President Trump: Making America Great Again...

[imanihonjin]

Lest anyone think otherwise, I do not put FDR and Trump in the same universe as far as POTUS goes. FDR had plenty of faults and crazy ideas, but he was a great leader and a great president.

Unless you are Japanese. What FDR did is worse than the stupid travel ban and it isn't even close

[Topper]

They're not going to take it, IMO. This was only about ruling on the restraining order. I'd be surprised if the Supreme Court wants to get involved at this point. They'll now just let the district court hear the full case. Letting the lower courts do their job is a hallmark of the Roberts Court anyway. The circuit court essentially explained exactly what they thought was wrong with the EO. A reasonable President would take that and re-write it to take care of those concerns while still protecting whoever he thought he needed to protect in a Constitutional and airtight legal way. A reasonable president would know that while he has enormous influence and authority, he still has to work within the constraints of the Constitution, and along with the other branches of the government. But I'd be shocked if Trump actually took the reasonable approach. We already know enough about him from his campaign and in his first few weeks as President that he's just not a reasonable guy, and he never became President with the thought of doing his job within legal and Constitutional restraints.

Whoever drafted this EO would be summarily fired in most administrations. Yours truly is no immigration genius, but a quick glance at the case authority and statutes should show anybody that the EO was written by a blind chimp pounding on a keypad. There are interesting legal theories and questions surrounding these issues, but the administration lawyers blew this one so badly.

[BlueK]

Whoever drafted this EO would be summarily fired in most administrations. Yours truly is no immigration genius, but a quick glance at the case authority and statutes should show anybody that the EO was written by a blind chimp pounding on a keypad. There are interesting legal theories and questions surrounding these issues, but the administration lawyers blew this one so badly.

Sounds like Bannon did write it then.

[Topper]

Sounds like Bannon did write it then.

I would not be surprised if a non-lawyer wrote it.

[Jeff Lebowski]

He didn't fail, he won.

lol. No he didn't.

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/when-franklin-roosevelt-clashed-with-the-supreme-court-and-lost-78497994/

Unless you are Japanese. What FDR did is worse than the stupid travel ban and it isn't even close

Yes, it was worse. Probably the worst blunder of his presidency. But it was done at a different time under dramatically different circumstances. But I counterbalance that with how he saved the US by correctly foreseeing the danger of Nazi Germany and dragging the US kicking and screaming into supporting England and preparing for war.

[PaloAltoCougar]

I’m encouraged by the news the White House has gone back to the drawing board and may be drafting a better EO. Given his stupid “See you in court” tweet, Trump was heading down the usual wrong path, in which every perceived slight must be addressed. But it appears someone in the administration is telling him to get over his gossamer-thin skin and schoolyard bickering and to focus on winning the war, not on a relatively trivial fight.

Today’s fantasy: Trump replaces Bannon with Bob Gates. I also think occasionally about winning Powerball.

[falafel]

lol. No he didn't.

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/when-franklin-roosevelt-clashed-with-the-supreme-court-and-lost-78497994/

That Smithsonian article sort of agrees with Japaneseman. FDR lost the court-packing battle, but won the war. The court pretty much caved and gave in to all of FDR's expansive New Deal programs. The court saved itself, but greatly expanded the government's authority under the constitution.

[Topper]

That Smithsonian article sort of agrees with Japaneseman. FDR lost the court-packing battle, but won the war. The court pretty much caved and gave in to all of FDR's expansive New Deal programs. The court saved itself, but greatly expanded the government's authority under the constitution.

He won this battle through the appointment of jurists such as Hugo Black, who advocated a narrow application of the DP clause when scrutinizing government programs. In the Warren Court, this was considered a "conservative" approach, but in the 1930s, it was radically liberal.

[Jeff Lebowski]

That Smithsonian article sort of agrees with Japaneseman. FDR lost the court-packing battle, but won the war. The court pretty much caved and gave in to all of FDR's expansive New Deal programs. The court saved itself, but greatly expanded the government's authority under the constitution.

No, the title to the article is right. He was successful with implementing many of his New Deal programs, but many of them failed and/or were rejected by the courts. Either way, my post (and the article) are specifically referring to his court-stacking proposal. It failed.

[Paperback Writer]

Yes, it was worse. Probably the worst blunder of his presidency. But it was done at a different time under dramatically different circumstances. But I counterbalance that with how he saved the US by correctly foreseeing the danger of Nazi Germany and dragging the US kicking and screaming into supporting England and preparing for war.

I'll give credit to FDR for saving Europe by dragging the US into WWII; but the US was not directly threatened by Nazi Germany. Anyhow, supporting England was the right call as defeating Germany if/when war finally came to the US was much easier while England was still standing.

[wuapinmon]

No, the title to the article is right. He was successful with implementing many of his New Deal programs, but many of them failed and/or were rejected by the courts. Either way, my post (and the article) are specifically referring to his court-stacking proposal. It failed.

Ihadn'treadbackfarenough,sorry.

[Topper]

No, the title to the article is right. He was successful with implementing many of his New Deal programs, but many of them failed and/or were rejected by the courts. Either way, my post (and the article) are specifically referring to his court-stacking proposal. It failed.

You're missing the point. FDR wanted to pack the Court to get his New Deal programs through. He lost the battle of packing the Court, but won the war of getting many of his New Deal programs through. He got many of them through because the Court began to adopt a less restrictive review of the propriety of legislation, mostly through a loosening of the Commerce Clause, and a restricting of the review under the EP and DP Clauses. Hugo Black led that charge.

[Jeff Lebowski]

I'll give credit to FDR for saving Europe by dragging the US into WWII; but the US was not directly threatened by Nazi Germany. Anyhow, supporting England was the right call as defeating Germany if/when war finally came to the US was much easier while England was still standing.

That doesn't make sense.

[Paperback Writer]

That doesn't make sense.

You credited FDR for saving the US from Nazi Germany. I replied that FDR only saved Europe not the US. I don't think Germany was capable of defeating the US with or without England. Coming to England's aid when the US did, made defeating Germany easier when the US was finally dragged into WWII.

[Jeff Lebowski]

You credited FDR for saving the US from Nazi Germany. I replied that FDR only saved Europe not the US. I don't think Germany was capable of defeating the US with or without England. Coming to England's aid when the US did, made defeating Germany easier when the US was finally dragged into WWII.

Still seems like a distinction without a difference. Whatever.