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.

 

Federal judge tosses House dems' lawsuit...

page: 1
45
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:
+24 more 
posted on Jun, 3 2019 @ 08:41 PM
link   
Judge tosses House Dems' lawsuit over Trump's use of emergency military funds for border wall

ATS Users and Lurkers,

The House Democrat lawsuit over the administrations use of emergency military funding has been thrown out.


"Washington, D.C., district court Judge Trevor McFadden threw out House Democrats' lawsuitseeking an injunction against President Trump's emergency border wall funding reallocation, saying that the matter is fundamentally a political dispute and that the politicians lack standing to make a legal case."
Et al.

Here we have a federal judge basically saying that the Democrats have no legal standing and if anything are pushing this case for politicized reasons.

Back story incase you forgot, Trump declared a national emergency over the southern border due to congresses inability to fund the border wall. The democrats accused him of basically trying to steal funds from other projects.


"House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and House Democrats then filed suit in April, charging that Trump was "stealing from appropriated funds” by moving $6.7 billion from other projects toward border wall construction.

Democrats argued that the White House had "flouted the fundamental separation-of-powers principles and usurped for itself legislative power specifically vested by the Constitution in Congress."
Et al.

The ruling pretty much states that the courts won't be politiziced by the Democrats.


"But, in his ruling, McFadden, a Trump appointee, suggested Democrats were trying to circumvent the political process.

"This case presents a close question about the appropriate role of the Judiciary in resolving disputes between the other two branches of the Federal Government. To be clear, the court does not imply that Congress may never sue the Executive to protect its powers," McFadden wrote in his opinion. "The Court declines to take sides in this fight between the House and the President."
Et al.

The federal judge goes into detail on the who, what and why. It's actually a lot of detailed information surprisingly, too much to post here.

If any readers would like to break that down, it would be appreciated.

What do you think ATS?




SOURCE:

www.foxnews.com...



edit on Mon Jun 3 2019 by DontTreadOnMe because: EXTAGS ADDED IMPORTANT: Using Content From Other Websites on ATS




posted on Jun, 3 2019 @ 08:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Arnie123

Gee
The cic making a national security judgment?
Hmm who would have thought he had the power to do that??


+9 more 
posted on Jun, 3 2019 @ 08:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Arnie123

Democrats were trying to prevent the President from saving American lives by slowing the influx of law-breakers into this country?

Thank goodness Donald Trump is appointing judges who love America and love life the way normal people are supposed to!


This anti-American Obama judge who ruled in favor of illegal immigrants, and by extension, increased crime, just last week.

REF: www.militarytimes.com... /

was bich-slapped by a REAL judge today. GOOD!



+3 more 
posted on Jun, 3 2019 @ 08:52 PM
link   
I believe the private wall was also given the go ahead to resume construction in the past day or so.

Like it or not people, these walls are going to happen. Everyone wants it to(yes even the dems who 5 years ago wanted better border security).


+3 more 
posted on Jun, 3 2019 @ 08:56 PM
link   
I'm just glad for a Trump win.

In the beginning, it seemed like every judge was against Trump, these...activist judges.

But as time went on and the Trump Administration gradually and slowly started putting their people and elements into positions, we're finally seeing some wins, not based on politics, but by logical law following judges who aren't activist.

Awesome Job and keep it coming Trump!



posted on Jun, 3 2019 @ 09:15 PM
link   
a reply to: MisterSpock


Private walls.... could be the next plan to circumvent Trump. If they cannot stop the walls, they will become a part of the team, building their own private wall with a big fat secret door to keep the flood going incognito..



posted on Jun, 3 2019 @ 09:48 PM
link   
Naw fences and walls don’t work! LOL

Albuquerque relieves a ton of the illegals coming over the border. Sanctuary city you know and all. Dems control the city, county and state politics. They just love the illegal immigrant invasion. Well that is until it starts to effect them. Now they want to build a fence around the University campus because of the crime and filth problems.

What a bunch of jokers,

www.krqe.com...



posted on Jun, 3 2019 @ 09:59 PM
link   
a reply to: whywhynot
It just so happens that when you start making the ivory towers deal with the problems they create, they don't like the problems so much.

Good enough for me, but not for thee!



posted on Jun, 3 2019 @ 10:15 PM
link   
a reply to: chadderson
That's a stretch.. LOL.





posted on Jun, 3 2019 @ 10:21 PM
link   
I think it is good that the Judge slammed the Democrats back down for trying to stop our government from trying keeping us safer. I have no problem with legal immigration within reasonable limits, but these people sneaking into our country is breaking the laws of our country. If an American tries to illegally sneak into France, what will happen to that person if the French government catches them. What about in Germany, would they allow people to sneak into their countries from a country not part of their Union? Many of the People in this country are not smart, the lack of intellect is spreading to Canada too.



posted on Jun, 3 2019 @ 10:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: EternalShadow
a reply to: chadderson
That's a stretch.. LOL.


Is it though???

A liberal judge was recently put on leave with no pay while under investigation.

She refused to hand over an illegal Alien. ICE was in the courtroom and she let him slip, literally, through the BACK DOOR.

Yes, this did happen.

So I wouldn't put it past them, but even still, I'll have to agree that it is quite a stretch, but not impossible to consider.
edit on 3-6-2019 by Arnie123 because: Errors.



posted on Jun, 3 2019 @ 10:44 PM
link   
The Dem losses are really starting to pile up. Must be a real shot to the Dem ego to watch people who love their country, be vindicated(again) while their chances of instituting total fascism in America, die day by day. Breaks the heart....



posted on Jun, 3 2019 @ 10:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: BoscoMoney
The Dem losses are really starting to pile up. Must be a real shot to the Dem ego to watch people who love their country, be vindicated(again) while their chances of instituting total fascism in America, die day by day. Breaks the heart....
Most definitely.

Perhaps if they decided to actually cut the hyper partisan BS out and stop calling anyone and everything a racist, they might get somewhere.



posted on Jun, 4 2019 @ 12:58 AM
link   
a reply to: Arnie123




Because the White House had not "nullified" that legislative power, McFadden wrote, there was no urgent need for judicial intervention sufficient to override the considerations of the political question doctrine, which holds that courts generally stay out of politically sensitive matters best left to voters.


So this one judge out out of many that are hearing cases about the wall funding decided it was better that he stay out of it.
After reading I see that he has good reasons.

One reason he gives.


Additionally, McFadden said Democrats retained constitutional legislative options with which to remedy their objections about the president's purported misuse of the Appropriations Clause.

Makes a good point. Makes it several times even.


McFadden noted in particular that Democrats retained the power to modify or even repeal the appropriations law if they wanted to "exempt future appropriations" from the Trump administration's reach


The article mentions a case where another judge blocked the trump admin. www.texastribune.org...

This stands out to me.


About $1 billion has been moved from military pay and pension accounts, transfers that Gilliam ruled against Friday, but no money has been transferred from the emergency military construction fund for which the president declared a state of emergency in February. That fund represents about $3.6 billion of the money Trump wants to use.


Wtf! Trump wants to take the wall money from military pay! And pensions!
I'm fine with the money coming from the military construction fund but not the pay and pensions.

I wonder how many active military know about this?
edit on 4-6-2019 by scraedtosleep because: (no reason given)

edit on 4-6-2019 by scraedtosleep because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 4 2019 @ 05:22 AM
link   
a reply to: scraedtosleep

That read (IN a Sienfeld voice) YADA YADA YADA.... it sounded like "I hate it that Trump is POTUS". The D's have let our troops down for YEARS. He now has them working for America and not for the haters of Freedom. Continue to think otherwise it won't change the fact the Military would take a bullet for POTUS 45.

edit on 4-6-2019 by Justoneman because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 4 2019 @ 05:26 AM
link   
a reply to: Arnie123

So he didnt find for trump either.

He basically said.. this is politics solve it yourselves.

You act like the judge made a ruling in trumps favor. LOL



posted on Jun, 4 2019 @ 06:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Arnie123

So he didnt find for trump either.

He basically said.. this is politics solve it yourselves.

You act like the judge made a ruling in trumps favor. LOL
It is though.

The judged tossed the suit, said we won't be politicized.



posted on Jun, 4 2019 @ 09:40 AM
link   
Let's Keep A GREAT Thing Going: twitter.com...



posted on Jun, 4 2019 @ 09:46 AM
link   
Wall issue aside I agree with the judge. This what happens when Congress is split.



posted on Jun, 4 2019 @ 09:52 AM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

If I am facing a lawsuit against me and the judge hearing the case tosses it out, that's called a "win" for me and a "loss" for whoever is suing me.

TheRedneck




top topics



 
45
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join