It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

A Query

page: 1
12

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 28 2018 @ 12:36 AM
link   
A federal judge has ordered that the US government, within a rather challenging timeline, reunite children with their parents. Now, it's obvious that the government will appeal this order (bigly). But let's assume that the order stands. SCOTUS is no longer in session so not likely to hear an appeal for a stay. Let's assume that the timeline stands.

What happens if the government does not comply with a court order? Can it simply be ignored? It seems that this situation was anticipated earlier this year:

The Article makes four conclusions. First, the federal judiciary is willing to issue contempt findings against agencies and officials. Second, while several federal judges believe they can (and have tried to) attach sanctions (fines and imprisonment) to these findings, the higher courts have exhibited a virtually complete unwillingness to allow sanctions, at times swooping down at the eleventh hour to rescue an agency from incurring a budget-straining fine or its top official from being thrown in jail. Third, the higher courts, even as they unfailingly thwart sanctions in all but a few minor instances, have bent over backward to avoid making pronouncements that sanctions are categorically unavailable, deliberately keeping the sanctions issue in a state of low salience and at least nominal legal uncertainty. Fourth, even though contempt findings are practically devoid of sanctions, they have a shaming effect that gives them substantial if imperfect deterrent power.
papers.ssrn.com...

Let's leave the current (and past) politics out of it. Turn it around, say a conservative judge issued such an order to a liberal government.

Jail time for officials, cabinet members?

Fine the government, with the proceeds going to the Treasury? That seems dumb.

Or Just make the government look bad? (Yeah, right.)
edit on 6/28/2018 by Phage because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 28 2018 @ 12:45 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

I don't have the answer but ...

As long as some of the Judges are partisan hacks ... should we then do the same to them?

Some of those Judgements are so far away from the Constitution that one has to wonder.

As you pointed out, fines are meaningless. Jail time is the only answer but then, some of these judges are loony.

P



posted on Jun, 28 2018 @ 12:50 AM
link   
a reply to: pheonix358
Current politics are not relevant to the purpose of this discussion.

What if the Supreme Court were to issue an order and the government did not comply. That hasn't happened as far as I know, but hypothetically speaking?

What recourse is there? Is it not the responsibility of the DOJ to enforce the law? Is not the Court the ultimate authority on the law?

edit on 6/28/2018 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 28 2018 @ 01:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: pheonix358
Current politics are not relevant to the purpose of this discussion.

What if the Supreme Court were to issue an order and the government did not comply. That hasn't happened as far as I know, but hypothetically speaking?

What recourse is there? Is it not the responsibility of the DOJ to enforce the law? Is not the Court the ultimate authority on the law?

Sounds like it could lead to a Constitutional crisis.

If the Supreme Court issued an order, and it was incumbent upon the DOJ to enforce the order, and they ignored it, then it would up to the President to make the DOJ perform its duty.

If the President can not, or will not, make the DOJ perform their duty, then it's up to Congress to begin impeachment proceedings.

That's the way I think it's supposed to work. Checks and balances and all.

-dex



posted on Jun, 28 2018 @ 01:28 AM
link   
a reply to: DexterRiley

The buck stops there. Sounds good.

But it ends up back where it started. What happens to the order? How is it executed?

It really seems that action against the concerned department head would be the most obvious course, and the DOJ, Congress, or the president could do that. I think.

I wonder what happens next.



posted on Jun, 28 2018 @ 01:38 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

The result will be the government will print more money and keep on spending on the military.



posted on Jun, 28 2018 @ 01:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: DexterRiley

The buck stops there. Sounds good.

But it ends up back where it started. What happens to the order? How is it executed?

It really seems that action against the concerned department head would be the most obvious course, and the DOJ, Congress, or the president could do that. I think.

I wonder what happens next.

I think until the other concerned parties get it worked out the order is not enforced.

However, if there were an urgency to the order where serious and lasting damage could be incurred from ignoring it, then a breakdown in the chain-of-command may occur. Those closest to the situation who are capable of implementing the court order may take unilateral action.

-dex



posted on Jun, 28 2018 @ 01:57 AM
link   
a reply to: DexterRiley




Those closest to the situation who are capable of implementing the court order may take unilateral action.

I too am an optimist. Try to be, anyway.



posted on Jun, 28 2018 @ 02:13 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage




Current politics are not relevant to the purpose of this discussion.


Lol.

Nice try, but politics from the bench should see the Judges turfed out on their backsides.

You need to look at the whole picture ... not just the little corner that is safe space.

P



posted on Jun, 28 2018 @ 02:14 AM
link   
a reply to: pheonix358




Nice try, but politics from the bench should see the Judges turfed out on their backsides.
Fine. You know that there is a procedure for that, right? Or do you favor tar and feathers? A hanging tree?


In the meantime, what happens to the order?

edit on 6/28/2018 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 28 2018 @ 02:19 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

I guess you put kids in prison with their parents.

The decision will not stand ... it is hideous.

The only way to really do it is to just send the whole family back from whence they came without processing.

But then, the ones who want kiddies in jail with their parents would cry, cry and cry some more.

These are all roadblocks.

President Trump seems to be good at plowing through roadblocks.

P



posted on Jun, 28 2018 @ 02:22 AM
link   
a reply to: pheonix358




I guess you put kids in prison with their parents.

In this case the trick might be in getting them back together at all, within the stipulated time frame. But you're getting all specific again.


edit on 6/28/2018 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 28 2018 @ 04:47 PM
link   
Didn't President Trump sign the Executive Order to keep illegal immigrant families together and stop Obama's "Family Separation Rule" , days ago ?
Does that not kinda make this thread moot and pointless ?
Especially on a "what if unicorn farts cured all diseases" style thread .







 
12

log in

join