[NTLK] SOPA Legislation

[David M. Ensteness]

On Stewart's behalf, below is reference to the statement he refers to is:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/federal-eye/post/recess-appointments-constitutional-justice-dept-says/2012/01/12/gIQA1QRctP_blog.html

The DOJ contends that the President's actions are constitutional, as Stewart said, it is up to SCOTUS to decide otherwise.

-DME



On Jan 17, 2012, at 6:43 PM, Dennis Swaney wrote:

> You mean the DOJ run by Eric Holder? BTW, to what "legal opinion" are you
> referring? Please post a link. Thank you.
> 
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 15:39, Robert Stewart
> <robertdylanstewart at gmail.com>wrote:
> 
>> The U.S. Department of Justice says you're wrong. It's all over the news.
>> Until that legal opinion gets challenged in an actual court, it is
>> inarguably more valid than your opinion that the appointments were
>> unconstitutional. The SCOTUS decides whether something is unconstitutional,
>> not senators, not representatives, and certainly not the public.
>> 
>> Deal with it and STFU, like the Republicans told me to do for eight years.
>> 
>> --
>> 
>> Robert D. Stewart - AC5ZH
>> Sent from my phone
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Jan 17, 2012, at 17:09, Dennis Swaney <romad at aol.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Doesn't matter what Congress does as Our Dear And Glorious Leader has
>>> started ruling by fiat because "we can't wait". An example is his spate
>> of
>>> "recess" appointments when Congress is NOT in recess. So the passage of
>>> SOPA and PIPA is moot. Our Dear And Glorious Leader will implement the
>>> policies only if they give him more power.
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Sincerely,
>>> Dennis B. Swaney
>>> California People's Republic
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 14:16, Lloyd Conway <doc_retro at juno.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> I'd like to think that you're right, Jon, but he threatened to veto the
>>>> 2011 NDAA, the new law that gives him the power to arrest and imprison
>>>> Americans within our borders on his own authority w/o any check or
>> balance,
>>>> if he deems them to be 'threats' and he's declared the USA to be a
>>>> 'battlefield' in the war on terror, so i do not hold out hope that he'll
>>>> refuse to sign such a bill.  It may not empower him directly, but it
>>>> empowers those with power.
>>>> Regards,
>>>> -Lloyd Conway
>>>> Charlotte, Michigan
>>>> 
>>>> "Except apparently, today, Obama threatened to veto it, and Congress
>>>> has supposedly dropped the bill. We'll see how this goes in the
>>>> future, but I'd like to think that many congressmen are currently
>>>> breathing a sigh of relief--this thing kind of grew a life of its own,
>>>> and nobody seemed willing to try to seriously stop it. (my theory for
>>>> why, once word came from the WH threatening the veto, that Congress
>>>> was so quick to drop that potato)
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> ?-Jon Glass
>>>> Krakow, Poland
>>>> <jonglass at usa.net>"
>> 
> 
> ==================================================================== 
> The NewtonTalk Mailing List - http://newtontalk.net/
> The Official Newton FAQ     - http://splorp.com/newton/faq/
> The Newton Glossary         - http://splorp.com/newton/glossary/
> WikiWikiNewt                - http://tools.unna.org/wikiwikinewt/
> ====================================================================