[tomder55]

Texas decided to take matters into their own hands and have prevented DHS to patrol the border at Shelby Park in Eagle Pass .
DHS has issued a "demand " for Texas to cease . Texas has defied their demand and we are now passed the deadline that was part of the demand.

According to your letter, “[t]he U.S. Constitution tasks the federal government with . . . securing the Nation’s borders.” When were you planning to start?President Biden has been warned in a series of letters, one of them hand-delivered to him in El Paso, that his sustained dereliction of duty in securing the border is illegal. By instructing your agency and others to ignore federal immigration laws, he has breached the guarantee, found in Article IV, § 4 of the U.S. Constitution, that the federal government “shall protect each of [the States] against Invasion.” Texas, in turn, has been forced to invoke the powers reserved in Article I, § 10, Clause 3, which represents “an acknowledgement of the States’ sovereign interest in protecting their borders.”

OAG Response to DHS Demand Letter 01172024.pdf (texasattorneygeneral.gov)SCOTUS heard arguments in 2 cases about the excesses of the leviathan administrated state ; the unelected 4th branch .

The so called ' Chevron deference' has been the excuse that has been used to allow the bureaucracy to grow unchecked . The "deference " says that a wide latitude be given to administrative decisions by the bureaucracy in the creation of regulations based on Congressional laws passed. SCOTUS according to the precedent allows agencies to basically make law.

The biggest problem has been that Congress passes the laws and then the bureaucrats make the regulations that most impact our lives. The Constitution gave executive power exclusively to the President ;not to Congress or a nameless faceless lifer in the deep state.

I am fairly confident SCOTUS will reverse Chevron although Chief Justice Roberts loves to find ways to make the libs happy.



It is election time and Trump is running . So it is a good time for the Dems to again brush off that tired charge that Trump violated the "Emolument Clause" (quick everyone run get your dictionary )

• Clause 7 Compensation and Emoluments
• The President shall, at stated Times, receive for his Services, a Compensation, which shall neither be encreased nor diminished during the Period for which he shall have been elected, and he shall not receive within that Period any other Emolument from the United States, or any of them.
  

There are actually 2 clauses . One for the President and one for Congress.

Article 2 states

• The President shall, at stated Times, receive for his Services, a Compensation, which shall neither be encreased nor diminished during the Period for which he shall have been elected, and he shall not receive within that Period any other Emolument from the United States, or any of them.
  
  Article 1 for Congress reads “No person holding any office of profit or trust under them, shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state.”
  
  Think the Biden Crime Family .
  
  The Dems say that Trump needed to sell off all his businesses when he became President if his businesses had any foreign clients. An absurd contention. What Trump did was place all his businesses into his son's caretaker ship.
  
  You see the Trump organization runs hotels . Many foreigners like going to them . They are top of the line resorts . But according to the Dems the normal business operations would violate the clause.
  
  It makes for some good grandstanding on Capitol Hill.
  
  Trump's businesses got at least $7.8 million in foreign payments while he was president, House Democrats say - CBS News
  
  
  
  

[tomder55]

Texas border update

Chief Justice Roberts and Amy Coney Barrett sided with the libtard majority in granting the Clueless Joe's DHS the power to tear down that razor wire wall.....at least for now.


SCOTUS granted the emergency power to the Feds; after some illegals drowned attempting to cross into Texas. None of the justices provided any explanation for their vote. The one-page order is a victory for the Biden administration while the lawsuit over the wire continues.

Supreme Court allows agents to cut razor wire on Texas-Mexico Border | AP News

Three migrants drown at US border as Texas, White House feud | Reuters


Perhaps if they weren't attempting the illegal entry they would still be alive.

Roberts vote doesn't surprise me . I cannot comment on Barrett's reasoning without hearing why she voted that way. But it proves to all the fear mongers that having a conservative majority doesn't mean the end of their world. Often when they get appointed for life ;their concerns become more in line with being invited to the DC cocktail circuit and getting their books published . Principles be damned .

It is too early to tell ;but there are enough examples like John Paul Stevens ;David Souter ;Harry Blackmon and of course Earl Warren ..... justices appointed by Repub Presidents who became stalwart champions of the lib agenda.