>executive order on DACA, you can't without congress

>>140481010
There's no correlation between these 2 premises.

>>140481085
>There's no correlation between these 2 premises.

Both deal with immigration, both were dealt without congress.

Using Trump's own logic he should resign for signing that Muslim majority country ban in February.

>>140481163
Muslim isn't a race, it's an ideology. And it specifically is in relation with the concern for American safety. Notice that how not all Muslims were barred from entering the U.S., just certain countries.

DACA was an executive order to begin with, so it's obvious Trump can get rid of it with a pen stroke. This is in relation to the legality status of the illegal immigrants.

They aren't the same thing at all. Try using some critical thinking.

File: chad face.jpg (7KB, 241x209px)

7KB, 241x209px

>>140481010
one is making people citizens who are not citizens.
the other is excluding citizens and not citizens for national security.

>>140481163
>Both deal with immigration, both were dealt without congress.
>Using Trump's own logic he should resign for signing that Muslim majority country ban in February.

Top notch reddit. Top notch.

File: 1500511449760.jpg (40KB, 599x412px)

40KB, 599x412px

>>140481010
Indonesia has the largest muslim population in the world yet it isn't banned.

who cares, muslims are shitskins of the lowest breed, literally nigger-tier.

>>140481163

This feels like a waste of time to respond and I should be studying, but this is a mistake of law.

Legislation exists which allows the executive to exercise a discretion on immigration policy, being the ability to exclude aliens based on a set of beliefs that the executive holds, to do with security, etc. Trump's ban was an exercise of a discretion allocated to him by the legislative branch, and intra vires.

Obama's purported amnesty amounted to, at best, an impermissible fettering of discretion. More likely, it amounted to an executive policy going to a ban on departments enforcing legislation with respect to prescribed parties, which is essentially ultra vires.

It worked because nobody challenged it. If someone did, it would stop working quite quickly, given that it was the equivalent of a police department policy not to charge shoplifters, all the while shoplifting still being an offence in the relevant criminal code.

tl;dr Obama should have smoked less weed in law school and maybe should have read a few cases.

>>140481010
You're not a 1-post OP, so I'll explain it. Congress explicitly gives the President the power to ban any class of people from entering the country. Naturalization, however, is simply not up to the president, and must be passed by Congress. That's all there is to it.

Also,
> /pol/ is against immigration of violent people/non-whites into the US
Wow who would've thought.
We will fight. You will not replace us.

File: goback.jpg (174KB, 712x1024px)

174KB, 712x1024px

>>140481010
hi leddit
have a se.. nah actually don't
get the fuck back

>>140481010

> i do not understand law in anyway

democrats actually believe this.

>>140482169
>It worked because nobody challenged it.
They did challenge it. That's why these poor brown illegals are still non-naturalized.

>>140481010
the ppl who want 2 kill me can be banned?
those ppl ruin parties

phew

>>140482490
>They did challenge it.

To what extent? Was there a component purporting to grant naturalisation outside the Act that was specifically challenged? Or do you mean political pressure wrote that bit off?

I fancy the entire eo is ultra vires to the extent that it purports to grant rights, etc, outside the power of the executive to actually grant. The inconsistency with existing immigration law and the in existence of the relevant discretion is just to obvious to maintain.

>>140482755
Out of shower.

Obama's original DACA had a two-year period of deferred action. This has already expired. In Dec 2014, Obama tried to expand it. The states challenged this and the court injunction was kept.
>In February 2015, Judge Andrew S. Hanen issued a preliminary injunction blocking the expansion from going into effect while the case, Texas v. United States, proceeds.[9][10] After progressing through the court system, an equally divided (4-4) Supreme Court left the injunction in place, without setting any precedent.

So now Trump is freee to deport them, but will wait 6 months.