On Monday, Judge Leonie Brinckema, a Federal Appeals Judge in Virginia, issued an injunction against President Trumps Immigration Executive Orders on the basis that they are in fact, a Muslim Ban.
The Government has argued that the doctrine of Plenary Powers over National Security and Immigration should make the Orders unreviewable. But can such power be given under the Constitution? If the answer is no, then can statements made outside of the Orders by the President and his advisers be taken into account as to the intent of the orders?
If the answer is yes, are we prepared to accept a country where he sitting President has unchecked power which neither the Courts nor Congress can counterbalance?
It’s a Valentines day Tuesday episode of Constitution Thursday!
Say the words, “Judicial Review” to most Talk Radio Show Hosts and you get to watch them go ballistic as they explain why judicial activists are ruining the country. In recent days we have seen a whole lot of this argument, as the 9th Circuit Court upheld a stay against the Immigration Executive Orders of President Obama.
Whether or not you support the Orders or oppose them, there is a basic misunderstanding as to exactly what the argument was last week – and it wasn’t whether or not Immigrants from seven Islamic ruled nations should be admitted or not to the country. In fact, it was the same basic argument that the Supreme Court first heard in 1796, when Alexander Hamilton himself argued that a tax on Carriages was Constitutional.
The Court agreed that it was in fact, not a direct tax and therefore Constitutional. More than that however, they made it clear that because they agreed, there was no need for “Judicial review.”
But it wouldn’t be long before they would see the need for it…
I realize that as a Conservative Talk Radio Chat Show Host I am supposed to be screaming about the “unconstitutional” actions that President Obama is about to take in issuing an Executive Order on Immigration. Now I agree that the Presidents action would be ill-advised, wrong, and divisive instead of unifying. I also agree that he would be flying in the face of the electorate who clearly do not want such an Executive Order to be issued.
But does that make it “unconstitutional?” Read the rest of this entry