Biden admits he is proudly and deliberately breaking the law

[oeb11]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...olW?li=BBnb7Kz





Despite the Supreme Court’s explicit warning that any executive extension of the federal eviction moratorium would be struck down, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention decided this week to implement a new moratorium anyway for two months. When asked about the legal obstacles this policy would inevitably run into, President Joe Biden admitted that what his administration is doing is illegal, but he said he doesn’t care.
© Provided by Washington Examiner "Constitutionally, the bulk of the constitutional scholarship says that it's not likely to pass constitutional muster," Biden admitted during a press conference on Tuesday. "Look. I want to make it clear. I told you I would not tell the Justice Department or the medical experts or scientists what they should say or do, so I don't want to get ahead of the CDC."

He continued, “At a minimum, by the time it is litigated, we’ll probably give some additional time while we’re getting that $45 billion out to people who are, in fact, behind in the rent and don’t have the money.”
In other words, Biden knows that the CDC is acting illegally but wants the agency to continue to act illegally until the courts can get around to stopping it. Litigation takes time, which means the moratorium could be in effect for weeks, maybe even months, before it is struck down. And even when it is declared unconstitutional, there is no way to go back and force renters to pay the money they owed when the moratorium was in place, even if the moratorium itself was illegal.
This is such a flagrant violation of the law and the constitutional bounds of Biden’s presidency that it’s a wonder no one outside of conservative circles seems to care.
Imagine, for a moment, if the Supreme Court had told former President Donald Trump that he could not use military funds to build the southern border wall without congressional approval. (In reality, it allowed the construction to continue in a 5-4 ruling last summer.) And imagine if Trump responded by tweeting that he was just going to build the wall anyway. The uproar from Democrats and the liberal media would have been immediate. They would have slammed his executive overreach as a hopeful dictatorship, and they would have been right to do so. The president cannot rule as he pleases. He is necessarily checked by Congress and the courts, and when one branch of government has very clearly forbidden him from overstepping the bounds of his authority, he has a constitutional duty to listen.
Biden is trying to see just how much he can get away with, and he deserves a sharp and immediate rebuke. Pandemic or not, the separation of powers still applies, and no president should be able to defy this constitutional principle in a blatant manner without facing serious consequences for doing so.
Tags: Beltway Confidential, Opinion, Joe Biden, Constitution, CDC, Evictions, Coronavirus, Law, White House, Housing
Original Author: Kaylee McGhee White
Original Location: Biden admits he is proudly and deliberately breaking the law




fiden, Cuomoo, Avenatti, and the list is endless
marxist DPSTs do love their criminal nomenklatura!!

[gnadfly]

Again, is this an excuse to pack the court?

[HedonistForever]

Yes, anything Biden and Democrats can point to and say "see, the SC won't let us do this with a majority of what they call "Conservative Justices", who in reality are textualist, not activist Justices, who make judgements based on what they are "feeling" at the moment and give in to their "passions" rather than what the Constitution actually says, will be an excuse to pack the court.


To say you know the SC will rebuke you but you do it anyway is bad policy no matter whether it is a Republican or a Democrat President.

[oeb11]

And the marxist DPST's don't care - because they plan to make teh SC irrelevant.

Thank You, HF.

[bb1961]

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, POLITICSAugust 4, 2021
“I Do Solemnly Swear”: Biden Calls tor Extending the Eviction Moratorium Despite Being Unconstitutional


As I discussed yesterday, I was astonished by the remarks of President Joe Biden on his support for extending the eviction moratorium, which was found to be unconstitutional by lower courts. It was later preserved by a divided Supreme Court despite the view of a majority that it was unconstitutional. It was saved from being struck down merely by the fact that it was expiring. President Biden acknowledged that his legal experts overwhelmingly told him that any extension would violate the Constitution. However, he then said it was worth extending the moratorium because it would take time for a court to intervene and, in the interim, they could rush out money to renters despite the lack of constitutional authority to do so.

Like many, I was mystified by the Supreme Court decision not to strike down the moratorium. The 5-4 decision in Alabama Association of Realtors v. HHS turned on the fact that it was about to expire on July 31st. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh voted to preserve it but Kavanaugh made clear in his opinion that he would vote against any extension as unconstitutional. It was a decision decoupled from the merits. The unconstitutionality of the law was treated as simply inconvenient or irrelevant given the expiration.

In his press conference, President Biden acknowledged that most of the experts consulted by the White House said that an extension would be unconstitutional. However, he noted that he found a few who dismissed or rejected such views: ““The bulk of the constitutional scholarship says that it’s not likely to pass constitutional muster … But there are several key scholars who think that it may and it’s worth the effort.”

Frankly, given the overwhelmingly liberal makeup of law faculties, it is astonishing that most still told the President that an extension would be unconstitutional. Moreover, it is not difficult to find experts who are cavalier about the Constitution and willing to sign off on any effort to achieve desire political or social results.

What is interesting is that Biden did not appear to accept their view but still thought violating the Constitution would be beneficial in this circumstance:

“There are a few scholars who say it will and others who say it’s not likely to, but at a minimum by the time it gets litigated it will probably give some additional time while we’re getting that $45 billion dollars out to people who are in fact behind on the rent and don’t have the money.”

The President said the quiet part out loud and admitted that they would use litigation as a delaying tactic to spend money without constitutional authority. That line will now likely be repeated at the top of any motion challenging the extension and seeking a temporary injunction.

President Biden’s position not only dismisses constitutional protections but disregards his own presidential obligations.

It was just six months ago that President Biden swore to the following words:

“I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

Chief Justice Roberts did not include an option for unconstitutional acts in the name of a good cause or when convenient. Biden agreed to uphold the Constitution to the best of his abilities.

The Supreme Court has made clear that the extension would be unconstitutional as was the original moratorium. Biden asked the CDC to use the very same authority in extending the moratorium to give him a pretense for the spending of federal money. That does not seem to bother many legal experts. After all, this unconstitutional act would be done for a good cause. Yet, imagine if a Republican president announced that he was told that an order on drilling or subsidizing a religious organization was unconstitutional but would use litigation to get the money out before a court could intervene. The hue and cry in the media and from law schools would be deafening.

Biden came to office declaring a return to the “rule of law” but has actually racked up an impressive array of court losses. Now he is treating a presumptively unconstitutional act as a purely tactical consideration to allow the spending of federal funds. That is not exactly what he pledged before he declared “so help me God” on January 20th.

[oeb11]

bb- Thank you for a good article - good Sir!!!

[HedonistForever]

Originally Posted by bb1961

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, POLITICSAugust 4, 2021
“I Do Solemnly Swear”: Biden Calls tor Extending the Eviction Moratorium Despite Being Unconstitutional


As I discussed yesterday, I was astonished by the remarks of President Joe Biden on his support for extending the eviction moratorium, which was found to be unconstitutional by lower courts. It was later preserved by a divided Supreme Court despite the view of a majority that it was unconstitutional. It was saved from being struck down merely by the fact that it was expiring. President Biden acknowledged that his legal experts overwhelmingly told him that any extension would violate the Constitution. However, he then said it was worth extending the moratorium because it would take time for a court to intervene and, in the interim, they could rush out money to renters despite the lack of constitutional authority to do so.

Like many, I was mystified by the Supreme Court decision not to strike down the moratorium. The 5-4 decision in Alabama Association of Realtors v. HHS turned on the fact that it was about to expire on July 31st. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh voted to preserve it but Kavanaugh made clear in his opinion that he would vote against any extension as unconstitutional. It was a decision decoupled from the merits. The unconstitutionality of the law was treated as simply inconvenient or irrelevant given the expiration.

In his press conference, President Biden acknowledged that most of the experts consulted by the White House said that an extension would be unconstitutional. However, he noted that he found a few who dismissed or rejected such views: ““The bulk of the constitutional scholarship says that it’s not likely to pass constitutional muster … But there are several key scholars who think that it may and it’s worth the effort.”

Frankly, given the overwhelmingly liberal makeup of law faculties, it is astonishing that most still told the President that an extension would be unconstitutional. Moreover, it is not difficult to find experts who are cavalier about the Constitution and willing to sign off on any effort to achieve desire political or social results.

What is interesting is that Biden did not appear to accept their view but still thought violating the Constitution would be beneficial in this circumstance:

“There are a few scholars who say it will and others who say it’s not likely to, but at a minimum by the time it gets litigated it will probably give some additional time while we’re getting that $45 billion dollars out to people who are in fact behind on the rent and don’t have the money.”

The President said the quiet part out loud and admitted that they would use litigation as a delaying tactic to spend money without constitutional authority. That line will now likely be repeated at the top of any motion challenging the extension and seeking a temporary injunction.

President Biden’s position not only dismisses constitutional protections but disregards his own presidential obligations.

It was just six months ago that President Biden swore to the following words:

“I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

Chief Justice Roberts did not include an option for unconstitutional acts in the name of a good cause or when convenient. Biden agreed to uphold the Constitution to the best of his abilities.

The Supreme Court has made clear that the extension would be unconstitutional as was the original moratorium. Biden asked the CDC to use the very same authority in extending the moratorium to give him a pretense for the spending of federal money. That does not seem to bother many legal experts. After all, this unconstitutional act would be done for a good cause. Yet, imagine if a Republican president announced that he was told that an order on drilling or subsidizing a religious organization was unconstitutional but would use litigation to get the money out before a court could intervene. The hue and cry in the media and from law schools would be deafening.

Biden came to office declaring a return to the “rule of law” but has actually racked up an impressive array of court losses. Now he is treating a presumptively unconstitutional act as a purely tactical consideration to allow the spending of federal funds. That is not exactly what he pledged before he declared “so help me God” on January 20th.

Didn't seem to bother Nancy Pelosi either.


https://www.wral.com/fact-check-pelosi-says-cdc-has-the-power-to-extend-the-eviction-moratorium/19810456/



Fact check: Pelosi says CDC 'has the power to extend the eviction moratorium'

Pelosi’s degree of certitude about the law ignores critical facts that would give a different impression. We rate the statement Mostly False.


To which Nancy Pelosi said "now you see why we must stack the SC"!


OK, I just made that up but you know damn well that's what she was thinking

[bb1961]

Originally Posted by oeb11

bb- Thank you for a good article - good Sir!!!

From Johnathan Turley Sir

[LexusLover]

Biden admits he is proudly and deliberately breaking the law

Such an admission requires greater cognitive skills than he possesses.

[rexdutchman]

STEP 5

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by rexdutchman

STEP 5

I believe he started tripping at about step 10 ... windier there.

[dilbert firestorm]