How are Supreme Court orders enforced?

Emergency hearing can be petitioned for the SCOTUS to order DC to act. If it fails, an individual whom was wronged can bring a section 1983 lawsuit, violation of civil rights, against DC. The plantiff can also target the mayor personally.

I'm not sure, but it should end in said 'ignorer' being put in jail, and any who work for him and enforce his illegal law, are also put behind bars, and possibly forced into early retirement.

Unfortunately, it would probably end up in the mayor using taxpayer dollars to defend himself, lose, and use more taxpayer dollars to pay the fines.

The judicial branch of the gov't has no enforcement power. Enforcement comes from the executive branch.

In this particular case, given that it's DC, I suspect that federal marshalls would be required. Whether they would be ordered to do anything remains to be seen, but to me it's doubtful.

Ed

I propose a Delta Force mission to relocate Mayor and cronies to Gitmo until they shape up.

A President famously said once "The Supreme Court has issued their verdict, now let them enforce it."

Their ability can range from issuing a directive from the bench to comply all the way to having the executive branchs end in Federal troops (National Guard) to enforce a decision.

For those of you younger folks, that's when George Wallace "stood in the school house door" and refused to allow African-Americans to enter the University.

Federal Marshalls, supported by armed troops, enforced the decision of Brown v. Board of Education.

But before we start looking for Strykers coming donw the street, take a look at my other Post on Gura's blog this morning. In his opinion the city is complying with the letter of the new law but he does not intend to let the rest of their unconstitutional laws stand and to quote Mr. Gura, "they will change ... one way or another"..

Their ability can range from issuing a directive from the bench to comply all the way to having the executive branchs end in Federal troops (National Guard) to enforce a decision.

For those of you younger folks, that's when George Wallace "stood in the school house door" and refused to allow African-Americans to enter the University.

Federal Marshalls, supported by armed troops, enforced the decision of Brown v. Board of Education.

Click to expand...

But keep in mind. None of the federal marshals or troops involved were controlled by the court. They have to rely on the executive branch to actually enforce their orders.

If the libs. ignore the court order I would remind them, orders that favor them can and should be ignored in the future. You can't pick and choose.

That being said, I think the judicial system is totally out of control in this country on the federal, state and local levels. The executive and legislative branches of government have failed to rein in judicial activism and we all are paying for it.

Case in point a local county was ordered by a federal judge to build a new jail because of over crowding and to present him a plan for a new jail and a new tax from which they would be paying for it with. Since when under ANY constitution do judges have to power to levy taxes or order construction of anything?

The executive and legislative branches had better wake up and crack the whip through the prescribed means in the Constitution and the state constitutions or they are going to be out of a job in 30 or so years.

I would also imagine that if a decision and order from SCOTUS goes ignored by said other gov body, any charges and convictions will eventually be overturned, would it not?

Words of wisdom from Judge Kozinski of the 9th Circuit:

"The Second Amendment is a doomsday provision, one designed for those exceptionally rare circumstances where all other rights have failed -- ... where courts ... can find no one to enforce their decrees."

Ed

the executive branchs end in Federal troops (National Guard) to enforce a decision.

Click to expand...

Actually, in such a situation, the president can use active duty military, not only the National Guard. Some people will say that using active duty troops would violate the Posse Comitatus Act, but thats irrelevant. When National Guard troops are federalized, legally they are no different than active duty federal troops.

As I said in another thread, I'd airdrop the entire 82d Airborne into DC, and send the Marines ashore from the Potomac River. That would send a clear message to Fenty and his chronies that their crap will not be tolerated.

The handgun in the Heller case was a 9 shot .22 revolver...DC is trying to use that fact to say they are complying when they are obviously not.

A President famously said once "The Supreme Court has issued their verdict, now let them enforce it."

Click to expand...

see, at that point it becomes OUR job to enforce it

I think it would be easy to argue that a Glock or 1911 is alot more "common" than a 9 shot .22lr revolver

A President famously said once "The Supreme Court has issued their verdict, now let them enforce it."

Click to expand...

Google has 1 hit

Mind giving me more info?

"John Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it!"

Andrew Jackson - 1832 after Worcester v. Georgia

"John Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it!"

Andrew Jackson - 1832 after Worcester v. Georgia

Click to expand...

Not exactly... Jackson's actual words were:

"The decision of the Supreme Court has fell still born, and they find that they cannot coerce Georgia to yield to its mandate."

It's the Executive Branch's responisibility to enforce the will of the court. Whether or not they go through with their responsibility... that's the question.

A one million dollars per day fine paid to Mr. Heller for each day they refuse to comply.






oh yes, SCOTUS can!!

It's the Executive Branch's responisibility to enforce the will of the court. Whether or not they go through with their responsibility... that's the question.

Click to expand...

Same thing with legislation - the "will of Congress."

So what keeps the President from just deciding that he is going to do or not do whatever he wants?

Okay, Congress can impeach him(her). So who is going to enforce that - the president???

No. We the People.

TallPine: "So what keeps the President from just deciding that he is going to do or not do whatever he wants?"
=======================================

Ah! I see you've discovered why we have an illegal immigrant problem.

In the final analysis, this sort of thing is why we have the 2nd Ammendment.

Unconstitutional enforcement of the law in question would have to be either be extrajudicial, or the enforcement of a verdict from a lower court made without regard to the precedent set by the SCOTUS.