Anonymous ID: 40c008 Nov. 10, 2018, 12:48 p.m. No.3838188   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>8256

>>3837308 LB LB LB

lawfag here

doubt this mater will be too important to the plan so i will only describe briefly - it it comes up again i can go further

 

first let it be known that this is yet another example of the many tussles between our branched of govt - and further that the outcome is a real mess - look for much more litigation on this separation of powers AND on the issues of state vs federal powers - SCOTUS is indeed going to play a YUGE role in the outcome and nature of the plan - jst as they had a big role in creating the current chaos.

 

So this case is about a situation where congress autorizes the executive branch (DOJ/AG) to issue exceptions to deportations based on facts and curcimstances - HOWEVER congress retained a veto power over such waivers and excercised it in this case.

 

SCOTUS held that Congress could not grant authority to DOJ to adjudicate a matter and then just veto it if they didnt like it - once they delegated the power it was too late - of course congress could change the law and take away the power but they didnt do that.

 

There are other similar laws mixing congress veto power (oversight?) on the executive branch and since this SCOTUS case both branches have been aware of and more orless dancing around the issue.

Anonymous ID: 40c008 Nov. 10, 2018, 12:52 p.m. No.3838256   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>3838188

lawfag again

one aside - this issue does apply to the war powers act which may or may not be constitutional - not tested in court

 

The consultation provisions of the War Powers Act have been contested by every president since Richard M. Nixon, but are followed

 

some day POTUS may say FU see ya in court