tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6412826294594900386.post3740452533034819134..comments2023-04-12T08:12:17.855-05:00Comments on yellowarmadillos: Selective Law EnforcementAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12068839756237461498noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6412826294594900386.post-90368265307024114632011-02-26T22:26:13.731-06:002011-02-26T22:26:13.731-06:00Does this not upset the "checks and balances?...Does this not upset the "checks and balances?" I mean Legislature passes a law, Judicial Department has made no decision declaring a law unconstitutional, the Executive Branch just decides they don't like a law, so they will "functionally veto" the law, since they can't veto or repeal it for real. <br /><br />And then when the next administration takes over <br />and decides that they do like the law, what becomes of all the people who took advantage of the previous government's "blind eye?"<br /><br />Smells like trouble to me.S. Holbrookhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04316506713873493248noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6412826294594900386.post-38746020963935818162011-02-23T15:03:00.202-06:002011-02-23T15:03:00.202-06:00Well, Jackson decided not to enforce the Worcester...Well, Jackson decided not to enforce the Worcester decision, which, while narrow in scope, would have been considered a pro-indian precedent that would have at least slowed the removal of the Chreokee.Michaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01501092767358868675noreply@blogger.com