Arileidi 437]

1 hour ago, Bill & Katya said:

What I believe is that Congress has the power to write the proposed laws and the president has the power to approve or reject any bill that is sent to him.  I do not believe a president, any president, has the power to do something like DACA through and EO or EA.  Apparently this judge feels otherwise, so onward and upward I guess.  The thing that is interesting is that EOs or EAs by any administration can be easily canceled by the next administration, but for some reason this judge feels otherwise effectively giving the president the power to make their own law.

Your concerns are noted. 

 

But all the Time administration has to do is come up with a few concrete reasons as to why DACA isn't legal. 

Its been a year and no beans.

 

 

 

[Dashinka 23,318]

5 hours ago, Keith & Arileidi said:

Your concerns are noted. 

 

But all the Time administration has to do is come up with a few concrete reasons as to why DACA isn't legal. 

Its been a year and no beans.

 

 

 

To me it seems simple, this was an action created through executive action and can easily be ended through a new executive action without need to explain anything.  As the initial EO said, it is a deferred action for enforcing a law, so technically it is not a new law, but a new administration can end the deferred action just as easily.  With a judge saying the new administration cannot do the same thing the previous administration without some legal basis, the judge seems to be treating it as a law.  I suppose, SCOTUS will need to get involved at some point.

[TBoneTX 43,290]

I'm not sure what to think about this website overall (didn't look beyond the piece below), but we're required to supply links to quoted pieces, so here:

https://www.theburningplatform.com/2018/06/04/the-modern-civil-war-is-being-fought-without-guns-so-far/

 

A non-VJ pal sent this to me.

 

The piece in the link talks about other things, too, but a couple of paragraphs a bit past the middle precisely deal with the topic of this thread.  I can't disagree with the idea of a double standard.

Edited August 5, 2018 by TBoneTX

[Chris Duffy 1,256]

I thought DACA was only for a certain time period and had basically already expired on it's own.

 

Funny how Federal Judges from liberal states like Hawaii, California, New York or even District of Columbia are the ones always ruling on this and wanting to keep it going. 

 

We all know if it reaches the Supreme Court then they will back up Trump.  

[Keith & Arileidi 437]

52 minutes ago, Chris Duffy said:

I thought DACA was only for a certain time period and had basically already expired on it's own.

 

Funny how Federal Judges from liberal states like Hawaii, California, New York or even District of Columbia are the ones always ruling on this and wanting to keep it going. 

 

We all know if it reaches the Supreme Court then they will back up Trump.  

Liberal or not, why hasnt the trump administration provided enough legal evidence to get rid of DACA. 

 

 

[Chris Duffy 1,256]

24 minutes ago, Keith & Arileidi said:

Liberal or not, why hasnt the trump administration provided enough legal evidence to get rid of DACA. 

 

 

I suspect Trump doesn't want to end DACA, just to modify it.  Allow the ones who qualified by either legal or illegal means, or if they falsified documents don't matter.  I suspect he wants them grandfathered in.  He doesn't want any new applicants

 

I think most people think DACA is or was a good thing.

 

The reason is I thought Trump pretty killed DACA and either his administration or Obama Administration set it up so that no more new applicants could apply, only people who were on DACA could re apply. 

 

DACA is good, DAPA was bad.  You can't reward people for breaking the law, that is something Obama couldn't understand

[Randyandyuni 2,682]

3 hours ago, Keith & Arileidi said:

Liberal or not, why hasnt the trump administration provided enough legal evidence to get rid of DACA. 

 

 

Actually not arguing, but devil's advocate ...

 

What was the legal basis for establishing DACA?

[Chris Duffy 1,256]

2 hours ago, Randyandyuni said:

Actually not arguing, but devil's advocate ...

 

What was the legal basis for establishing DACA?

Executive Orders are basically when the President wants to get around laws.  So they sign an EO

 

Like when Roosevelt did the internment camps for Japan Americans, or when Lincoln suspended the writ of habeas corpus.

 

There was no legal basis for DACA

 

Excellent Question

[Dashinka 23,318]

14 minutes ago, Chris Duffy said:

Executive Orders are basically when the President wants to get around laws.  So they sign an EO

 

Like when Roosevelt did the internment camps for Japan Americans, or when Lincoln suspended the writ of habeas corpus.

 

There was no legal basis for DACA

 

Excellent Question

 

3 hours ago, Randyandyuni said:

Actually not arguing, but devil's advocate ...

 

What was the legal basis for establishing DACA?

No legal basis other than the executive branch delaying any action taken against these individuals.  Hence my question regarding the actions of this judge.

[Keith & Arileidi 437]

3 hours ago, Randyandyuni said:

Actually not arguing, but devil's advocate ...

 

What was the legal basis for establishing DACA?

That's a good question, that I can't really answer.

 

 

[Randyandyuni 2,682]

It just seems to be a grey area, if it's not based on law why is a legal requirement need to repeal it. 

 

I really do not understand the process behind E O