The President's Job is to Enforce the Laws (1 Viewer)

[Steve R.]

Mark Levin slams Biden over border, warns it is the 'greatest crisis' facing America | Fox News Video

'Life, Liberty & Levin' host Mark Levin joined 'Fox & Friends Weekend' to discuss the fallout over Biden's border crisis and the Hunter Biden investigation.

video.foxnews.com

An excellent video clip overview by Mark Levin within the background of illegal immigration. The job of the President, as the chief executive officer of the US, is to enforce the laws. The President does not have the personal discretion not to enforce certain laws, to modify laws, or to create "laws" . Biden's failure to enforce the law, to modify the laws, and to create "laws" for personal political purposes are impeachable offenses. Biden seems to believe that he is a "dictator".

 

[Pat Hartman]

I'm pretty sure that there are a number of state's Attorneys General that are suing the federal government for not enforcing immigration laws but the "Supremes" are either not taking the cases or are dismissing them for no standing.

State Challenges to Federal Enforcement of Immigration Law: From the Mid-1990s to the Present (fas.org)
Attorneys General suing Biden administration for not deporting illegal immigrants | The Biden administration is being sued by Alabama’s Attorney General Steve Marshall for ignoring immigration law “that requires the federal government to arrest, detain and deport foreign nationals in the U.S. illegally” , reports Just the News. The Republican attorneys general of Florida and Georgia also joined the lawsuit, which was filed in the U.S. (ussanews.com)

 

[Steve R.]

Worse. The Supreme Court has no enforcement power to make Biden comply, he can just ignore their rulings. Of course, Biden won't actually claim that he would be ignoring the ruling, just that complying is somehow immensely "difficult".

 

[Pat Hartman]

Then the Supremes are a useless expense.

 

[Isaac]

the USSC has always relied on the respectable character of the defendants who are expected to comply without being handcuffed, this was the scenario back in some of the famous ones (I forgot if it's Marbury vs. Madison or one of those anyway), where the USSC established its right to constitutionally review laws and declare them unconstitutional as final arbiter. Whether the party on the receiving end was going to comply was the big question after that case. They did, and from that point on, we've assumed they will - or it would be a "constitutional crisis" which is a nice way of saying "revolution".

 

[Steve R.]

You raise a fundamental shortcoming of civilized society, What happens when a leader purposely breaks laws and there is no "civilized" way to either stop or to remove that leader? Both Biden and Putin fall into that camp. Biden ignores the US Supreme Court and Putin ignores the UN.

 

[Pat Hartman]

I'm pretty sure that the Russian people are not behind Putin either but that never mattered.