18 Burst results for "Justice Jackson"

"justice jackson" Discussed on 860AM The Answer

860AM The Answer

03:57 min | 1 year ago

"justice jackson" Discussed on 860AM The Answer

"To welcome back America, Ugo and inside the Beltway. On a wonderful Friday that brown Russia, Shauna begins a blessed Russia Shauna to our Jewish friends. They'd be in their high holy days. And as the Browns begin their their run to the Super Bowl last night, I'm in a joyous mood begun really on Wednesday night when Attorney General Bill Bar without Hillsdale College for Constitution Day. With Dr Larry aren't great speech. Followed up by National Archives and Wreck Administration speech by Donald Trump yesterday announcing the 17 76 commissioner, rebuke to the 16 19 project, which is nuts and the 17 76 Commission. A great thing. Maybe Larry aren't should chair that, but I'm focused on Bill Bar at Hillsdale. I think it's all posted at hillsdale dot edu, But I've got the best of the audio this morning. Here is the attorney general Wednesday night. Hillsdale College Hillsdale, Daddy talking about the power that federal prosecutors have this sets up the whole speech cut number four. Federal prosecutors possess tremendous Power power that is necessary to enforce our laws and punished wrongdoing. But power that, like all power any other power Carries inherent potential for abuse. Justice Jackson recognize this and as he put it, the prosecutor has more control. Over the life, liberty and reputation. Than any other person in America. Stop for a second stop for a second on Twitter there telling me they're not hearing the bill Bar audio Is that possible? Generalisimo, we fix it, okay? Let's go back then. To the start of this bill, they didn't hear the first part. So I want to go back to cut number two about why the Constitution is actually let's start over Cut number one. Larry are has just introduced Bill Bar. I was telling Larry I don't get to make many speeches like this. I'm usually Talking about crime rates and that kind of thing, but I wanted to speak in Hillsdale because it's one of the few Maybe a handful of institutions of higher learning where it Is actually worth while spending the money to get an education at how insufferable is Larry aren't going to be this morning on the Hillsdale dialogue, But now you can hear the audio here is the attorney general talking about the separation of powers cut number two. The framers recognized it by dividing the legislative executive and judicial powers. Each significant but each limited They would minimize the risk of any form of tyranny. That is the real genius of the Constitution, and it ultimately Is more important to securing liberty. In the bill of rights. He's right about that. And he goes on. Then to explain how Article two has the power to prosecute cut number three. The Supreme Court has correctly held it under Article two of the Constitution. The executive has virtually unchecked discretion to decide whether to prosecute individuals for suspected crimes. We all know that as the executive Vested with the responsibility for seeing that the laws are faithfully executed. The power to execute and enforce law is an executive function altogether. And that means discretion is vested in the executive to determine when to exercise the prosecutorial power. Now that is so important, he explains. Why? Because I have so much power cut number four. Federal prosecutors possess tremendous Power power that is necessary to enforce our laws and punished wrongdoing. But power that, like all power any.

Bill Bar Hillsdale College Hillsdale Hillsdale Dr Larry executive Attorney America Shauna Russia Browns 17 76 Commission Twitter Ugo Donald Trump Justice Jackson National Archives Generalisimo Wreck Administration
History of the US Income Tax

Planet Money

10:01 min | 1 year ago

History of the US Income Tax

"But our country has this really conflicted history with the income tax. It was not designed by our founding fathers for most of American history there was no income tax at all in the years are brand new government needed some way to raise money, but there was no need to mess around with an income tax. The government had a much simpler way just. Tax The stuff that comes into the ports for a long time really the only way that they raised money was using tariff duties duties on imported goods. This is tax historian Joe, thorndike and tariffs are simple. Right? You send out a tax collector told the major ports ship pulls import us go through the manifests, check the cargo and you add up whatever you WANNA tax sugar guns, books simple. But there's one big problem with tariffs they fail you the one time you really really really need revenue tariff duties are great way to raise money as long as you're not fighting a war yet because someone's blocking airport right or sinking your ships on the way. News Yeah. And that that does tend to depress a little bit. So when in the United States do people start to think and talk about an income tax will you know the earliest? In American history that I know of comes during the war of eighteen twelve when the treasury secretary throws it out there it's it's really kind of a throw away in a report that he sends to Congress. You know, hey, we could consider taxing incomes but this suggestion during the war of eighteen twelve, it goes nowhere an income tax is actually a very complicated thing to pull off successfully there are three big obstacles to getting it. Right. The first obstacle is logistics like how do you make sure people pay a percentage of their income? Oh, it's enormously complicated because it really does come down to. The individual, who's filing this return, and that person we're going to expect them to begin with just to keep track of how much they're earning. Then expect a lot of honesty from them about reporting those records to the government and to make sure that they're actually doing the job you didn't have to create this huge administrative apparatus to go in and enforce it, and you have to give these people the power to dig through the personal financial records of every taxpayer, and that's usually pretty unappealing to tax payers and the government is not going to radically reform the tax code unless it has to. Unless, there's something incredibly expensive it needs to fund. This is how a lot of taxes come out. There's a war, and in fact, fifty years after the idea of the income taxes I floated such a war comes to pass the civil war. This is a very, very, very expensive warm Congress needs money to feed its soldiers by guns, cannon ships. So this time, it's not just one guy. Bringing up the income taxes a suggestion this time. Congress makes it law and even more importantly they come up with a way to enforce it Congress provides for the creation of the Bureau of internal. Revenue this is the first real income tax in the United States, but it doesn't look quite like the one we have today during the civil war only the wealthy had to pay income tax. And the government does this really very clever thing to get rich people to pay it. It makes tax returns public during the civil war anyone could go in and look up your income tax return or at least your report of how much you earn and the idea was that this would help improve compliance because your neighbor would see you driving around on your brand new plow and he'd. Say Wait a minute I that guy get all that money I'm going to see how much he reported on his income tax and they'd go in and they check it out and they could report to the agency and say, Hey, you know I. Don't think that this is the right number. This guy looks like he's living too large for this sort of an income they sort of conscripted. And made the tax collector. So who is living large in? Let's say Washington DC in eighteen, sixty four. Well, we pulled up a copy of the tax assessor sheets for DC, during the civil war and there happens to be a guy here Abraham. Lincoln. Address White House at the White House. Everyone knows where it is it's senator and and the taxes he paid I'm sure people were very interested in this one, thousand, two, hundred, ninety dollars. They're also entries here for restaurant owners for liquor dealers some guy lived on longboat may be in the Potomac River. It's clear from this list that people were paying taxes, the plan worked. Well, some people are paying taxes the north part of the country. Remember this is the civil war, the south. Also attempted an income tax attempted they had a much less effective, a tax system and their income tax was much less effective than the North's version. Is there a case to be made? The civil war was sort of an economic battle in the in the north was better at at that and raising money and and that's one reason at one. Oh, absolutely I mean taxes do have a lot to do with the. North. Winning the war. Not just taxes, but the North's ability to borrow money it. It just had a better economic foundation for fighting a big warlike that you know the income tax worked. So well during the war, you would think that the US government would want to keep it around I. Mean it's Nice to have extra money when you're actually rebuilding from the carnage and such but once the conflict ended, there was this big argument about whether to keep the. Income tax round or not, and now the income tax hits its second obstacle a legal obstacle. Remember how he said the income tax only hits the rich. Well, the rich did not like it and the rich have lawyers in eighteen ninety, five legal challenge to the income tax reaches the US Supreme Court here's economic historian John Steele Gordon. My great great uncle was one of the lead lawyers in that case and guess which side he was on. The trying to shoot down the income then you've got. Cable. He was a Morgan partner at five years later. The argument John Steele Gordon great great uncle made in court was that the income tax violated little document that we'd like to call the US Constitution here Ariba line to you. It says quote direct taxes shall be apportioned among the states according to their respective numbers. I will translate that for you if the federal government wants to raise money directly from people or property, then it has to divide the tax burden up equally Among the states according to their population. So if a state had ten percent of America's population, it should only have to pay about ten percent of the tax and the income tax wasn't taxing according to population it was taxing according to income. So the question before the Supreme Court is and as is often the case it's something kind of knowingly subtle and hard to follow. The question is, is the income tax eight direct tax. I stayed up late last night reading court documents. This is a huge rabbit hole of complicated things, but it comes down to this if any part of this income tax law passed by Congress, if any of the many taxes embedded inside considered a direct tax, then Congress did it wrong? The law is unconstitutional. That is the question that justices had to decide a very interesting thing happened in the Supreme Court. One justice was ill evacuate dying Justice Jackson from Tennessee who was argued before eight justices and they split four four as to whether or not the income tax was a direct tax and therefore unconstitutional. That's why we have an odd number of justices. He can't have a tire. Exactly. was. A four four time. The court decided that the case was simply too important to be tied, and so they haul justice Jackson out of his deathbed. Now odd number of justices and everybody knew that he was in favor of the income tax because he'd said. So publicly, Z. Really Dying Jesse really died two months later. So the lawyers re argue the case Justice Robert Jackson is. In the final days of his life is a pro income tax guy. So he's going to break the tie in favor of the income tax and the tie was broken case was decided five four. But the crazy thing is it was five four the other way it was a five four decision against the income tax. One of the other justices we don't know who switched his vote. and. So the tax was unconstitutional. No income tax. How do people reacted the time to this little intrigue Oh they've there would be a there was a lot of. In the papers about it, but the Supreme Court was silent as it so often is to what the internal workings we really don't know who who, really don't know who it but somebody's which their vote we just don't know. So there's this weird stretch in the middle of American history where the income tax has been ruled unconstitutional but this didn't in anyway settled the argument I mean, if anything the debate over income tax in America grew more heated. This is the time when a lot of big industrialists are getting filthy rich JP Morgan, Rockefeller Carnegie, and at this exact time, the nation has no income tax, the people who are not JP Morgan or Rockefeller Carnegie in the country. A lot of them feel those guys the rich need to bear more of the burden. So nearly twenty years after the income tax is ruled unconstitutional, we get an amendment to the Constitution the sixteen, th amendment ratified in nineteen thirteen a single sentence which begins the Congress shall have the power to lay and collect taxes on incomes just in time for another war World War One. So the income tax has cleared to hurdles so far logistics check legality check. The income tax needs one more thing to bring it into the modern age. One More L. Word Love the income tax of to this point has been a tax on the rich right everyone else was exempt in fact when they bring the income tax back after the constitutional amendment, less than two percent of the population has to pay. All this changes though with World War Two, the government needs more money and now ordinary folks are asked to pay again Joe Thorndike this is a is a real revolution because for most Americans, they've never had this kind of direct tax paying relationship with the federal government. You know they're paying excise taxes on alcohol tobacco or consumer goods but those things are are usually levied somewhere other than like on the consumer you know they're levied at the manufacturer level for the first time. Americans are sort of confronting the federal government as a tax collector and the middle. Class has never paid this tax before they not sure what to do a whole in nineteen forty-three show that one third to one half of people were unclear what

Us Supreme Court Congress United States Federal Government Joe Thorndike John Steele Gordon Potomac River Washington Jp Morgan Justice Robert Jackson White House Senator Lincoln Tennessee Justice Jackson
"justice jackson" Discussed on AM 970 The Answer

AM 970 The Answer

11:08 min | 2 years ago

"justice jackson" Discussed on AM 970 The Answer

"Driving a stolen America. I did not steal this suggestion. You know, there's the president's going to declare a national emergency and begin to build barriers. He wants to build barriers, and there is a a blizzard of opinion on this. May I add to your to your background in this that presidential power decisions are numerous they are detailed. They are complicated. But none is more important than the opinion of Mr Justice Jackson, one time solicitor general one time attorney general chief prosecutor at Nuremberg for the United States FDR's trusted legal adviser, and then Justice in court in nineteen fifty two Harry Truman attempted to seize the steel mills in the United States because there was a work stoppage threatened by the owners of those mills in anticipation of a strike by the workers in those mills at the height of the Korean war. And this firm court said. Mr president. You can't do that. They turn down and in agreeing that he did not have that authority Justice Jackson who did not right for the court. Who's better who's opinion has become the definitive touchdown of understanding? These deliberations wrote as follows that comprehensive and undefined presidential powers hold bell practical advantages and grave dangers for the country will impress anyone who has served as legal advisor to president in time of transition in public anxiety, while an interval of detached reflection may temper teachings of that experience. They probably are a more realistic influence on my views. That means Justice Jackson. It actually been to Nuremberg. He had seen what untrammeled authority in one individual would lead to the death camps. He had been an adviser to Roosevelt a new the frustrations of having an executive tied down by the separation of power. So he's the ideal person to write this in many respects, a more realistic influence on my views than the conventional materials judicia. Decision which seem unduly to accentuate doctrine and legal fiction. But as we approached the question of presidential power, we have overcome metal hazards by recognizing them the opinions of judges, no less than it executives and publicists radio talk show host or people on MSNBC CNN and FOX those opinions. They often suffer the suffer the infirmity of confusing. The issue of powers validity with the K 'cause it is invoked to promote of confounding the permanent executive office with its temporary occupant. The tendency is strong to emphasize transient result upon policies such as wages are stabilization or border barriers and lose sight of enduring consequences upon the balanced power structure of our Republic. A judge like any executive advisor may be surprised at the poverty, a really useful and unambiguous authority applicable to concrete problems of executive power. If they actually present themselves. Just what did our forefathers invasion or whatever invasion had they foreseen. Modern conditions must be divined from materials as enigmatic is the dream Joseph was called upon to interpret for pharaoh, by the way, whenever I bring this up. I asked my law students how many of you know, what we're talking about here with Joseph and Farrell train. Do they get like five percent? Modern education a century and a half a partisan debate. And scholarly speculation continues. The Justice yields no net result. But only supplies more or less apt quotations from respected sources on any side of each side of the question, they largely cancel each other out and court decisions. They're indecisive because of the Jewish practice of dealing with the largest questions in the most narrow way the the actual art of governing under our constitution. Does not and cannot conform to judicial definitions of the power of any of its branches based upon isolated clauses or single articles torn from context while the constitution diffuses power, the better to secure liberty. It also contemplates that practice will integrate those dispersed powers into a workable government, it enjoins upon its branches separateness but interdependence autonomy, but reciprocity. Presidential powers are not fixed. But fluctuate depending upon. Disjunction or conjunction with those of congress. We may well begin right? Justice Jackson by a somewhat over-simplified in grouping somewhat over-simplified grouping practical situations in which a president may doubt or others may challenge his powers, and by distinguishing Ropley, the lingual the legal consequences of this factor of relativity, one when the president acts pursuant to an express or implied authorization of congress, like the nineteen seventy six emergencies act this authority is at its maximum Ford includes all that he possesses in his own, right? Plus all the congress can delegate it in these circumstances that in these only may it be said for what it may be worth to personify these circumstances in these only may he be said, the president be said for what it may be worth to personify the federal sovereignty if his act is held under constitutional under those circumstances. It usually means that the federal government as an. Undivided whole lacks power of seizure executed by the president pursuant to an act of congress would be supported by the strongest presumptions and the widest latitude of judicial interpretation and the burden of persuasion would rest heavily on any who might attack it when the president this is number two when the president acts in the absence, either of a congressional grant or denial of a thorny he may rely upon his own independent powers. But there is a zone of twilight in which he in congress may have concurrent authority or in which its distribution is uncertain therefore congressional nurse indifference to or or quiescence may sometimes at least as a practical matter, enable if not invite measures on independent presidential responsibility in this area. Any actual test to power is likely to depend on the imperatives of the vents and contemporary imponderables rather than abstract theories of law three when the president takes measures and compatible with the express or. Implied will of congress. Remember, they did pass the border security act of two thousand six a border fence act of two thousand and six in addition to the national emergency an additional to ten million or twenty one million dollars of unfunded appropriation. That needs the money that the Pentagon in the army corps of engineers, and the president can direct it to any answer. They got three authorities. So we're not really zone three. But I want to read it for you zone three when the president takes measures incompatible with the express or implied will of congress. His power is at its lowest ebb for then he can only rely upon his own constitutional powers, minus any constitutional powers of congress over the matter courts can sustain exclusive presidential control in such a case only by disabling, the congress from acting upon the subject presidential claim to power at once so conclusive and preclude must be scrutinized with caution for what it is at stake is the equilibrium established by our constitutional system into any into which of these classic. Does this executive seizure in that case of the steel mills in this case the authority to Bill border barriers? It is eliminated from the first by admission. Where does conceded that? No congressional declaration authorization exists for the seizure. That's not the case with President Trump that takes away the support of the many precedents and declarations which remained in relation to and must be confined in that category. Well, I actually think President Trump is operating in category. One. He's got the secure border pets act of two thousand six. He's got the nineteen seventy six emergency declaration Zack. And he has an appropriation last year. The department of defense for the construction of. Facilities by the army corps of engineers, and affiliated parts of the he's got three explicit. Authorities. The only thing working against him as the congress didn't give it explicit control this session. But those old authorities have not been repealed and congress did not forbid him from building the border barrier. Therefore, I don't know. And you don't know, and nobody knows. But if anyone says, they know they don't know, and you ought to just turn them off forever. Because if they say, they know they don't know now, what is walking Castro would like to be president United States. But nobody knows he's running. What does he say? The former secretary of housing and urban development said the CNN with wolf Blitzer this cut number one. Yeah. I believe that there will be a lawsuit filed in the courts, and then also here in congress in the house, we will file likely joint resolution to negate or terminate his declaration and hopefully take a vote on that. I believe it will pass in the house of representatives. And as I understand the Senate would then have to take a vote on it a mandatory vote. So they couldn't they couldn't block taking a vote on the resolution, and I don't know that the president would have the votes at that point. To uphold in the United States Senate his declaration of emergency to build the border wall. But he didn't know that the president can veto the resolution in which case it would require a two thirds of both houses to override it ain't happening. So they're only going the only way to work. This is to sue now. I assume that the smart lawyers in the White House counsel's office have decided to begin building the wall in Texas on a friendly, Texas landowner's land who's immediately going to sue to prevent the condemnation of his property because we want him to sue in the fifth circuit because that's the same circuit is both of the ninth circuit, and the ninth circuit isn't, trustworthy, because three judges were held up by Jeff flake. May. I remind you who could have been confirmed it would be an almost balanced circuit. And there would be a chance of drawing on a panel that would be reasonable except for Jeff flake, Jeff flake is growing up the constitutional consideration of this. But eventually it's gotta get to the supreme court. But as a matter of politics, it's already alive and kickin Baidoa Rourke Bego beta said, the Chris Hayes on he's running in the NS NBC primary. The MSNBC primaries is underway. And it's really going to be a big MSNBC primary 'cause they're all showing up at the at the studios. Baidoa Rourke says this to Chris as last night cut number two, would you? If you would you take the wall down now here. Yes. Absolutely knock down. I'll take the walking. You think the city you think if there's a referendum here in this city? I do. Wants to take the walls down. That's like Alexander Calcio Cortez didn't want Amazon and can we bring back up one more time to play because again, getting rid of Amazon from New York just reminds me of a line from the movies too stupid. Does sir. That's about they know. That's it. That's sums it up. Amazon not going New York celebrating as stupid does, sir. Well, L journey. Oh, Calcio Cortez is not agree. Number four. Shows..

president congress Mr Justice Jackson United States executive Mr president Nuremberg President Trump Jeff flake army corps of engineers America Harry Truman FDR MSNBC Alexander Calcio Cortez federal government executive advisor Amazon
"justice jackson" Discussed on 860AM The Answer

860AM The Answer

04:21 min | 2 years ago

"justice jackson" Discussed on 860AM The Answer

"Binge listening is advised Dr Arnn Justice Jackson said this President Trump. Presidential powers are not fixed, but fluctuate depending upon their disjunction or conjunction with those of congress. We may well begin by a somewhat over-simplified grouping practical situations in which a president may doubt or others may challenge his powers and by distinguishing roughly the legal consequences of this factor. Relativity one when the president acts pursuant to. An express or implied authorization of congress. His thority is at its maximum for it includes all that he possesses in his own, right? Plus all that congress can delegate in these circumstances. And in these only may he be said for what it may be worth to personify the federal sovereignty if his act actors held unconstitutional under these circumstances. It usually means that the federal government is an undivided whole lacks power. A seizure executed by the president pursuant to an act of congress would be supported by the strongest presumptions and the whitest latitude of judicial interpretation and the burden of persuasion would rest heavily on any who might attack it. Now, given what you know of the laws that have passed the nineteen seventy six law that you referenced earlier the two thousand and six border fence act and the new defense authorization act that gives between ten and twenty billion dollars of unallocated non earmark money to the military to build where building is needed. You think he's in zone one. Yeah. I I I don't actually see how you can say otherwise about that. And and and the. So his first point right Jackson. First point was if they've so the national emergencies act, let's the president do that. And and you know, they Obama declared one for the swine flu. And there was no. Act of congress declaring the swine flu a national emergency and not dead. Certain. There was any kind of emergency national-scale about that. So I just say here's another way to look at it distinguish this from what I think was one of the worst things that Obama did which was he used what he called prosecutorial discretion. Not to prosecute people who have come into the country illegally. Correct. And that means that there's an explicit law. Saying thing is illegal and the president is to take care that the laws be faithfully executed. And he said he wouldn't do it. And that means that you know, that's directly against the law. A law signed by passed by congress and signed by president. So so this is not like that. Right. There's this is a power that is frequently used my own view is I wish it weren't. So frequently used it just interesting that Trump has been reluctant to do. It hasn't done it at this moment. And and he's reluctant to do it because he tried to get he get some stuff, and he tried to get some stuff from congress. So some will interpret the fact that he did not get the stuff from congress as pushing this into zone three where he's in conflict with the congress. But in fact, it's it's clearly not zone three because congress did not tell him not to build the fence. That's the question of language. Right. Correct. Laws are written down, and there's a reason for that. And so if they had said in the law. This and no more. Well, then that way in the he signed that Bill then they've all agreed in his Jackson points out. He was a heck of a guy was he ever and that lovely live. When I mentioned that lovely language that you read it the beginning he liked he liked air. Harry chairman. Heck, I'm giving a talk about Harry Truman tonight. I like Harry Truman as national commander. Although he was kind of Dany. That's true. And so he is point is it isn't personal. And he also makes the point. It isn't just what you think about the issue. It you've got a divorce it from the president who's doing it. And the position of the issue on which you are involved and think in terms of the of.

congress president Dr Arnn Justice Jackson Obama Harry Truman federal government Trump chairman commander Bill twenty billion dollars
"justice jackson" Discussed on News-Talk 1400 The Patriot

News-Talk 1400 The Patriot

05:18 min | 2 years ago

"justice jackson" Discussed on News-Talk 1400 The Patriot

"So if you wanna go for free enjoy a wonderful reception here, Dr Arnn talk about education, the future of American civilization do that. Now, Dr Arnn Mark Murray is a over at NBC, and he is part of the chorus that is saying quote, make no mistake the emergency that Trump faces the border isn't a real national emergency. It's a perceived political one. And he cites as evidence of this violent crime in El Paso, falling since the mid nineteen ninety s apprehensions in El Paso falling over the years, a one to nineteen those are interesting data points. They don't go to the question of the severity of the threat posed by an individual. That's right. And you know that. That judgment, right? Because let me let me let's go back to where we were. There must be a power like this. It's written in the nature of the thing. And indeed the whole distinction between the executive and legislative branches implies things like that. But if the power becomes so broad that the executive branch is just acting of its own without the congress. Then that's really terrible. And I will say there is a danger of that. But that doesn't really come from Donald Trump that comes from the fact that the most of the legislative power has moved into what we call the executive branch, but it's really these hundred and fifty or so agencies their legislative executive engineer branches all rolled into one. And so. Take that factor away, which was just beginning to grow. When Justice Jackson's opinion was was made in nineteen fifty two. It take that away the way you balance that because it is a balance thing is is this emergency power to great. Finally, the people have to balance that right? Yup. And they do every four years elections. Right. And that's how that's how you fix that. Or one of the ways and see conflict between the branches is a signal to the people to get involved. One of the ways you don't fix. It is to have a handful of FBI people decide to take out the president. This is Andrew McCabe on sixty minutes, which will be seen in full on Monday night, the clip they have released cut number eleven. I was speaking to the man who had just run for the presidency and and. And won the election for the presidency. And who might have done. So. With the aid of the government of Russia. Our most formidable adversary on the world stage, and that was something that troubled me greatly. How long was it? After that you decided to start the obstruction of Justice in counterintelligence investigations involving the president. I think the next day I met with the team investigating the Russia cases. And I ask the team to go back and conduct an assessment to determine where are we with these efforts? And what steps do we need to take going forward? I was very concerned that was able to put the Russia case on absolutely solid ground in an indelible fashion. That were I removed quickly reassigned or fired that the case could not be closed or vanish in the night without a trace. I wanted to make sure that our case was on solid ground. And if somebody came in behind me and close. Tried to walk away from it. They would not be able to do that. Without creating a record of why they've made that decision. You wanna date documentary record? That's right that those investigations had begun because you feared that they would be made to go away. That's exactly right. Larry arnn. That is the deputy director of the FBI not the director who has never been elected to anything asserting the power to take control and force an investigation upon adjust elected president. That's right. And that. Just remember can only be obstructive obstruction of Justice to fire an executive official if that official is not under the control of the president. And those officials are not elected and the president is and so it is the clearest thing in the world that any President Donald Trump included can fire any. FBI director James Comey, included, maybe included, especially just because he doesn't like the way you parts his hair, and he could say that and that why because we rightly or wrongly put Donald Trump in that place. And if the, you know, the meaning of the wrangles between the executive and legislative branches. Back in Lincoln's day, for example in an Andrew Johnson's day. Was does the president have the power to dismiss appointed executive visuals? Because if he doesn't then they're working for somebody else in those days, they would have been working for a radical congress. But in these days, they would be working for themselves. Exactly. Right. Dr Larry Arnn, president Hillsdale College. Thank you, my friend..

president Donald Trump executive FBI Dr Larry Arnn Dr Arnn Mark Murray Russia Dr Arnn congress El Paso executive engineer James Comey Justice Jackson NBC Andrew McCabe Lincoln deputy director Hillsdale College Andrew Johnson
"justice jackson" Discussed on 860AM The Answer

860AM The Answer

05:28 min | 2 years ago

"justice jackson" Discussed on 860AM The Answer

"I I am one. Who does not believe I have a clue even though I know the constitutional cases, and I teach them whether or not the declaration of national emergency and the redirection and military funds in the use the military will be upheld as constitutional. But what are you here? Generally is the view of it within green room. Flu may have struck already in there. Be one take in DC. What is it? Well, I didn't have to take 'cause I'm not a lawyer. But when I talk to people close to the White House counsel Patsy bologna, they said that the confidence that they did it's constitutional and that the person that's very broad emergency powers, and they're going ahead with it. So I don't have any information certainly not inside my brain that contradict that earlier today posted a long excerpt on Twitter from Justice Jackson's concurrence in the steel seizure cases. And and it's always ambiguous when the president's use power. But I don't believe yet Jonathan if you get it. It will be the scoop of scoops that anyone has seen the national declaration or the authorities which decided whether it's the nineteen seventy six law or whether it's the secure border active two thousand six Laura whether it's the NBA from last year has anyone got their hands on it yet. I don't and I've not seen anyone that does I've been trying to get it. And no. Pat's it blown his team is competent. They're good lawyers. They're very good lawyers. If they're competent than I'm beginning to think we might be in zone. One is Justice Jackson would say any idea on a time timeline of release. Well, he's going to announce this morning. I'm told. The declaration and the package that surrounds it and the money that that we accessing build the wall could get dragged into diction money military construction money, I should add another point just to what you were saying earlier, I was talking to Trump advisor last night about about the concept is president. And they said to me this is someone who's the president listens to and who is pretty well wide into the legal side of this. And they should look. People talk about, but I'm not that worried about practices because I don't think that a future the doomsday scenario that he brought up his what does president Elizabeth warranty? They said I don't think she's going to care about president. I mean, she's going to want to use the machinery of the federal government to the most maximalist extent to achieve her decades. So it's not like this person was saying like the other side, they said we always getting stuck in this sort of originalist. You know, constructs like the other side is going to. Conservatives are always we're always worried about the slippery slope and the left is jumping off the cliff. We really don't have to worry about slippery slope. I am curious though, if there's any indication of legal strategy that would see a friendly plaintiff say a landowner in Texas tipped off to a condemnation action. So they could bring the challenge in the fifth circuit, which is overwhelmingly originalist and brilliant people like judge with judge Willett judge Jones. There are very smart people down there who could apply the Justice Jackson, a spectrum of one two and three is there any plan to get the case in the fifth circuit as opposed to the ninth circuit, which because of Jeff flakes obstructionism remains heavily tilted to the left. He's a plan. I'm not aware of it. And that doesn't mean that they recruit one, I know I just I tried. This is like you just literally described my reporting challenge for the next twenty hours. Then you put you put out your tip sheet on Sunday night. Do you not do? I want every lawyer and leaker in the White House with or without the approval to go to Jonathan swan on Twitter and establish a link and get him because the details on this matter a lot. It's my whole show next week. Now, very quickly. The Senate is changing its rules on confirmations. But they are not changing them for circuit judges. It's still gonna take thirty hours per circuit. Judge that's nine hundred hours if they get thirty like they did in the first two years. Why didn't they blink the Republicans? Always blink. I mean, they walk right up. They don't the Democrats wouldn't hesitate. Harry Reid didn't hesitate to end the filibuster. He wouldn't hesitate to make the time of debate for circuit. Judges two hours. Why did the Republicans point John? Again, we talked about this before. It's just what I do. I I get inside McConnell's head thought what I would. I pretty confident all the again, you've already heard Elizabeth Warren talk about I. But I'm pretty sure I remember in the last few weeks, I think that we ought to get rid of the legislative filibuster. And I expect that Democrats win back power in the Senate. They won't hesitate to get rid of the legislative filibuster. Yeah. That's interesting. They might I really am opposed to that. But but I just wish the Republicans would play tit for tat and the and and that's just what they do. They blink not match one. It's what. Been pushing. I mean, Trump wants them to get rid of. I don't I don't I separate. Jonathan very quickly. Is there going to be a new secretary of defense? There's some buzz out there that that may be it's going to be Heather Wilson the secretary air force. I think Admiral Stavridis would make a great one Shannon's got some critics. What are you here? Yeah. It's a really good question. Trump has left Shanahan because Burkey reasons one he's much let to him the Mattis was.

president Justice Jackson Jonathan swan Trump Twitter Democrats Republicans Senate judge Willett judge Jones president Elizabeth Flu secretary federal government Elizabeth Warren White House Harry Reid NBA Patsy bologna Pat Admiral Stavridis
"justice jackson" Discussed on 860AM The Answer

860AM The Answer

10:31 min | 2 years ago

"justice jackson" Discussed on 860AM The Answer

"Driving a stolen America. I did not steal this. This is just there's the president's going to declare national emergency and begin to build barriers where he wants to build barriers, and there is a a blizzard of opinion on this. May I add to your? To your background in this that presidential power decisions are numerous they are detailed. They are complicated. But none is more important than the opinion of Mr Justice Jackson, one time solicitor general one time attorney general chief prosecutor at Nuremberg for the United States FDR's trusted legal adviser, and then Justice is brim court in one thousand nine hundred fifty two Harry Truman attempted to seize the steel mills in the United States because there was a work stoppage threatened by the owners of those mills in anticipation of a strike by the workers in those mills at the height than the Korean war. And the supreme court said, No, MR president, you can't do that. They turned him down. And in agreeing that he did not have let thority Justice Jackson who did not right for the court, whose whose opinion has become the definitive touchdown of understanding. These deliberations wrote as follows that comprehensive and undefined presidential powers hold belt practical advantages and grave danger for the country will impress anyone who has served as legal adviser to a president in time of transition in public anxiety, while an interval of detached reflection may temper teachings of that experience. They probably are a more realistic influence on my views. That means Justice Jackson actually been to Nuremberg he had seen what untrammeled authority in one individual would lead to the death camps. He had been an adviser to Roosevelt the new the frustrations of having an executive tied down by the separation of powers. So he's the ideal person to write this in many respects. A more realistic influence on my views than the conventional materials of judicial decision, which seem unduly to accentuate doctrine and legal fiction. But as we approached the question of presidential power, we have overcome mental hazards by recognizing them, the opinions of judges, no less than it executives and publicists radio talk show host or people on MSNBC CNN and FOX those opinions. They often suffer the suffer the infirmity of confusing. The issue of powers validity with the K 'cause it is invoked to promote of confounding the permanent executive office with its temporary occupant. The tendency is strong to emphasize transient result upon policies such as wages are stabilization or border barriers and lose sight of enduring consequences upon the balance power structure of our Republic. A judge like any executive advisor may be surprised at the poverty, a really useful. And unambiguous. Authority applicable the concrete problems of executive power as they actually present themselves. Just what did our forefathers vision or what have been vision had they foreseen modern conditions must be divined from materials as enigmatic as the dream. Joseph was called upon to interpret for pharaoh, by the way, whenever I bring this up. I asked my law students how many of you know, what we're talking about here with Joseph in Pharaoh's dreams and they get like five percent. Modern education a century and a half of partisan debate. And scholarly speculation continues. The Justice yields no net result. But only supplies more or less apt quotations from respected sources on any side of each side of the question, they largely cancel each other out and court decisions are indecisive because of the judicial practice of dealing with the largest questions in the most narrow way the arc the actual art of governing under our constitution. Does not and cannot conform to judicial definitions of the power of any of its branches based upon isolated clauses or single articles torn from context while the constitution diffuses power, the better to secure liberty. It also contemplates that practice will integrate those dispersed powers into a workable government, it enjoins upon its branches separateness but interdependence autonomy, but reciprocity. Presidential powers are not fixed. But fluctuate depending upon. Disjunction or conjunction with those of congress. We may well begin right? Justice Jackson by a somewhat over-simplified in grouping a somewhat over-simplified grouping of practical situations in which a president may doubt or others may challenge his powers and by distinguishing roughly the lingual the legal consequences of this factor of relativity one when the president acts pursuant to an express or implied authorization of congress like the nineteen seventy six emergencies act. This is at its maximum for it includes all that he possesses in his own, right? Plus all the congress can delegate it in these circumstances. And in these only may it be said for what it may be worth to personify these circumstances in these only may he be said, the president be said for what it may be worth to personify the federal sovereignty if his act is held under constitutional under those circumstances. It usually means the federal government as an. Undivided whole lacks power of seizure executed by the president pursuant to an act of congress would be supported by the strongest presumptions and the widest latitude of judicial interpretation and the burden of persuasion would rest heavily on any who might attack it when the president this is number two when the president acts in the absence, either of a congressional grant or denial of a thorny he may rely upon his own independent powers. But there is a zone of twilight in which he in congress may have concurrent authority or in which its distribution is uncertain therefore congressional inertia indifference to or act or essence may sometimes at least as a practical matter, enable if not invite measures on independent presidential responsibility in this area. Any actual test to power is likely to depend on the imperatives of the vents and contemporary imponderables rather than on abstract theories of law three when the president takes measures incompatible with the express or. Implied will of congress. Remember, they did pass the border security act of two thousand six a border fence act of two thousand six in addition to the national emergency an additional to ten million or twenty one million dollars of unfunded appropriation. That meet the money's at the Pentagon in the army corps of engineers and the president can directed to any answer. They got three authorities. So we're not really zone three. But I want to read it for you John three when the president takes measures incompatible with the express or implied will of congress. His power is at its lowest ebb for then he can only rely upon his own constitutional powers, minus any constitutional powers of congress over the matter courts can sustain exclusive presidential control in such a case only by disabling, the congress from acting upon the subject presidential claim to power at once so conclusive and preclude must be scrutinized with caution for what is at stake is the equilibrium established by our constitutional system into any into which of these classes. Vacations does this executive seizure in that case of the steel mills in this case the authority to Bill border barriers fit? It is eliminated from the first by admission Puertas conceded that no congressional declaration authorization exists for the seizure. That's not the case with President Trump that takes away the support of the many precedents and declarations which remained in relation to and must be confined in that category. Well, I actually think President Trump is operating in category. One got the secure border pets act of two thousand six he's got the nineteen Seventy-six emergency declarations act, and he has an appropriation last year. The department of defense for the construction of. Facilities by the army corps of engineers, and affiliated parts of the he's got three explicit. Authorities. The only thing working against him as the congress didn't give it explicit control this session. But those old authorities have not been repealed and congress did not forbid him from building the border barrier. Therefore, I don't know. And you don't know, and nobody knows. But if anyone says, they know they don't know, and you ought to just turn them off forever. Because if they say, they know they don't know now, what is walking Castro would like to be president United States. But nobody knows he's running. What does he say? The former secretary of housing and urban development said the CNN with wolf Blitzer this cut number one. Yeah. I believe that there will be lawsuits filed in the courts, and then also here in congress in the house, we will file likely a joint resolution to negate or terminate his declaration and hopefully take a vote on that. I believe it will pass in the house of representatives. And as I understand the Senate would then have to take a vote on it a mandatory vote. So they couldn't they couldn't block taking a vote on the resolution, and I don't know that the president would have the votes at that point. To uphold in the United States Senate his declaration of emergency to build the border wall. But he didn't know that the president can veto the resolution in which case it would require a two thirds of both houses to override it ain't happening. So they're only going the only way to work. This is to sue now. I assume that the smart lawyers in the White House counsel's office have decided to begin building the wall in Texas on a friendly, Texas landowner's land who's immediately going to sue to prevent the condemnation of his property because we want him to sue in the fifth circuit because that's the same circuit as opposed to the ninth circuit, and the ninth circuit isn't, trustworthy, because three judges were held up by Jeff flake. May. I remind you who could have been confirmed it would be an almost balanced circuit. And there would be a chance of drawing an on panel that would be reasonable except for Jeff flake, Jeff flake is growing up the constitutional consideration of this. But eventually it's gotta get to the supreme court, but as a matter of politics, it's already alive. Live and kicking Baidoa. Rourke? Beta beta said, the Chris Hayes on he he's running in the NS NBC primary. The MSNBC primary is is underway. And it's really going to be a big MSNBC primary because they're all showing up at the at the studios. Baidoa Rourke says this to Chris as last night cut number two, would you? If you could would you take the.

president congress Mr Justice Jackson United States executive Nuremberg President Trump army corps of engineers Justice Jackson America MSNBC Jeff flake Harry Truman FDR executive advisor federal government Baidoa Rourke Joseph
"justice jackson" Discussed on Full Court Press

Full Court Press

03:44 min | 2 years ago

"justice jackson" Discussed on Full Court Press

"Okay. So the kings kind of roll the dice, and they bring in Harrison Barnes who will likely go back to a a role. That's very similar to what he did in Golden State. It's not gonna get all the touches and shots that he got in Dallas Dallas gets Zebo. I think they're already in the works. Probably a buyout or a wave or whatever. He's he's not really gonna do them. I don't even know if he played a single minutes here, honestly. But they get Justin Jackson Justin Jackson's a kind of a a nice, you know wing player. But here's the bar is pretty pricey player. If he goes back to the reduce role he had in Golden State's but the kings are trying to do something real this year, obviously. And they're not teaching a championship. But I think they're trying to put these young players that they have into an environment where they're chasing something. That's. Hard to tame and build character through that kind of effort to chase something that's really everyone else thinks it's beyond your reach. And I believe that that's a smart organizational pro-choice at times. So but Shumpert tried to kind of play the guy that plays the bigger wing players last time, I think the kings played Golden State. They almost wanted. Justin Jackson defended Kevin almost the entire game ended and was a very respectful effort despite the size disadvantage. Justice Jackson, says Hetty and smart and resourceful industrials player as you're gonna find especially at that age. But how much do you think? Greg Harrison Barnes. You know, being the guy that he's going to defend up during and in the match up worsest, Golden State, east gonna defend LeBron a matchup versus the Lakers easy's gone drawl, those responsibilities and have to live with fewer touches, you were shot attempts, less impressive, stat lines, etc. Do you think the kings are going to do quite well, it was a result or move the needle a little move the needle modestly move the needle a lot? What do you think? I think they've helped them selves quite a bit. Honestly, I think, you know, be leads to sort of play in that starting role the four with Willie colleague, STAN at the five is not, you know, if you sort of plotted out going into the season the best four five combos in the league that would have been kind of down the list, and I think they've overachieved both those guys played pretty good basketball this year, but limited again in terms of options defensively, I think what what really helps Harrison Barnes is going from a team that sort of you know, below the median in the NBA of pace whereas going back to the very very top of the league there sacrimento top two or three pace somewhere there. And they are one of the fastest point teams, Lee and Barnes, really thrived. I think of that environment when he was in Golden State where playing a very very high up tempo game playing on a team that really really lose the basketball. Dallas plays more of a ball guard ball dominant style system when Lucas kind of playing guard, but even when guys like JJ Berea in the you know, on the bass on the court, you know, just to guard, you know, sort of a ball dominant guard type offense that slows it down. I think I think Harrison's going to thrive again now is going to be the player that Dallas would be which is like is he going to be a twenty two twenty three point tonight guy. No, I mean, but I think that he's gonna bring you tremendous value for Sacramento. And I think he's going to thrive in that pay office that plays at a higher pace..

Greg Harrison Barnes Golden State Justin Jackson Dallas Lakers basketball Lee Justice Jackson Sacramento Shumpert Zebo Lucas NBA Hetty Willie Kevin STAN
"justice jackson" Discussed on The Steve Deace Show

The Steve Deace Show

02:12 min | 2 years ago

"justice jackson" Discussed on The Steve Deace Show

"Argument that this is this is exactly what Obama was doing the executive Fiat that conservatives like you and me had all our tidy whitey's in a bunch about for for several years, particularly Obama's made up executive amnesty? For example. What would you say to those who say now, you guys are hypocrites because you want Trump to do what you were condemning Obama of doing? Wing are these things morally, well, let's stick to the legally are they legally statutorily equivalent. Not at all. And they're not they're not also in for very straightforward reason does a very famous concurrence from Justice Jackson in the steel seizure. Case said nineteen fifty two I believe the famous Youngstown case when president Truman tried to seize the steel mills for domestic production visa visa, Korean war effort and scream court. Put a halt on that. But the famous opinion is not majority opinions. Concur from Justice Jackson, which which everyone talks about what you learned in law schools to this day, which Justice Jackson talked about is there are three levels of executive action. Where executive action is at its highest levels when the president is acting either directly explicitly or implicitly core into delegates Dettori thirty the middle. Ground is where congress silence in just Jackson's words. President powers quote lowest ebb where he is directly defined the explicit or implicit wilt congress. But the difference between President Trump would do here. What President Obama Lisa vs, doc? Dafa executive amnesties is funny. Exactly the difference between the first third problem of just Jackson, Kurtz. Congress explicitly rejected the dream act had an opportunity to vote on legislatively. They voted down. So when President Obama enacted DACA for the twenty twelve election, save nothing Dapo, which is even more expansive amnesty. He was directly defying the explicit rule of congress. He was acting as lowest add formulation here on the other hand, President Trump is acting as far as I can tell my reading the statute, and again, the reading of professors Eastman. You referenced earlier President Trump would be acting directly pursuant delegates Dettori thirty and that makes all the difference in the world.

President Trump Obama Lisa president Justice Jackson executive Congress president Truman whitey Youngstown Eastman Kurtz
"justice jackson" Discussed on AM 970 The Answer

AM 970 The Answer

02:09 min | 2 years ago

"justice jackson" Discussed on AM 970 The Answer

"Said wrote the president twenty minutes ago during rallies with little variation that Mexico will pay for the wall. We've just signed a great new trade deal with Mexico. It is billions of dollars a year better than the very bad NAFTA deal, which it replaces the difference pay for the wall many times over that is his response. Right. And and I know there'd be like that. But I'm also kind of bored by that whole deal. I'm very interested in the declaration of a national emergency. Allowing him to move forward with border construction. There is a nineteen Seventy-six statute governing authorizing the president to do certain things under specific circumstances. I haven't looked at the predicate that the administration would argue for invoking the nineteen Seventy-six statute. I haven't looked at the precedents. I it's just right out of the casebooks dot com. Law class for the semester yesterday. I said, I can't believe it. We're having a replay of Youngstown sheet and tube were Harry Truman sees the steel mills and he lost by the way. That power was rejected. Justice Jackson should famous opinion talking about the three zones of presidential power floodtide, the unknown Ed tied, and it seems to me we're going to be in zone two. So I don't know how that would come out. But there is also the inherent power of the president in article two to direct the military to do what is necessary in the national defense that authority has been invoked by presidents all the time without declarations by congress without any authorization from congress that's inherent in the authority of the commander in chief. And if he believes that there a crisis that threatens the national security at the border he will invoke not only the nineteen seventy six statute. But also here's inherent article to authority what will happen. I do not know. And nobody knows zero people knows it would probably go. As Senator Ron Johnson said yesterday would be challenged by open border advocates certainly in the nights. Circuit because that's the worst circuit for the United States rule of law, and there it would probably be put on hold pending adjudication, and that would be a slow roll digitalization. But eventually it we'll.

president Youngstown sheet and tube Ed Mexico congress Senator Ron Johnson Harry Truman United States Justice Jackson twenty minutes
"justice jackson" Discussed on AM 970 The Answer

AM 970 The Answer

02:09 min | 2 years ago

"justice jackson" Discussed on AM 970 The Answer

"Minutes ago during rallies with little variation that Mexico will pay for the wall. We've just signed a great new trade deal with Mexico. It is billions of dollars a year better than the very bad NAFTA deal, which it replaces the difference pays for the wall. Many times over that is his response. Right. And I know the media doesn't like that. But I'm also kind of bored by that whole deal. I'm very interested in the declaration of a national emergency. Allowing him to move forward with border construction. There is a one thousand nine hundred seventy six statute governing authorizing the president to do certain things under specific circumstances. I haven't looked at the predicate that the administration would argue for invoking the nineteen Seventy-six statute. I haven't looked at the precedents. I it's just right out of the books. I got my first car law class for the semester yesterday. I said, I can't believe it. We're having a replay of Youngstown sheet and tube were Harry Truman sees the steel mills and he lost by the way. That power was rejected Justice Jackson issued a famous opinion talking about the three zones of presidential power floodtide, the unknown Ed tie, and it seems to me we're going to be in zone two. So I don't know how that would come out. But there is also the inherent power of the president in article two to direct the military to do what is necessary in the national defense that authority has been invoked by presidents all the time without declarations by congress without any authorization from congress that's inherent in the authority of the commander in chief. And if he believes that there's a crisis that threatens our national security at the border he will invoke not only the nineteen Seventy-six statute. But also, here's inherent article authority. What will happen? I do not know. And nobody knows zero people knows it would probably go. As Senator Ron Johnson said yesterday, it would be challenged by open border advocates certainly in the nights. Circuit because that's the worst circuit for the United States rule of law, and there it would probably be put on hold pending adjudication, and that would be a slow roll digitalization. But eventually, we'll go to a new United States Supreme.

president Youngstown sheet and tube Mexico United States congress Harry Truman Senator Ron Johnson Justice Jackson
"justice jackson" Discussed on 860AM The Answer

860AM The Answer

02:09 min | 2 years ago

"justice jackson" Discussed on 860AM The Answer

"Said wrote the president twenty minutes ago during rallies with little variation that Mexico will pay for the wall. We've just signed a great new trade deal with Mexico. It is billions of dollars a year better than the very bad NAFTA deal, which it replaces the difference pay for the wall many times over all right. That is his response. Right. And I know the media doesn't like that. But I'm also kind of bored by that whole deal. I'm very interested in the declaration of a national emergency. Allowing him to move forward with border construction. There is a nineteen Seventy-six statute governing authorizing the president to do certain things under specific circumstances. I haven't looked at the predicate that the administration would argue for invoking the nineteen Seventy-six statute. I haven't looked at the precedents. I it's just right out of the casebooks dot my first con law class at the semester yesterday. I said, I can't believe it. We're having a replay of Youngstown sheet and tube were Harry Truman sees the steel mills and he lost by the way. Power was rejected. Justice Jackson should've famous opinion talking about the three zones of presidential power floodtide, the unknown eb tied, and it seems to me we're going to be in zone two. So I don't know how that would come out. But there is also the inherent power of the president in article two to direct the military to do what is necessary in the national defense that authority has been invoked by presidents all the time without declarations by congress without any authorization from congress that's inherent in the authority of the commander in chief. And if he believes that there's a crisis threatens the national security at the border he will invoke not only the nineteen seventy six statute. But also here's inherent article to authority what will happen. I do not know. And nobody knows zero people knows it would probably go. As Senator Ron Johnson said yesterday, it would be challenged by open border advocates certainly in the nights. Circuit because that's the worst circuit for the United States rule of law, and there it would probably be put on hold pending adjudication, and that would be a slow roll digitalization. But eventually, we'll go.

president Youngstown sheet and tube Mexico congress Senator Ron Johnson Harry Truman Power United States Justice Jackson twenty minutes
"justice jackson" Discussed on 860AM The Answer

860AM The Answer

02:11 min | 2 years ago

"justice jackson" Discussed on 860AM The Answer

"I often said wrote the president twenty minutes ago during rallies with little variation that Mexico will pay for the wall. We've just signed a great new trade deal with Mexico. It is billions of dollars a year better than the very bad NAFTA deal, which it replaces the difference pays for the wall. Many times over all right? That is his response. Right. And I know the media doesn't like that. But I'm also kind of bored by that whole deal. I'm very interested in the declaration of a national emergency. Allowing him to move forward with border construction. There is a one thousand nine hundred seventy six statute governing authorizing the president to do certain things under specific circumstances. I haven't looked at the predicate that the administration would argue for invoking the nineteen seventy six statute. I haven't looked at the precedents. I it's just right out of the casebooks taught. My first law class with the semester yesterday. I said, I can't believe it. We're having a replay of Youngstown sheet and tube were Harry Truman sees the steel mills and he lost by the way. That power was rejected. Justice Jackson should've famous opinion talking about the three zones of presidential power floodtide, the unknown in ebb tide, and it seems to me we're going to be in zone two. So I don't know how that would come out. But there is also the inherent power of the president in article two to direct military to do what is necessary in the national defense that authority has been invoked by presidents all the time without declarations by congress without any authorization from congress that's inherent in the authority of the commander in chief. And if he believes that there's a crisis that threatens the national security at the border he will invoke not only the nineteen seventy six statute. But also his inherent article to authority what will happen. I do not know. And nobody knows zero people knows it would probably go. As Senator Ron Johnson said yesterday, it would be challenged by open border advocates certainly in the night. Circuit because that's the worst circuit for the United States rule of law, and there it would probably be put on hold pending adjudication, and that would be a slow roll adjudication. But eventually, we'll go to a new United States.

president Youngstown sheet and tube Mexico United States congress Senator Ron Johnson Harry Truman Justice Jackson twenty minutes
"justice jackson" Discussed on AM 970 The Answer

AM 970 The Answer

02:09 min | 2 years ago

"justice jackson" Discussed on AM 970 The Answer

"President Trump issue? A national declaration of emergency. And just go ahead and build the border barrier. I don't know. I haven't seen the national declaration. I don't know what a thorny upon which it would rest whether they'd say it's inherently in his authority is article two commander in chief of the armed forces to command the military to build a barrier on the southern barrier. I know that they would have to pay under the fifth amendment. The property cost of the people whose property was condemned fifth amendment provides it no property shall be taken for public use without just compensation, but a barriers public use. They can take all that land doesn't matter if it's tribal land matter if it's an animal quarter. None of that matters to the president orders the military to do it. That's an article to assertion of authority of the president would the people challenge it, obviously, I don't know if they have standing to challenge, but congress might challenge it as a violation of their article one thirty if they did it would be up to article three the supreme court to decide whether or not the president had exceeded his authority, and it would come back to Youngstown sheet and tube a long ago opinion. Because this is a very delicate area. Justice Jackson in the famous in that opinions that there are three zones of presidential power. The president power is at full floodtide when he has the congress behind him. When the congress is explicitly opposed to what he's doing his powers at its lowest ebb in between zone to there is a vast amount of confusion. We don't know what the president's mean. We don't know what he proposes to do. It would be better. If it did not happen. But if anyone tells you we can't do it. They're lying. And if anyone tells you he can do it. They're lying. He can try and do it certainly he will be opposed. If he tries, and it will be up to the United States Supreme court to decide if he does that is the reality. That is the bottom line. Now yesterday was announced rod Rosenstein is going to leave as soon as Bill bars confirmed as attorney general Lindsey Graham met with.

president congress United States Supreme court Youngstown sheet and tube Lindsey Graham rod Rosenstein Justice Jackson Bill bars attorney
"justice jackson" Discussed on 860AM The Answer

860AM The Answer

02:21 min | 2 years ago

"justice jackson" Discussed on 860AM The Answer

"America. Can President Trump issue? A. National declaration of emergency. And just go ahead and build the border barrier. I don't know. I haven't seen the national declaration. I don't know what it thorny upon which it would rest, whether they'd say it's inherently in his authority is article two commander in chief of the armed forces. Command the military to build a barrier on the southern barrier. I know that they would have to pay under the fifth amendment. The property cost of the people whose property was condemned amendment provides it no property shall be taken for public use without just compensation, but a barriers public use. They can take all that land doesn't matter if it's tribal land doesn't matter if it's an animal quarter. None of that matters or the president orders the military to do it. That's an article to assertion of authority of the president would the people challenge it, obviously, I don't know if they have standing to challenge, but congress might challenge it as a violation of their article one. And if they did it would be up to article three the supreme court to decide whether or not the president had exceeded his authority, and it would come back to yell sound sheet and tube a long ago opinion because this is a very delicate area. Justice Jackson, the famous concurrence in that opinions said there are three zones of presidential power. The president power is at full floodtide when he has the congress behind him. When the congress is explicitly opposed to what he's doing his powers at its lowest ebb and in between zone to there is a vast amount of confusion. We don't know what the president's mean. We don't know what he proposes to do. It would be better. If it did not happen. But if anyone tells you we can't do it. They're lying. And if anyone tells you he can't do it. They're lying. He can try and do it certainly he will be opposed. If he tries, and it will be up to the United States Supreme court to decide if he does that is the reality. That is the bottom line. Now yesterday was announced that rod Rosenstein, according to leave as soon as Bill bars confirmed as attorney general Lindsey Graham met with Bill bar and had this to say afterward cut number nine. Cut number nine. Mr..

president congress United States Supreme court Bill bars America. rod Rosenstein Lindsey Graham Justice Jackson Bill bar attorney
"justice jackson" Discussed on MSNBC Morning Joe

MSNBC Morning Joe

04:26 min | 2 years ago

"justice jackson" Discussed on MSNBC Morning Joe

"That's now the humanitarian crisis is well that's going to be happening within our own borders. Willie? It's it's so the arguments are so stupid. You know last night. I saw a Fox News primetime. Somebody put up the banner NBC says only and then put in put in print and quote marks only six people on terror watchlist came across the southern border. And that was so I guess supposed to suggest that NBC doesn't care about these six terrorists. Well, of course, it's always half a story. It's always half the truth, which is worse of full lie seven times as many came across the northern border. And you have one Republican Senator after another Republican Senator that has to be looking at all of this and say, gee, we we just don't have the arguments on our side. We don't have the facts on our side. And when Nancy Pelosi is passing Republican bills. Which is what she's doing? She's passing Republican bills. How do you tell voters? Well, yeah. I would have voted for that Bill to keep the border open, you know, four weeks ago, but I'm not gonna vote for it. Now, there's no justification. And that's why you're seeing these senators is Heidi points out Republican senators peel off yet Shelley Moore Capito as you mentioned Republican West Virginia state, by the way, Donald Trump won by forty two points calling this shutdown quote useless, saying what are we doing here? Let's debate the border security question. But let's reopen the rest of the government they're fed up. And I think you're right. I think we're gonna see more and more of them peel off Danny Cevallos one ask you about the question of a national emergency. The president has threatened that if he doesn't get his five point seven billion dollars from congress for this border wall. He may declare a national emergency. He obviously stopped short of that. Didn't do it in his nine minutes speech last night. But if he does it if he declares a national emergency what kind of opposite. Would he face? What would be the pushback from the courts? Fortunately, history, gives us a precedent for exactly this situation. In one thousand nine hundred fifty two president Truman gave a speech ordering his secretary of commerce than to take over the steel industry, nationalize it for the then going on Korean war. And this case made it in record time to the supreme court which struck down the president's use of power. But more importantly, the court Justice Jackson gave us a framework going forward for analyzing whether or not the president exceeds his or her power win he acts without the approval of congress, and in fact against the will of congress and the short answer is in this third category where the president acts and congress opposes the president usually loses. But does not always lose in fact in two thousand fifteen there was a case in that category. Three where the executive branch actually prevailed, but for the most part when the president acts against the will of congress, even if he invokes. His emergency powers. He will likely lose Danny in Justice Jackson's opinion, all those years ago. Is there a definition now of national emergency executive powers of the gutted national emergency. The executive the national emergency powers of the president are not even defined in the constitution other than suspending the rid of habeas, corpus. So all the president's sources of emergency powers, come from federal statutes. And I believe the Brennan center is identified something on the order of one hundred and thirty different sources of these power toe. So to say that it is a patchwork quilt is an understatement, and it's complicated. And that's where President Trump thrives, but using the Truman precedent as an example Justice Jackson's concurrence in the fascinating thing about this case Youngstown is that all of the six three majority wrote separate opinions. So it's hard to say whether or not the really is a majority opinion in the Youngstown case, but Jackson opinion gives us this tripartite analysis, which many. Academic. Critics have said doesn't really give us any answers other than to say that in a situation where the president acts against the will of congress, then the supreme court has to find that congress has zero power in that area in order to uphold the president's action, even if he invokes emergency powers, so Dan, if he declares a national emergency..

president Donald Trump congress Senator Justice Jackson Truman Nancy Pelosi executive Fox News NBC Youngstown Danny Cevallos Willie Shelley Moore Capito Brennan center Bill Virginia Heidi
"justice jackson" Discussed on Fantasy Focus Football

Fantasy Focus Football

03:02 min | 3 years ago

"justice jackson" Discussed on Fantasy Focus Football

"And so first off you can run on the chiefs right twenty fifth against the run over the last four weeks. So there's that and we always talk about this. What's the most the two most important things in fantasy success talent and opportunity and Justice Jackson. We you know in the short in the small sample. We have we think there's something talented there and opportunity is abundant remember since week eight charges running back gaining the second most yards per carry before first contact that offense of line starting to play. Well, and like last three weeks, he's there's actually some big playability there again all this small sample size. But last three weeks Justin Jackson has at twenty five touches three of them. I'm sorry. Six of them of the twenty five touches six them have gained seventeen or more yards by comparison. Austin equa only has two of fifty. So I mean, there's there's some big play there and some of that's holes and some of that's scheming. But the fact that matter is is that in the small sample that we've seen him, Mike. Justin Jackson is impressed. Yeah. No question about if five point two yards per carry against small sample, but he's caught off five of his targets. He's been affected so far. And you know, sometimes there are teams or offenses or backfield's where especially backfield's where you're like. This is a great fantasy backfield their chiefs being a great example of that in your the saints and other one say Ingram went down. We're always off season when he was suspended. We were talking about who's going to be that number two where we subtracted to that. Well, the chargers are one of them. They are second in running back fantasy points this season only seven behind the saints. I mean, that's how great that backfield has been whether it's Akhalgori. Or Jackson mixing in. So this is a great spot. There's no question he can push for upward of fifteen seventeen. Touches maybe more. If the games close. Now, the only reservation I'd have is it could be a very pass heavy game for the chargers, especially if they're behind in this game. And maybe they don't throw the running backs a lot and this one either I mean that that's really the only red flag is that it could end up being a shootout. And a lot of the targets will go to the. But honestly, like to me, I think I would be at somebody who might start Justin Jackson and a couple of leagues like I'll be able to get them in. I have I have been my vampire league and have been one other league. So I haven't looked at my lineups yet. So I I may be starting him this week. I would be excited about a shootout. Because then I think there's a chance they found the end zone question. And even the you mentioned he's caught five passes. So here's a guy that I think will be back there, you know in the backfield. And so whether there's dump offs from Philip rivers and just being on the field and a game with it's gonna be a lot of scoring. You know, I think is would be beneficial to Justin Jackson again thinking. About how you attack the chiefs running the ball against them as one of them. The more you run the ball the less time. Patrick Mahomes has on the field thirsty. Cal throws up on the screen that in his final collegiate season Justin Jackson caught forty four passes. So that's within his skill set as well. As a pass catcher man a ton of volume that final season college. I think he had over three hundred carries through just a crazy workhorse role. But I'm with you. I will have him top fifteen. There's no question. He's a fringe Rb one. I'm just saying it could be a little different from a normal game script for the charge. And that of course, and he's not Melvin Gordon, but like to find a guy in the waiver wire that could be a top team play..

Justin Jackson chiefs Justice Jackson chargers saints Melvin Gordon Austin equa Philip rivers Ingram Patrick Mahomes Cal Mike three weeks twenty fifth four weeks two yards
"justice jackson" Discussed on Radiolab Presents: More Perfect

Radiolab Presents: More Perfect

01:30 min | 4 years ago

"justice jackson" Discussed on Radiolab Presents: More Perfect

"Established the system of jim crow legalize a system of jim crow and so it's published you know in newsweek and then beat the comes explosive in a real big problem for rank was during his confirmation mm rank was worked very hard to quiet that storm he said i wasn't expressing my own views i was asked to write a memo about justice jackson's views for her i'm jackson's separates former secretary elsie douglas she told reporters that's just ally like general didn't ask as clerks to write down memos about what jackson should think jackson knew what he thought he asked his clerks to tell him what they thought so he could elaborate or three could can deliberate on the multiple positions that they would present him with so rank with sends a letter to the senate judiciary committee tried to explain all of this senate judiciary committee threatens to hold hearings over the holiday or after christmas this is december of 1971 uh nixon start putting pressure on on senators and you can imagine somebody at this point might have thought i wonder if there's anything in frankfurt's papers which are huge she have just been given to the you know recently given the library of congress that would cast light on the ringquist nomination and one of the things that is no longer in frankfurt irs papers but appears to have been before the let the theft is a letter that rehnquist wrote to frankfurter and nineteen fifty five.

jim crow newsweek justice jackson senate judiciary committee frankfurt congress theft rehnquist secretary elsie douglas christmas nixon irs frankfurter