46 Comments
Yvette Gagum
4/21/2016 05:43:01 pm
The first article works on trying to bring two views to the table, one showing how the executive order is within President Obama's reach as the president as he protects thousands of illegal immigrants, and the other showing how he overstepped separation of powers with the order because Congress did not pass any of his suggested legislation on immigration and how it doesn't "faithfully execute the law". This also applies to federalism and the state vs federal government and their powers. Does the federal government really have the power to affect a state's economy and population? The second article focuses on this and more arguments brought to the table from the states' lawyers and Obama's lawyers as they argued before the Supreme Court.
Reply
Kynzie Watahomigie
4/22/2016 10:12:46 am
I agree with Yvette. The issue with the federal government stepping in on state government may not sit well with certain states. In fact we know that states do not want to necessarily abide due to the fact that this bill is being challenged in the Supreme Court.
Reply
Laura Jackson
4/22/2016 11:16:29 am
I agree, but I think that once the Supreme Court makes their decision the rest of the states should follow lead. If they don't, then states will be ignoring a critical branch of the US government and will put the supreme court at stake. 4/22/2016 11:27:15 am
Yvette, love how you basically summarize the entire two long articles in one paragraph. Shows how crazy everything is and really nice to see it how it is without the crazy specifications. But yeah that is basically it. They tried throwing Trump in on the second one (or the first, one of them I know of), but aside from that its just another back and forth between Obama and Congress.
Reply
Kynzie Watahomigie
4/21/2016 06:57:35 pm
This is going to be a major Supreme Court decision, this could effect the view of President Obama and executive orders. This is a major bill and the way the states are challenging it is a positive effect on the separation of powers. This proves that one government official cannot have the power to create a bill without being checked. Unfortunately there is no easy outcome with the court split 50/50. Not to mention the negativity that could come from having the federal government step in and create a law that would effect a state's population and economy.
Reply
Yvette Gagum
4/22/2016 07:38:55 am
Exactly why this connects with Federalism, well at least the part about the Federal Government making a law that effects a state. That's the main reason the states are suing the Fed. Gov., it's because they want to handle immigration their own ways instead of spending all this money for something they don't support.
Reply
Ryan Schwarz
4/22/2016 09:09:02 am
I think that view is a little bit misleading as for one I believe the national government is who mainly funds the national guard so in a sense it isn't their money, as well as the fact that not deporting people will actually cost less than deporting them in most cases. 4/22/2016 11:30:29 am
I can see what you mean by handle immigration in their own way, but the reason why they are standing is because of some ordeal with budget and supplying licenses. It looks to me as another "Republican denying Obama" situation, but the overstepping of powers is a reasonable...well...reason. Only issue I see is how flimsy the reasons and solutions are.
Jacob Acuna
4/22/2016 11:36:28 am
I think the states should just suck it up and be 100% committed to this amazing country!
Imelda
4/24/2016 08:11:49 pm
I also agree that the states should suck it up because their budget should not be anyone else's concern other than their own. I do not belive Texas has standing or that this case should be decided with a state.
Ryan Schwarz
4/22/2016 09:11:42 am
However true this may be the federal government does exactly this all the time. As we have learned the bureaucracy almost exclusively makes laws and regulations that effect state economies, such as the E.P.A. Why is immigration policy so different? The D.oD. and the national guard are part of the executive branch of government does it not follow the President can effect policy as other government bureaucracies do all the time?
Reply
Jacob Acuna
4/22/2016 11:34:39 am
I agree with Ryan wholeheartedly with what he says.
Andie Stockwell
4/24/2016 09:57:59 pm
I agree that the states response is a type of check and should not be ignored. The president is supposed to be the most representative of the people. There are steps to making laws and policies in place that guarantee the people's will is heard. This is something executive order ignores.
Reply
Barter
4/25/2016 12:34:28 pm
HMMM, the President most representative of the people? Very Jacksonian of you.
Robert Medina
4/25/2016 08:49:50 am
I love how you mention the economy of the states. Without illegal immigrants we wont have any "menial" workers or so we would have to purchase either higher forms of labor or increasing the technology to meet the demand. However the counter argument would be that our unemployment would go down because we would have more field type job openings to do for the average american. This bill doesnt only affect our political real, but it also plays a major role in the social welfare, and economy as we lose millions of workers, it leaves us with more questions of what we should do.
Reply
Ryan Schwarz
4/22/2016 09:04:56 am
Well it looks like this case is a real doozy, though it appears this case has the potential to make real concrete decisions on a variety of issues, Standing in court cases, presidential power, seperation of powers. It is my belief this case will not make any significant decisions on any of these issues one problem being the 4v4 split in the court but another just being the muck currently surrounding this case and the political charge around it. It seems to me in cases like this the Supreme court has trouble making strong decisions because the case brought to them is so blurred.
Reply
Kynzie Watahomigie
4/22/2016 10:08:09 am
I agree with Ryan. For this split is really going to prevent the court from coming to any solid decision quite yet.
Reply
Yvette Gagum
4/22/2016 11:01:23 am
I think that it may not be a 4v4 split, I wanna believe that the court may try to actually rule on a decision because its pretty important
Reply
Laura Jackson
4/22/2016 11:21:04 am
I agree; Because this is such a highly covered issue I think that the court will take action. It is a highly controversial topic and because of that, including the recent Justice nomination, I believe they will come to a solid conclusion in order to bring back some credibility to the Court.
Deanna Strayer
4/22/2016 11:23:24 am
I definitely agree that the current court of 8 justices is playing a large role in the outcome of the situation. With all the issues brought up by Scalia's death, lines are getting blurred.
Reply
Andie Stockwell
4/24/2016 10:00:50 pm
A real doozy is right. I also agree that it is unlikely that this case makes significant change due to the split in the Supreme court, but also because if it isn't resolved by the end of Obama's presidency, it likely is not going to have..oomph.
Reply
Jeremy Bessett
4/25/2016 08:02:21 am
I think that if Scalia was still alive we all know how this would end. But Ryan is right the courts ruling is unlikely to provide any real substance as far as doctrine. But who knows maybe one of the justices will change their vote, but that seems just as likely as Scalia rising from the dead and walking into the court himself to cast his own vote.
Reply
Robert Medina
4/25/2016 08:43:33 am
I feel as though the case presented to them is not so much blurred as it is political in nature. If we look, Democrats want this order to be ruled constitutional and Republicans want this to be viewed as unconstitutional. The court as we have seen has tended to go above political nature and delve into more of an observational role, a third person. With that being said, I feel as though they should, in the interest of themselves not making themselves look weak, definitely take a ruling on it, and one that makes them unified. I think that they should not rule politically but rather state that Texas does not ave the precedent to bring about the case which will a) stall and allow for a new supreme court justice to hopefully be in by that time and b) keep the powers of the court in tact.
Reply
Laura Jackson
4/22/2016 11:11:33 am
Providing both opinions on Obama's executive action was a good idea because it showed the various different arguments for and against the action itself. While Obama did have the power to enforce the executive order, it's constitutionality is put into question. Because executive powers are so vague, it is hard to define exact limits for the president. In addition, this action also has the potential to infringe upon state sovereignty laws regarding immigration and deportation.
Reply
Deanna Strayer
4/22/2016 11:21:23 am
I agree that it was good to include both sides. What you wrote was a nice summary of the consequences of executive action and how it is a strange power for a president to wield.
Reply
Imelda Fragoza
4/24/2016 08:08:12 pm
I agree that it is hard to place exact limits on presidential power. I think this is most upsetting to congress and that this Texas case is mostly about deciding whether or not to limit some of the president's power.
Reply
Jace Gerl
4/22/2016 11:18:34 am
While the topic of immigration has been one of discussion for decades, the court cases brought up and the arguments brought up in these two articles I feel personally aren't going to do anything to help with the case, especially with the court being split. Though Obama's continuining atempts on a change is admirable perhaps he should try a less direct approach to get things done? More appeal to the public media certainly wouldn't hurt.
Reply
Jeremy Bessett
4/25/2016 07:59:30 am
I agree, although Obama maybe trying to actually trying to get something done and be productive I think that he has definitely overstepped it this time, and i think that maybe this was his intention. Since the Executive powers are so undefined i think that he probably wanted to test the waters, especially because of congresses useless mentality at the moment.
Reply
Deanna Strayer
4/22/2016 11:19:09 am
While this case could have a large impact on policies, it ain't gon' happen son. With the 4-4 split going on right now happening because of Scalia's untimely death the Supreme Court isn't going to risk the case ending with a tie and making the court seem weak right now. The case is also hugely in the public eye right now, and lines are getting blurred all over the place, there is no cut and dry decision. It's a hugely political atmosphere, even though the court is supposed to function independent of politics, that isn't the case anymore.
Reply
4/22/2016 11:23:08 am
Its just one big separation of powers ordeal, or at least that's how it seems to me. With the 4v4 split, then nothing is going to be done but that is a given. The big issue is if the president has the authority to handle mass immigration through an executive order, and right now Texas's reason for standing sounds pretty iffy. They are starting the lawsuit under the reason that they would lose a lot of money supplying licenses to the immigrants. However, the solution was pretty bad as well: Make a law to deny immigrants, who came illegally and who can now stay, licenses. So I can see what they mean by "a real catch 22". Honestly, though, the impact is more figurative at this point then anything. They mention about the presidential race but I don't see any real threat there. This is a defining moment in history as it establishes more information on what the president can and can't do, but at the same time it isn't as we were already expecting a tie, and unless a new judge comes in or an opinion changes, then everything will just stay the same. There is already so much hype and craziness that this here just seems silly, just like the entirety of the race by this point.
Reply
Lupita Durazo
4/22/2016 11:29:49 am
The case can either be extremely influential or make no change at all. The case can have an effect in future on presidential power and separation of powers. However the case is not very clear so the likelihood of the case having an influential effect on the presidency is unlikely.
Reply
Barter
4/25/2016 12:39:55 pm
Either way it is decided will have a significant impact. Either on the immigrants or on the scope of presidential power. Unless they rule that there is no standing, then it's a punt.
Reply
Jacob Acuna
4/22/2016 11:33:02 am
If the Supreme Court hears the case, the Executive orders of the president will be severely checked and be used against future presidents.
Reply
Madeline Arbogast
4/25/2016 07:53:12 am
The supreme court's decision in this case could have a larger future impact of other executive actions and they might use the case in future preceding, I can see the decision that is being made in this case being interpreted in another way in a future case and the decision being overturned
Reply
Barter
4/25/2016 12:40:41 pm
They just heard the case.
Reply
Imelda Fragoza
4/24/2016 08:03:56 pm
I do not think that Texas has standing in this case because affects to their budget should not be considered injury. I also agree with the article of the emails that this case seems to be more about defining the president's powers and therefore should be figured out between the president and congress first, and then come back to the issue in Texas.
Reply
Madeline Arbogast
4/25/2016 07:58:48 am
What is a bigger injury than losing money, to be fair. The state of Texas is being forced to move money from areas they wanted to be funded, like textbooks that don't teach evolution, to an area that helps illegals, whom the hate. But really, there isn't really a way for congress and the president to work it out because of the "she said he said" dynamics of Washington where everything is an argument and "i'm always right" kind of attitude. So at this point, the SC was to be the mediator in the conflict like it's job description says.
Reply
Barter
4/25/2016 12:43:07 pm
Losing money injury, so if they choose to not find standing
Andie Stockwell
4/24/2016 09:51:51 pm
These articles definitively clarify the fact that this court case is not simply a question of separation of powers and the limits that powers should have, but that this case is highly political. And while this case seems to be paramount and highly critical to be resolved within Obama's frame of presidency, its improbable because of the even split between liberal and conservative justices. Though this case could reach the powers of the presidency to a new extent, it does not seem to be going anywhere particularly quickly and therefore it likely will not have a large effect on the presidency.
Reply
Madeline Arbogast
4/25/2016 07:49:14 am
with the 4-4 split in the SC, the Court is unlikely to make an impactful decision, but their decision could also side with Obama and extend the power of the presidency which would blur the separation of powers in a very large way. Siding with Obama would make executive orders a larger part in the blurry world of unwritten powers. The 4-4 decision runs the risk of making the court appear to be weak all because of Scalia's death, Thanks pal. This will change if a justice changes their opinion and the court ruling would be 5-3 an overwhelming victory in on way or the other, but this is unlikely.
Reply
Jeremy Bessett
4/25/2016 07:53:00 am
I think that this case although highly political in nature is also one that has a good reasoning behind it. The Executive powers are something that is extremely vague, as seen with things like signing statements. But i think that the president although he may deem that he has these powers needs the court to rule as to what the extent of the Presidents executive powers are. Because right now the president is acting as though he is both the Executive and Legislative branch, and although there may be a good reason that cannot be allowed. If we allow the president to make any executive order that does what ever it wants the balance of power is eliminated, and the Legislative branch is pointless, and no matter the reasoning behind it these actions cannot be allowed because nothing will then prevent the president from becoming a totalitarian dictator further down the road if the positions power is not limited. I think the court is split not because of the different methods of constitutional interpretation but because of political ideals in this largely political body.
Reply
Robert Medina
4/25/2016 08:38:32 am
Looking at the two articles it seems evident to me that this can be viewed in two ways. Yes, Obama is overstepping his executive powers and can in some ways be seen as overstepping those separation of powers based off of protecting millions of undocumented immigrants. However I can also see the counter to this in that being that we have a very divided government. Our president is a democrat, congress is republican and the supreme court is split right down the middle. One would say that executive actions are necessary in order to get things done. Personally I see the executive action as a way for us to not spend valuable money to deport these immigrants and to have all these resources vested in this. However, based off of the supreme court and them being split the way that they are, we can see that the order would just get tossed away unless the court chooses to reserve their powers and state that Texas has no precedent in bringing the case to them. I hope this is the plausible reason.
Reply
Jacqueline Fonseca
4/26/2016 09:14:43 am
I agree with you in saying that in order to get things done in our country the president has to use executive orders. Since our country is split we need to depend on one person to get things done.
Reply
Nina Almase
4/28/2016 10:52:15 pm
I agree as well. Something has to be done, everything seems to be so split. Obama made the decision rather than continuing to argue and dance around the subject. The president can't make everyone happy, and that's known. But they have duties to fulfill whether the people like it or not.
Jacqueline Fonseca
4/26/2016 09:11:36 am
These articles talk about wether President Obama is overstepping his presidential duties with this excuitive order. In different views he is doing the right thing by keeping people in the country that deserves to be here. But in other way people think that these people aren't Americans.
Reply
Nina Almase
4/28/2016 10:50:13 pm
I definitely think the first article is talking about the President's executive order and its place within these issues, but also how there is a line to be seen that can and may have been crossed by keeping these people here in America.
Reply
Leave a Reply. |
Archives
January 2020
Categories |