Who’s Actions Are Unconstitutional: President Obama or the Republicans?

Obama’s advisors (lawyers) told him his Executive
Action on Immigration is Constitutional. In fact Obama has his own degree in
Constitutional Law and so I’m sure he also believed his Executive Action was
legal according to the Constitution. We have all been reminded that Executive
Actions have been used by many administrations so an Executive Action on its
own is not unconstitutional. The question must be, then, is this particular
Executive Action constitutional?
Republicans, as we know, swear that this Executive
Action is not constitutional. But Republicans believe that everything Obama
does is unconstitutional, that he exceeds his powers so often that he must
believe he is monarch or an emperor.
A Federal Court in Texas has stopped the execution
of the Executive Action on Immigration. Can a Federal Court in one state
prevail against the President of the United States? This issue will probably
have to be decided by a higher court. It will have to be taken up by the
Supreme Court.
Republicans don’t want to wait for the court. They
want to threaten an action so dangerous and unpalatable that it will force the
President to vacate his Executive Action. Since Obama has shown no inclination
to be swayed by extortion, Republicans are able to claim that Obama is willing
to put the nation’s safety at risk in order to have his way (because he thinks
he is royalty). Sometimes when Republicans talk my brain feels as if it is
being twisted like a pretzel, one of those ones with no end and no beginning.
So, anyway, the Republicans threaten to stop funding
for the DHS unless Obama vacates his Executive Action.
Who’s right?
Is Obama’s Executive Action on Immigration
constitutional or not?
Can one party be allowed to bring governance to a
lengthy halt?
Is extortion a legitimate political tool?
Is Constitutional Law that slippery?
Is Constitutional Law a partisan matter?
Is party affiliation a determiner of
Are there no absolutes here?
Is it the job of Congress to judge the
constitutionality of an action taken by a President who has been boxed in by
that very same Congress?
If Republicans believe, against all evidence, that a
President is out of line, which they do, does the Constitution suggest that
this is a single party’s decision to make? Congress has the power of impeachment
but can it decide the constitutionality of a Presidential Executive Action? This
is not even the entire Congress in agreement about this President; this is only
the Republican Party.
Can a political party drive a wedge into the gears
of government and bring the whole system to a halt? Well we have certainly seen
that they can; but is that kind of behavior constitutional?
Does the Constitution allow both the Executive Action
and the use of any and all tactics necessary to stop implementation of the
Executive Action? We’re in trouble if both activities are legal. How will we
ever again get back to regular order?
The GOP has employed work stoppage tactics over and
over again throughout the Obama Presidency. Democrats question these tactics
but Republicans think they are justified. I think they are appalling.
I think the behavior of Republicans is racist in the
extreme. It matches all the ways we have obstructed racial equality in this
country since the time of the Civil War all the way to Ferguson and beyond. It
is embarrassing and yet impossible to prove and therefore impossible to
adjudicate. But it certainly does not exemplify the ideals written into our
Constitution. That is why I also think the behavior of Republicans is
And, due to the sparse nature of our original
Constitutional document, an enormous body of law has continued to interpret
what our forefathers intended and that enormous body of law does represent the
partisan politics that pertained in America at the various times these
interpretations were codified. Is this complexity to blame when we are unable
to decide about which party is acting in a manner consistent with our
Constitution and which party is not?
Who’s right, the President or the Republican Party?
Is this just an issue to be decided by polls and shifting public opinion or is
this something that the courts need to rule on? When even our courts have a
partisan bent it will be difficult to find a fair arbiter in this matter. We
have had six years of this and we are on our way to accepting two more.
Personally, with all the money and power that is behind the Republican Party at
this moment in time, perhaps any ruling in these matters will have to be left
for less partisan times. I’m afraid we may be headed toward an America with
only one political party and that would be very bad indeed.
By Nancy Brisson


What will the Supreme Court decide about The Affordable Health Care Act? This is the week that the court will deliberate, hear evidence, etc about this issue which has been at the center of debates for the past two years. Will they decide that there are no really serious constitutional problems with the health care mandate or will they declare it unconstitutional?
The mandate is only part of the Health Care Act but it is a very key part. Making sure people who were using expensive emergency room treatment because they had no health care provider will be covered by health insurance so their care will not be as huge a burden for taxpayers, was the raison d’etre for the entire plan. Will there be enough value left in the plan without the mandate?
How much does the Conservative agenda inform the Supreme Court? Here is the breakdown

Conservative        John Roberts              G. W. Bush Appt.           Chief Justice
Conservative        Antonin Scalia             Ronald Reagan
Cons/Swing          Anthony Kennedy        Ronald Reagan
Conservative        Clarence Thomas         George HW Bush  
Liberal                   Ruth Bader Ginsburg   Bill Clinton
Liberal                   Stephen Breyer             Bill Clinton
Conservative        Samuel Alito                  George W. Bush
Liberal                    Sonia Sotomayor           Barack Obama
Liberal                   Elena Kagan                    Barack Obama    

There are 6 male justices and 3 female justices; there are 6 Roman Catholics justices and 3 Jewish justices. In light of these demographics it will be interesting to see the results. The Court is not dominated by Conservatives in the way it is dominated by Roman Catholics but as “court followers” try to decide which way each justice will decide there are certain justices who seem to be unpredictable and none are perfectly predictable. Justice Kagan has recused herself from most decisions since she was confirmed because her questioners were worried that she had dealt with some of these cases outside of the Supreme Court or some such conflict-of-interest concern. It sounds like we will remain in suspense until the opinions are handed down in June.
I have butterflies in my stomach; how crazy is that? Whatever decision is made life will go on. Will the Obama presidency go on? I don’t know and it does mean a lot to me to reelect Obama so he can save us from the extreme revisions the GOP wishes to impose on America. I don’t think most of us will fare at all well if the Supreme Court decides against the mandate and therefore against Obama and the dominoes start to fall like those well-planned displays, until America belongs to the wealthy and the rest of us are left to shift for ourselves in the muck at the bottom of the empty pond.