So when a Govenor or Sherriff says they chose not to enforce such laws, they are just turning their head and looking the other way. But if an incident occures due to the unresponsive or non enforcement of the Federal law, we then have civil disobedience, "yes"?
And that would or could send the Govt. into the state to enforce such a law, resulting in a very serious situation. More than likelly heads would roll.
I believe if my logic is not faulty this would be the beginning of a huge split in the populace. Also other cities and states choosing sides and who they decided to folllow, of course, this is the stuff that movies are made of.
But it vey well could become a problem if not addressed. I think the more important question is if the Executive branch has the right to invoke a law that goes against the Constitution with no vote discussion from the Judicial branch and no agreement from the Legislative branch, it would violate our system of checks and balances would it not? Especially since we are not on a wartime footing, where such things are pushed through as emergency measures.
Could an executive order be ignored if it had no grounds other than the President just deciding he wanted to do it?
Or would it be blocked immediatlly by a court order, I have no clue what procedre is, on this kind of thing, they use executive action and executive order, almost interchangablly and I know they aren't. An executive action, can be anything he did,or said, true? Where an EO sounds more like a pending law.
Anyone?