Podcast Summary
Double standard in DACA ruling for Obama and Trump: The Supreme Court upheld DACA, allowing Obama's creation of a new class of US residents, while preventing Trump from altering it, sparking debate on immigration laws and executive power.
The Supreme Court's recent ruling on DACA, the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, endorsed a double standard in regulatory power between Obama and Trump. While Obama, against the law, created a new class of US residents through the program, Trump was prevented from undoing it unless he followed specific procedures. This ruling, criticized by Dan Bongino as a liberal decision despite John Roberts' appointment by a Republican president, highlights the controversy surrounding DACA and the ongoing debate on immigration laws and executive power.
Supreme Court: Proper Procedures Required to End DACA: The Supreme Court ruled that the Trump administration must follow legal procedures to end DACA, acknowledging the Obama administration's initial illegality but unable to stop it at the time.
The Supreme Court ruled that the Trump administration must follow the proper legal procedures to end the Deferred Action for Child Arrivals (DACA) program, even though the Obama administration had initially instituted it illegally without following the required rules and procedures. The Court's decision was based on the Administrative Procedures Act, which requires federal agencies to follow specific procedures when issuing or changing regulations. The Court remanded the case back to the Department of Homeland Security to go through the proper rulemaking process before rescinding DACA. However, the Court's decision also acknowledged that the Obama administration had acted illegally when creating DACA in the first place, but it did not have the power to stop it at that time due to the legal procedures not being followed. The complex ruling left many scratching their heads and highlighting the inconsistency in the application of the law.
Durban Marshall Credit Card Bill: A Threat to Consumer Data Security: The Durban Marshall Credit Card Bill could put consumer data at risk, shift billions in spending to less secure payment systems, and allow for unlawful policies without Congressional approval, potentially leading to years of legal challenges and executive mischief.
The Durban Marshall Credit Card Bill, if passed, could put consumers' data at greater risk of being hacked and exposed to foreign networks, shifting billions in consumer spending to less secure payment systems while allowing corporate megastores to make bigger profits. Additionally, a recent ruling allows a president to create unlawful policies without Congressional legislation, which could lead to years of legal challenges if reversed by the next president, inviting executive mischief, particularly from presidents at the end of their terms. It's crucial to oppose this bill and protect your data security. Visit handsoffmyrewards.com/security to take action and tell your senators to oppose the Durban Marshall credit card bill.
Suggesting new rules for both sides: Announce and implement executive orders despite potential legal challenges: President could issue executive orders on national firearm reciprocity, reducing top tax rate, and repealing Obamacare, reflecting a willingness to push boundaries and challenge the status quo, but carries risks and potential backlash
During this discussion, it was suggested that both sides play by new rules, which include announcing and implementing executive orders despite potential legal challenges. A specific suggestion was made for the president to issue executive orders on national firearm reciprocity, reducing the top tax rate, and repealing Obamacare. These actions were proposed based on the belief that the courts would eventually sort out any legal issues. While some may argue that this approach bypasses the legislative process, it reflects a willingness to push boundaries and challenge the status quo. This strategy could potentially lead to significant policy changes, but also carries risks and potential backlash.
Trump advocated for school choice and pro-life legislation through executive orders: Trump suggested using executive orders to implement school choice and pro-life policies, acknowledging the legal process involved, and encouraged listeners to subscribe to his podcast for more discussion and to add the Bongino Brief to their Alexa devices for easy access.
Former President Donald Trump advocated for national school choice and pro-life legislation during his tenure, suggesting executive orders as a means to implement these policies without the need for legislation. He also acknowledged the potential lengthy legal process involved in undoing executive orders deemed illegal. Trump encouraged listeners to subscribe to his podcast, the Dan Bongino Show, for further discussion on these topics. Additionally, he provided instructions on how to add the Bongino Brief to an Alexa device for convenient access to his daily podcast.
