I'm not an immigration lawyer and I don't know. Does the
AG normally deny the president access to the DoJ based on an unspecified, ethereal debate over the potential conflict behind a few statutes?
People are claiming that she had a constitutional obligation to do this which superseded her other constitutional obligation to serve the duly-elected chief executive. Do you contend that any potential statutory conflict rises to that level? If so, it would appear that the AG can only act on laws that had been fully adjudicated and for which there is currently no controversy or unsettled questions of law.
Remember, this is not about prosecutorial discretion; this is the acting AG denying the president access to resources that would typically be available to present his case to the judiciary, whose actual job is to make these determinations.
You seem to be radically redefining the role of the AG/DoJ.
Are you sure you understand the history, legally defined role, and traditions of the AG well enough to say, "You seem to be radically redefining the role of the AG/DoJ." to me? That's an awfully strong statement.
Green card holders legally well defined rights with strong precedent. I would personally research where those are defined and how they were affected by the original EA if I wanted to understand the full context of the former EA's actions.
>Are you sure you understand the history, legally defined role, and traditions of the AG well enough to say, "You seem to be radically redefining the role of the AG/DoJ." to me? That's an awfully strong statement.
People are claiming that she had a constitutional obligation to do this which superseded her other constitutional obligation to serve the duly-elected chief executive. Do you contend that any potential statutory conflict rises to that level? If so, it would appear that the AG can only act on laws that had been fully adjudicated and for which there is currently no controversy or unsettled questions of law.
Remember, this is not about prosecutorial discretion; this is the acting AG denying the president access to resources that would typically be available to present his case to the judiciary, whose actual job is to make these determinations.
You seem to be radically redefining the role of the AG/DoJ.