|
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend Bookmark this thread |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » General Discussion |
in_cog_ni_to (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-29-11 07:41 PM Original message |
UCLA Law Professor says "In this instance, the President CAN use the 14th Amendment!" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
elleng (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-29-11 07:42 PM Response to Original message |
1. Zaslaff. Excellent discussion. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
rucky (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-29-11 07:43 PM Response to Original message |
2. Obama v. US Congress |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
in_cog_ni_to (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-29-11 07:48 PM Response to Reply #2 |
6. Impeaching Clinton really worked out well for them, eh? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Chan790 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-29-11 07:50 PM Response to Reply #2 |
8. Does Congress have standing? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
msanthrope (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-29-11 07:51 PM Response to Reply #8 |
10. Any member has standing to file. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
indepat (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Jul-30-11 03:49 PM Response to Reply #2 |
41. The felonious five would surely assure a 5-4 decision against Obama showing |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
KittysRfuzzy (13 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Jul-30-11 03:54 PM Response to Reply #2 |
42. Then let the right wingers of the SC do it |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
cabot (101 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-29-11 07:44 PM Response to Original message |
3. not an american |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
in_cog_ni_to (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-29-11 07:52 PM Response to Reply #3 |
11. Thank you for caring! Here's the 14th Amendment: |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
cabot (101 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-29-11 07:56 PM Response to Reply #11 |
14. thanks! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
in_cog_ni_to (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-29-11 08:05 PM Response to Reply #14 |
17. If any country should be concerned, it should be Canada. Hopefully, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
cabot (101 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-29-11 08:10 PM Response to Reply #17 |
19. just know the majority of canadians |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
in_cog_ni_to (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-29-11 08:12 PM Response to Reply #19 |
20. LOL.... :) Good. At least it's not just us who think they're insane. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Samantha (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-29-11 07:47 PM Response to Original message |
4. He referred to the extended powers of the presidency |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Samantha (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-29-11 07:48 PM Response to Reply #4 |
7. PS He also said the Republicans ARE using the debt ceiling |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
in_cog_ni_to (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-29-11 07:56 PM Response to Reply #7 |
13. Thank You for explaining what he said. I caught, literally, the last 10 seconds when he said |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DURHAM D (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-29-11 07:48 PM Response to Original message |
5. Best discussion I have heard on the 14th. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Samantha (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-29-11 07:50 PM Response to Reply #5 |
9. I could not agree more |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DURHAM D (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-29-11 07:54 PM Response to Reply #9 |
12. There is a vast difference between being a con law professor and |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Samantha (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-29-11 08:30 PM Response to Reply #12 |
25. No, the Chicago University of Law said he was a professor |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DURHAM D (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-29-11 08:40 PM Response to Reply #25 |
27. No what? Don't understand your response. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Samantha (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Jul-30-11 11:41 AM Response to Reply #27 |
39. I think I misunderstood your post |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Samantha (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Jul-30-11 11:45 AM Response to Reply #27 |
40. Okay, I see what you saying now |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
lumberjack_jeff (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-29-11 10:15 PM Response to Reply #5 |
33. EXACTLY. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
creeksneakers2 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-29-11 08:01 PM Response to Original message |
15. Most of the experts who say Obama can seize power |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
NYC Liberal (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-29-11 08:03 PM Response to Original message |
16. Even though the 14th Amendment specifically says only Congress can enforce it? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
in_cog_ni_to (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-29-11 08:09 PM Response to Reply #16 |
18. They refuse to enforce it. That gives Obama the power to do it himself. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
NYC Liberal (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-29-11 08:21 PM Response to Reply #18 |
21. It's iffy. I agree that barring any precedent against it, he could probably do it. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
in_cog_ni_to (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-29-11 08:23 PM Response to Reply #21 |
22. And I think that's the card he's holding close to his chest. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
NYC Liberal (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-29-11 08:32 PM Response to Reply #22 |
26. Yeah, he can't do it when Congress is still debating. He has to be able to say, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
csziggy (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-29-11 10:15 PM Response to Reply #16 |
34. The 14th Amendment has been used against Congress, also |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
NYC Liberal (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-29-11 11:13 PM Response to Reply #34 |
37. Yes, however those were specific laws passed by Congress that were struck down. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
SlimJimmy (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Jul-30-11 05:57 AM Response to Reply #34 |
38. Congress is not trying to override their obligations in this case. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DearAbby (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-29-11 08:23 PM Response to Original message |
23. Interesting argument |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
SusanaMontana41 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-29-11 08:24 PM Response to Original message |
24. If only Obama would do this. But |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
sendero (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-29-11 08:43 PM Response to Original message |
28. Obama does not have the huevos. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Sarah Ibarruri (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-29-11 09:09 PM Response to Original message |
29. And the reason he's not, is? nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
in_cog_ni_to (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-29-11 09:27 PM Response to Reply #29 |
31. Waiting until he has exhausted all options? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Sarah Ibarruri (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-29-11 10:11 PM Response to Reply #31 |
32. Hmmm... maybe I just don't understand what I'm watching. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Pirate Smile (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-29-11 10:32 PM Response to Reply #31 |
36. It would make no sense for him to signal that he would use it ahead of time because that would just |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
jtrockville (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-29-11 09:23 PM Response to Original message |
30. University of California? The same folks who employ Yoo? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
lumberjack_jeff (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-29-11 10:16 PM Response to Reply #30 |
35. Turns out that torture was legal. Who knew? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
muriel_volestrangler (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Jul-30-11 04:47 PM Response to Original message |
43. Can someone explain his argument to me? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) | Sat May 04th 2024, 07:48 AM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » General Discussion |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC