> Nope. Both had executive orders blocked by the judiciary.
Yes, and? Would you like a list of decrees ignored by previous Presidents? The balance of power between the judiciary and the executive really only finds resolution in the legislative. I find executive orders, presidential findings, and the like extremely undemocratic. But the extent to which Presidents are adversarial and seek "workarounds" is clearly dependent on the administration in power and the context.
You might find the survey of executive orders and their interaction with judiciary helpful to review[0]. Most reviews are about how the executive order is implemented, not the sub stance of the order itself. The same will most likely be in this case (e.g, how to properly resolve the status of those affected and detained right now but not the denying entry to others)
> Under the proper use of the term, of course someone has standing to challenge their own detention.
Yes, there are two classes of people here. A relative handful who have a legal visa and are being denied entry who may have standing and millions outside the US who have none.
I believe the order as written (and copy-pasted from a previous Obama administration executive order denying entry to a similar class in 2011) allows for a case-by-case exemption by DepHomeSec.
Yes, and therefore it is not the case that "[It] depends on the President currently in power. The judiciary has no real authority to enforce anything." See GP.
> Would you like a list of decrees ignored by previous Presidents?
I would. But as you try to assemble it, bear in mind that the relevant task is to find cases where court orders have been ignored, not "legally circumvented." You will find some of the latter, of course. But I doubt you'll find too many of the former.
I with you agree that executive orders are especially difficult to challenge in court. I also agree with you that, for this and other reasons, executive orders generally have become pretty troubling from both a political and legal standpoint. But neither of these are the claims I was addressing in my comment.
Yes, and? Would you like a list of decrees ignored by previous Presidents? The balance of power between the judiciary and the executive really only finds resolution in the legislative. I find executive orders, presidential findings, and the like extremely undemocratic. But the extent to which Presidents are adversarial and seek "workarounds" is clearly dependent on the administration in power and the context.
You might find the survey of executive orders and their interaction with judiciary helpful to review[0]. Most reviews are about how the executive order is implemented, not the sub stance of the order itself. The same will most likely be in this case (e.g, how to properly resolve the status of those affected and detained right now but not the denying entry to others)
> Under the proper use of the term, of course someone has standing to challenge their own detention.
Yes, there are two classes of people here. A relative handful who have a legal visa and are being denied entry who may have standing and millions outside the US who have none.
I believe the order as written (and copy-pasted from a previous Obama administration executive order denying entry to a similar class in 2011) allows for a case-by-case exemption by DepHomeSec.
[0]: http://www.yalelawjournal.org/note/executive-orders-in-court