Ted Cruz’s New Report Blasts Obama: Courts Shutting Down Tons of Obama Policies

ZCruz
On Tuesday, Tea Party Senator Ted Cruz released a new report detailing the Obama Administration’s lawlessness. While so many lawmakers talk a great game about their distaste for the Obama regime’s heavy-handed tactics, Sen. Cruz seems to have no problem calling out our commander-in-chief for his numerous unconstitutional acts.
 
As a follow up to his now-famous Legal Limit Report 4, the report that detailed 76 specific acts of lawlessness by this administration, Sen. Cruz’s office released Legal Limit Report 5, a detailed account of the Obama Administration’s adversarial relationship with the American people and how the courts have been routinely rejected the Obama Administration’s arguments.
 
Sen. Cruz’s first report, Legal Limit Report 1, detailed court cases decidedly unanimously against the Obama Administration from January 2012 to June of 2013. This new report expands that discussion, recounting all court cases decided unanimously against the Obama regime dating back to 2009, when Obama first took office.
 
The courts have ruled unanimously against Obama’s overreaches a total of 20 times. The kicker: four of those times have been rulings from the Supreme Court in its most recent term.
 
The report offers a frightening look at what would have happened had the Judicial Branch not stopped Obama’s tyranny. The first and fifth report details that if Obama’s DOJ had been successful in it’s absurd defenses of these acts, they would have had the power to: 
Attach GPSs to a citizen’s vehicle to monitor his movements, without having any cause to believe that a person has committed a crime (United States v. Jones);
 
Deprive landowners of the right to challenge potential government fines as high as $75,000 per day and take away their ability have a hearing to challenge those fines (Sackett v. EPA);
 
Interfere with a church’s selection of its own ministers (Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church & School v. EEOC);
 
Override state law through the Presidential fiat (Arizona v. United States);
 
Dramatically  extend  statutes  of  limitations  to  impose  penalties  for  acts  committed decades ago (Gabelli v. SEC);
 
Destroy private property without paying just compensation (Arkansas Fish & Game Commission v. United States);
 
Impose double income taxation (PPL Corp. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue);
 
Limit property owner’s constitutional defenses (Horne v. USDA);
 
Drastically expand federal criminal law (Sekhar v. United States);
 
Unilaterally install officers and bypass the Senate confirmation process (NLRB v. Noel Canning);
 
Search the contents of cell phones without a warrant (Riley v. California);
 
Use international treaties to displace state sovereignty over criminal law (Bond v. United States);
 
Expand federal mandatory minimum sentencing laws (Burrage v. United States);
 
Apply arbitrary immigration rules (Judulang v. Holder);
 
Bring prosecutions after statutory deadlines (United States v. Tinklenberg);
 
Ignore certain veterans’ challenges to administrative agency rulings (Henderson ex rel. Henderson v. Shinseki);
 
Override state prosecutorial decisions by treating minor state drug offenses as aggravated felonies under federal law (Carachuri-Rosendo v. Holder);
 
Undermine Congress’s power to define criminal laws and the jury’s role in criminal cases (United States v. O’Brien);
 
Charge drug buyers with crimes committed by drug sellers (Abuelhawa v. United States); and
 
Ignore mental states needed for federal criminal convictions (Flores-Figueroa v. United States). 
Sen. Cruz summarized the findings of the report, saying, 
“When President Obama’s own Supreme Court nominees join their colleagues in unanimously rejecting his Administration’s call for broader federal power twenty times since Obama took office, the inescapable conclusion is that the Obama Administration’s view of federal power knows virtually no bounds.” 
Unlike dictatorial regimes that claim to represent “the people,” our government truly is a government of the people. The federal government exists to serve us, to provide basic law and order and it is a sad state of affairs when the Judicial Branch must work so hard to keep the federal government from seizing any and all power that isn’t nailed down.
 
Thankfully, we have leaders in America who know what is means to be free and what the function of our government is supposed to be. 

Comments

comments

Trending Today