Constitutional Emergency


Three things that are illegal about Obama's immigration plan


Published November 20, 2014

It’s official. By executive fiat, President Obama will grant amnesty to up to 5 million immigrants living illegally in the United States.

How did we get here? Didn’t the president say, even last year, that he couldn’t, and wouldn’t take executive action on immigration?

If Obama ever finds himself in a court of law, he would surely be advised to invoke the Fifth Amendment. He is prone to contradiction and tends to be a good witness against himself.

Consider his self-incriminating statements on immigration and executive powers. A year ago, when asked if he had the authority to end deportations of illegal aliens he said, “Actually, I don’t.” Three years earlier, when pressed as to why he could not act on his own on immigration he said, “The notion that somehow I can just change the laws unilaterally is just not true.”

Well, now the president says it is true -- he can alter the laws unilaterally. Why the metamorphosis? What changed? The law and the Constitution are still the same. Which leaves Obama. When it comes to the truth, inconvenient or otherwise, he is a chameleon like no other politician. He never hesitates to contradict himself, conjuring a new breadth of hypocrisy.

President Obama’s favorite justification for his executive action is that “Congress failed to act.” No, Mr. President, Congress did not fail to act, it chose not to act in granting amnesty. 

There is a difference. A determination not to act is, by itself, a deliberate act. This is how the framers constructed our system of government. Congress considers and debates a great many bills. Not all of them pass. This is not “failure” in the conventional sense, but decision by declination. It constitutes a prudent and calculated process.

But the president uses this contrived “failure” as a pretext to arrogate the authority of another branch of government. He wields his pen to legislate by executive decree. He well knows he is exceeding his power. In 2011, he said, “I know some people want me to bypass Congress and change the (immigration) on my own. But that‘s not how our system works. That’s not how our democracy functions. That’s not how our Constitution is written.” He was right. It was a rare moment of clarity for a man who fancies himself a constitutional scholar.

Now, however, by granting legal status to roughly half the nation’s population of illegal immigrants, Obama is twisting the law, ignoring the Constitution, and abdicating his primary responsibility as chief executive. For years, he argued publicly it would be unconstitutional for him to take such action because he said, “I’m president, I’m not king.” Apparently, he now favors a crown on his noggin. In truth, he is king of self-confutation, negating himself with his own words.

Recently, when asked why he disagreed with himself, the president insisted, “Well, actually, my position hasn’t changed”. After the laughter died down, the Washington Post Fact Checker gave Obama an upside-down Pinocchio for his tortured denial of a blatant flip-flop.

The president’s executive order to legalize illegals by nullifying existing law, constitutes a stunning abuse of office: usurping the power of Congress, while abdicating his duty to uphold and enforce the laws. Here are three ways this is happening:

1. Distorting Prosecutorial Discretion 

President Obama claims he is entitled to overhaul immigration laws in the name of  “prosecutorial discretion.” It is one of those wonderfully fungible phrases in the law. Elastic because it is vague and ambiguous. Useful because it can be easily abused. Mr. Obama has appropriated this doctrine to argue he has near boundless discretion to amend, revise, waive or suspend the execution of immigration laws. As chief executive, he is empowering himself to decide what laws may be enforced or ignored and what persons may come or go across our southern border irrespective of what the law actually states.

In past decisions, the U.S. Supreme Court has cautioned the executive branch that its prosecutorial discretion, while broad, is not “unfettered.” It is subject to restrictions. The doctrine may not be used to adopt a sweeping policy of non-enforcement of the law. It applies only to decisions not to prosecute or expel specific individuals or small groups of people, typically for exigent reasons like war, civil unrest or political persecution.

By contrast, President Obama is bestowing a wholesale, blanket amnesty for an entire class of nearly 5 million people. He is doing so not for the reasons allowed by law, but for purposes that appear to be purely political. This is a flagrant abuse of prosecutorial discretion. His expansive action exceeds his authority in ways that none of his predecessors ever envisioned. And it is a radical departure from any of the executive orders issued by previous presidents.

It is true that President Ronald Reagan utilized executive action in 1987 to grant a limited deportation reprieve to certain spouses and young children of immigrants. But his order was a logical and direct extension of, not a departure from, an existing amnesty law Congress had already passed. His exemption and a subsequent extension by his successor, President George H. W. Bush, were later incorporated into a new law passed by Congress. The point is instructive. The actions by Reagan and Bush are not a supporting precedent for Mr. Obama, but an important limiting principle of presidential authority.

However, President Obama has commandeered this elastic doctrine of prosecutorial discretion and stretched or manipulated it beyond all recognition and reason. It has become his political Gumby toy with which he exerts his will whenever he fails to get his way with Congress. He contorts the word “discretion” to adopt a capacious policy -- his own policy -- to ban full enforcement of a duly enacted immigration statute. He treats the doctrine as a magical incantation shielding his arbitrariness.

2. Usurping Legislative Authority

Our Constitution clearly delineates a separation of powers. Congress is vested with writing laws and the President is charged with executing those laws. This is especially true when it comes to immigration.

At the end of the 19th century, the Supreme Court declared that Congress had “plenary power” (meaning full and complete) to regulate immigration. Derived from Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution, the doctrine is based on the concept that immigration is a question of national sovereignty, relating to a nation’s right to define its own borders and restrict entrance therein. As the high court observed, “Over no conceivable subject is the legislative power of Congress more complete.”

Yet President Obama has decided to usurp this power by unilateral directive, unconstrained by established checks and balances. In so doing, he is granting himself extra-constitutional authority and upsetting the carefully balanced separation of powers. He is also subverting the nucleus of our constitutional design: the rule of law.

3. Breaching His Sworn Duty

President Obama’s decision that existing laws shall not be enforced against some 5 million illegal immigrants violates his sworn constitutional duty. Article II, Section 3 requires that the President “shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.” Nowhere is it written that the chief executive is granted the latitude to pick and choose which laws he wants to enforce. He cannot ignore or nullify laws he does not like because the constitution gives him no power not to execute laws. To infer such latitude would invite an authoritarian rule anathema to our founding fathers’ vision. President Obama admitted as much when he said, “The fact of the matter is, there are laws on the books that I have to enforce.” He was specifically talking about immigration laws.

In 1996, Congress passed a law which requires federal immigration agents to deport illegal immigrants, with few exceptions. The statutory language is mandatory. Thus, whatever prosecutorial discretion which may have existed previously, was specifically eliminated by that legislative act. Yet, the President is now, in effect, ordering those agents to break the law. He cannot, on his own, engage in a de facto repeal of this law by executive order. To do so would be, quite simply, lawlessness and a dereliction of his duty.

If President Obama can refuse to enforce a valid federal law affecting millions of people, are there any limits to his powers? After all, he has frequently threatened, “Where Congress won’t act, I will.” What is to stop him from rewriting other laws with which he disagrees? Or to act where Congress has declined or refused to act? Can he abolish certain tax laws because Congress chooses to keep them? Can he banish all sources of energy except renewables to advance his agenda on climate change? If so, why even have a legislative branch of government? What’s the point of a Constitution which enumerates and circumscribes powers and duties?

Men like Madison, Jefferson and Adams were keenly aware of the tyranny and corruption of authority concentrated in too few hands. They knew the thirst for power posed an existential danger to those who cherish freedom. Their genius was in crafting a sustaining document that would end the arrogance of one man rule and protect the inherent rights of all men. They knew that absolute power corrupts.

And they feared future presidents like Mr. Obama.

In the history of our republic, no president has dared turn his high office into an instrument of unrestrained power. They held too much respect for their fellow citizens than to abuse or misuse the principles of our democracy. Even Lincoln’s actions to preserve the nation during the Civil War were grounded in the Constitution and the rule of law.

But, like the title of his autobiography, Mr. Obama’s measure of himself seems defined by the word “audacity.” It is no more evident than now.

Views: 1408

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

i found this one quite interesting regarding Obama, a different PoV, but reasoned, worth consideration, imo:   Has he not assisted our awakening activism?  The comprehensive Answer follows, imo:Jury box trumps both ballot and ammunition boxes :)  ---------------------------------------------------------------                                                                                           ONLY THE PEOPLE CAN SAVE AMERICA!! The "hidden fourth" branch of gov't discovered & being "resurrected" to restore America to our constitutional republic PEACEFULLY & LAWFULLY.                         One “votes” daily by one’s words & deeds. Learn how one Chooses to locally participate in revival of true Justice, Freedom & Liberty. Local Radio interview can be accessed at   select Just the Facts dated 10/25/14 mp3.

Listen 1st  then see Quo Warranto some call New NOW Declaration of Independence  on YT or   


Blessings 2 ALL always in all ways  :D

I was in Washington DC last May with OAS. We had at a max of 6000 supporters there. Washington laughed at us. Nothing has changed. Washington is still laughing at us and thumbing their collective Marxist Muslim noses at us and the American people. You can file all the law suits you want, it will not make a difference. You can petition the Congress all you want, it will not make a difference. You can bit** and gripe all you want,  it will not make a difference. These are three of the many reasons I have backed away from PFA and OAS. When will you all realize nothing short of a bloody civil war will change things. And it is coming, it is coming. When the power grid goes down or some other national crises/emergency happens.................the war will start. I'm old and tired but I am ready for it. I am expendable but my children and grandchildren are not. Hopefully they will survive. My family has been in this country for over 300 years and I took an oath in 63 to defend the Constitution. No one has relieved me of that oath. I am ready to defend MY COUNTRY. This Muslim usurper and all of his ilk be damned.

I am looking for a leader that will give us a call to arms. Not more jaw flapping and hand wringing.

End rant.

Mr. Drummond: I was in Washington in May last and I must agree with your assessment. The time for talk has come and gone. This man should not be impeached; he should have been forced to resign long ago. I am a 70 year old Vietnam veteran of the Tet Offensive in 1968 who was 23 and voluntarily enlisted after receiving my degree in , of all things, GOVERNMENT, in June of 1967 June OF 1967. I WAS , AFTER MY VIETNAM SERVICE, ASSIGNED TO WRAMC IN WASHINGTON, D.C., WHERE AS A STAFF MEMBER, I HAD TO DEAL WITH CONGRESS CRETINS WHO TOOK THEIR MEDICAL CARE THERE. IT WAS A REVELATION TO HAVE BEEN IN SUCH A MODIFIED SNAKE PIT! I have had little use for ANY politician since and consider them ALL , regardless of party affiliation, to be career and professional parasites who produce nothing but debt and other problems social, spiritual and economic by their lack of common sense and thirst for the centralization of political power at the EXPENSE OF THE CONSTITUENCIES for their own twisted benefit! If you are successful in finding those who will act, rather than talk, I hope that I too, can participate and to the best of my ability assist you and other patriots and Citizen Soldiers wrest control of OUR COUNTRY  AND THE FUTURE OF OUR PROGENY FROM THIS MARXIST, MUSLIM , MEGALOMANIAC WITHOUT MORALS OR CONSCIENCE!  GOD BLESS AMERICA AND CONDEMN TO HELL THOSE WHO WOULD DESTROY HER!

This is an "AMEN, BROTHER" response, Brian..... spot on!  I agree 100% and I too was in DC May 16th.  As the day wore on I realized we were not going to have "millions" show up..... it was a devastating feeling.... with that said, IMHO, it WAS the start of standing up, in general.  I have felt that the knowledge factor has begun to snowball on this marxist crowd and they are seeing the results.  Like Greg Badger said, be encouraged and I am (at this moment).  There likely will come a time for a call to arms, but we must continue to increase the pressure in every way until then.  When the time comes, I'm with ya.

In fairness, Tish, I rather knew it was going to go as it did because there was no media coverage of the event though it was organized for months in advance. The demonstrations went on until some time in July as far as I know, but there were few leads on any news media outlet. I saw none at all and had hoped at least Fox would pick up or cover the convocation just to be what they usually are but, all to no avail. I honestly believe that since the object was informing everyday people and getting them to SEE what this cabal run by Obama as a New World Order statist Troll, it never had much chance of being what it was intended to be with the deck stacked against it. He is not even the prime mover here but is nothing more than a puppet. He really is not a very bright individual and quite frankly, given his utter lack of any worthwhile accomplishment and with no access to his records, he should NEVER have been elected in 2008. He did not look , act or sound qualified making statements about the "Marine Corpse," having visited most of the "57 states," being caught in many a Biden like gaffe and later on lying as a professional prevaricator when he promised all of an unhappy America that when the ACA was passed; "if you like your insurance, you can keep it!."  and then, interfering with the right of our ACTIVE MILITARY 'S RIGHT TO VOTE! In my opinion he should have been impeached for that alone; let alone the sickening number of scandals and Holder inspired cover-ups which were you or I to do would place US in a federal prison! I do not wish to see him impeached because everything he passed by Executive Order or with congressional approval would remain and, overturning the things we would like to would cost taxpayers billions if not trillions in legal fees but, if forced to resign, ( and unless there has been some clandestine change in constitutional convention and requirement, a very REAL possibility in this most "Transparent of all Administrations,) everything from his administration would be by constitutional LAW, immediately VITIATED! I am 70 years old and a Vietnam vet of the Tet Offensive with the 199th Light Infantry Brigade. Had I known what this country would do to itself and what a  lack of values and COMMON SENSE would prevail, what stupidity the populace has been guilty of by failing to be vigilant and holding their elected leaders both responsible and accountable for their actions, I would NEVER have come home. What would have been the point? All we fought to defend and uphold by the SAME OATH every politician takes prior to taking office, yes even the Imperial idiot,is being ignored and disdained by NOT ONLY HIM but by most of those cretin , criminally Complicit Congress people who enable him! I have also had a degree in GOVERNMENT  since a year PRIOR to my enlisted service in Vietnam. I had not wanted to write next of kin letters as an officer though I had the degree and five full years of military training in two different ROTC venues; Thee years mandatory Army ROTC in High School and 2 more of AFROTC at St. Michael's college in Vermont  After my return from Vietnam, I was assigned for my last 18 months of active duty at Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington, D. C. where I had to deal with  congress cretins on a regular basis. You can tell from my commentary that I have little respect for ANY of them in either party and THAT is why I never entered the political realm myself. SEEING THESE PARASITES IN ACTION UP CLOSE AND PERSONAL WAS TOO MUCH FOR ME AS I HAD A QUALITY MUCH LACKING IN THIS OR ANY CONGRESS: INTEGRITY!.! THE DIFFERENCE AT LARGE BETWEEN ALL OF US WHO SERVED IN THE MILITARY FROM WWII TO THE PRESENT PROVIDED COURAGEOUS AND HONORABLE SERVICE TO THIS COUNTRY AND THOSE IN GOVERNMENT, IS THAT OUR SERVICE WAS HONORABLE AND WE CAN , EVERY ONE OF US PROVE IT UPON REQUEST!. DO YOU REALLY  THINK THAT MOST OF THOSE IN CONGRESS, GUTLESS WONDERS AND CAREER PARASITES CAN ACTUALLY SAY THE SAME? HOW MANY OF THEM EVER; HAVE SERVED ANYTHING BUT THEMSELVES OR THEIR PARTY AGENDAS? THAT. IS WHAT WE NEED TO ADDRESS IF WE WOULD RESTORE THE RULE OF LAW AND THE CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC; RESTORE SELECTIVE  SERVICE, AND ENFORCE IN AN EQUITABLE MANNER  ALL LAWS, NOT JUST THE ONES THE EMPEROR WANNABE WITH DELUSIONS OF GODHOOD LIKES!

We need to take it to a public court, just like Indonesia and Malysia declared Bush, Cheyney, Rumsfeild, all war crimminals having committed mass crimes against humanity, We need to set up You tube publicly distributed courts video prooving the information and proceedings to a massive world wide audience.. as to the guilt or innocence of most public servants be they bankers, congressmen, intellegence eugenics lobby ,  whoever.. Lets start with the folks who pushed through the patriot act and move logically from there.... forwards and backwards

Thanks James, I think we met up in DC last May.

I'll meet you up there again when it starts. I swore that same oath in 1960.

"So Help me GOD"

I will be looking for you brother.

Gee I'm sorry, I thought this was an open forum  So you won't have me bothering you any more, hate groups that act like a bunch of quislings, my first amendment is still valid.

I do not know who has Castigated you for Comment's here, Yes we all do very much, well atleast I do believe in the First Amendment and the rights it enumerates that are God Given not Legislatively. We the People are the Ultimate Seat of Power in this Country and if Congress Fails go do it' job along with the JCoS then we indeed do have the Right and DUTY to remove him from office by any means possible

Only thing I can add,now , is Article IV Section 4  of the Constitution of the United States of America --the United States shall..protect each (of the States) against invasion. ...Obama--like several before him , has FAILED to do this.Fact  check on what he said--and what he failed to say-- suggests that the tide of ILLEGAL immigrants--undocumented Democrats coming north has been on the increase, the number of ILLEGALS stopped and returned to Mexico may be decreasing but how many have been ignored by the Obama policy  and orders to ICE to ignore  Illegals --not to detain? when any person violates the Law and is rewarded for that--it is reasonable to suggest they will not honor the law but expect to have their lawlessness rewarded again-- B.O. case in point. When our chosen officials ignore the law and/or reward others for the same--by what authority do they expect the rest of us to obey the law they ignore.?

What IS this man's real name? Is he Barack Hussein Obama? OR is he Usama Bin ObLadin
Which is it Mister "President"? ANSWER THAT question. WHAT IS YOUR REAL NAME?
He can NOT even answer that simple question, because to do so would require documentation, which HE DOES NOT HAVE.



Old Rooster created this Ning Network.

This effort is focused on sacrifice to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic.

Fox News

Tech Notes

Thousands of Deadly Islamic Terror Attacks Since 9/11


1. Click on State Groups tab at the top of the page.
2. Find your State Flag
3. Click on Flag.
4. Look for link to join Your State Group near the top of the State Groups page.
5. Click on it.

Follow the Prompts

How to post "live" URL in posts at PFA............. Adding URLs in blog posts that are not "live" is a waste of everyone's time.....
Here's how....if anyone has better guidance send to me.....
First........type your text entry into the post block to include typing or paste the URL you want us to view........when finished with the text, highlight and copy the URL in the text.......then click the "add hyperlink" tool in the B, I, U box just above the text entry, after clicking, a window will open asking for the URL...paste the URL in the box and click "OK". You have now made the URL "live" shows some code before the post is published, it goes away when you "publish post".......


© 2020   Created by Old Rooster.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service