When push comes to shove, the judiciary and legislative branches, I assume. If they are willing and able to do so.
What I’m asking is, are they required to do so?
Okay, perfect, the stage is set. While the CNN lawyers are on their way to the federal courthouse to get an injunction, not unlike what lawyers did with the “Muslim ban” EO, the military refuses to deploy to CNN’s offices because the Posse Comitatus Act prohibits it, and they aren’t required to obey unlawful orders. As for the “police”, it seems that their HQ is in Atlanta, so Trump calls up the Atlanta PD Chief and tells him to get some officers over their lickety-split to block the entrances, and he responds with a slightly-more-grown-up version of “you’re not the boss of me” and hangs up. Oh, and somewhere along the way some Congressmen begin drafting articles of impeachment.
I don’t know that I’ve ever seen a press secretary say that it was highly inappropriate for the press to ask questions, btu yeah. I do’t think that she did anything illegal, just shitty, and it reflects upon the shittiness of the administration, and their overall attitude towards a free press.
Insurrection and Posse Comitatus talk about military, not federal marshals. Speaking of insurrection act, “Under this act, the President may also deploy troops as a police force during a natural disaster, epidemic, serious public health emergency, terrorist attack, or other condition, when the President determines that the authorities of the state are incapable of maintaining public order.”
“…other condition, when the President determines that the authorities of the state are incapable of maintaining public order.” is pretty ambiguous.
And while the “if we’re lucky” was a joke on your part, I don’t know that I agree the rest really is. Courts take time. It doesn’t do all that much good for a court to rule that he shouldn’t have ordered an airstrike on CNN headquarters 2 months later.
Okay. I shall sleep better tonight. 
They don’t take that long. Trump signed his immigration EO on January 27th and a judge issued a temporary restraining order on February 3rd.
And, in between military and local PD, where do US Marshalls fall?
As glorified bailiffs, running Witness Protection and running down fugitives (like this one). I imagine they’d find themselves as unwelcome blocking the entrances to CNN HQ in Atlanta as they would be in Idaho today.
How many missiles can be launched in a week?
Now, I am sure that the temporary restraining order could get pushed through as an emergency, and legally tell the president to stop what he is doing within maybe even hours. Then you get to see if he like’s Andrew Jackson enough to quote him, “John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it!” He has said to have been a great admirer of the president who committed genocide after the supreme court’s ruling that he wasn’t supposed to.
My point of 2 months would be that it would take that long to have something in place that wasn’t a temporary court order, that it would take at least that long in order for it to make it to the SC. And, I am not sure of who would have standing to sue him, nor for what.
Congress seems his only check, and they are at best, borderline dysfunctional, just as their voters wanted them to be.
Probably just as unwelcome as they were when they were protecting the rights of black students to go to school after Brown v board of ed.
A whole bunch if the military felt like it, but like I said, the most likely outcome of him saying “Bomb CNN HQ now” is for them to respond with “Sir, that’s an illegal order and I will not comply” or something along those lines.
Except in this case it would be Trump left with an unenforced order, because the military would tell him “No”, and I’m confident he couldn’t arm and operate a Predator by himself.
CNN would be the one harmed, and they’d have standing to sue, for violating their civil rights.
No, Congress is not the only check. The military is a check. The courts are a check. Local law enforcement is a check.
Wait. Didn’t you see that documentary about how the FBI crushed the Klan in Mississippi?
At CNN offices on US soil? I have to believe that there are checks and balances and sufficiently intelligent military officers who would refuse such an order if given by the president.
I do agree that congress is the weakest link when it comes to putting constraints on presidential authority. But their dysfunction precedes the Great Orange Menace administration.
The President, Supreme Court justices, and Congress members swear an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution, and I assume that oath is legally binding. So, yes.
The Constitution stops him.
So Congress can stop him. The Supreme Court can also strike down an executive decision, so the Supreme Court can stop him.
This is one of those weird threads where I almost hope I don’t understand the question. “What if Trump shuts down CNN and Congress doesn’t do anything, and the Supreme Court waits two months before it acts?” It sure didn’t take a federal judge that long to block Trump’s travel ban, and that was slightly less urgent than federal marshals swarming CNN headquarters.
If the question is, “what if Trump does something horrible and the other two branches of government don’t do anything?” Then we elect other Congress men and women, and impeach and remove the current Supremes.
If the follow up question is “what if he issues an executive order canceling the elections?” don’t bother. Go post it in the “Second Amendment vs. tyranny” thread below.
Regards,
Shodan
Do you not see how “after Brown v Board of Education” is a key part of that story? The President didn’t unilaterally decide on a whim to send the Marshalls down to New Orleans. There was a court case, and the President was acting to enforce that decision.
The point that some posters continue to miss is that the Press Secretary is no more of a Constitutional actor than someone in the White House Travel and Telegraph Office, or one of the gardeners.
IOW, she can say whatever she likes, and it isn’t an “affront” to the Constitution.
Haven’t followed this thread in a few days but going back to this post because it’s been several days now and not only has Kelly’s account been proven demonstrably false, but he has yet to apologize for it or even come out to explain himself for it. I’m sorry, but I can only go so far in excusing misstatements. When I misspeak or make a statement that is demonstrably false, I tend to admit as much or attempt to clarify my remarks. Silence is just doubling down on the Trumpism and saying “I’m a general. I’m right. Shut up.”
General Kelly knowingly serves an administration which has been far more sympathetic in their characterizations of the white nationalist crowd that ended up killing a person in Charlottesville, Virginia than it has in their description of a black congresswoman. Rep Wilson can be forgiven for assuming racial bias behind those remarks made about her. Again, whether or not there is any is beside the point. Why hasn’t Kelly apologized? Does she not deserve one? Why doesn’t she deserve one? On what basis?
“The military”? Who is the military. The military is made of people. If the first person tells him no, he can fire that person, and turn to the next.
Those who survive and aren’t in guantanamo will be on the run.
Military is a means, as is local LEO. The courts are a check, but a slow one that can be ignored, and I still don’t see what law, exactly he would be violating. Congress would need to make a law for him to violate before the courts could do anything.
I hope so.
I think their dysfunction helped enable the GOMa.
Ah, good. Where at? What in the consittuion prevents the executive from doing this. That was what I thought would be a simple answer, and yet, I have yet to see what that may be.
If you are sure that the consitution stops him, please tell me where.
Agreed, but they have to act to do so
Once again, on what grounds?
Right, it took a week to get a temporary block on that EO, and that was fair contentious, even though it broke actual laws. I don’t know that I trust Congress to find it’s ass, much less pass legislation stopping the president from carrying out his desires.
That’s an even longer term remedy. By that time, if left unchallenged by all but the voters, he could go after all that he dislikes.
Well, no the follow up question would be, why would we want to have elections anyway, when the state sponsored media is telling us everything is better than it ever has been?
My point in that was only that the US marshals are no stranger to following unpopular EO’s. That people wouldn’t like it much makes no mind.
The gardeners hold press conferences where they speak as to the policies, positions, and actions of the administration?
This is wiki on the WHPS:
This is wiki on “affront”:
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/affront
She is definitionally an “affront” many times over, to many including all US citizens, and to our foundational documents. It may be from ignorance of her job, or that she’s working for a liar. But it happens every day or two. That’s in dispute? How?
Her job is public policy, not gardening or maintenance, and she is speaking for the ultimate constitutional actor. So her words have much more consequence than you want to acknowledge. She is the face of the administration and you compare her with a gardener?
And that person will tell him no too. No one wants their job in the military so badly that they’re going to bomb downtown Atlanta to keep it and risk ending up on trial for war crimes.
I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but we even allow the prisoners in Guantanamo to sue 
I’ve told you several times: Posse Comitatus:
Yes, they do things that may be uncomfortable when there is a legal basis for doing so. There’s no legal basis for barring entrance to CNN. And if they tried it, they’d get arrested by the Atlanta PD, fed credentials notwithstanding.