Rush Limbaugh

For a better experience,
download and use our app!

The Rush Limbaugh Show Main Menu

RUSH: Now, the Supreme Court decision on DACA. What this essentially means is that one president can create policy with an executive order, but another president can’t eliminate it. Now, that’s just absurd. Obama couldn’t get legislation passed. He couldn’t get Congress to pass anything he wanted on DACA, on these DREAMer kids, so he did it all with executive order.

So, because he did, the Trump administration chose the executive order to eliminate the Obama policy via executive order. But the chief justice, John Roberts, said, “No, no, no, no, no! You can’t do it this way. You gotta come back and do it another way. No, no, no!” So now an executive order from one administration lives to another administration if you have a chief justice from the deep state who is intent on sabotaging a president like (in this case) Donald Trump, and that’s what’s happening.


RUSH: Somebody sent me a note. “Can Trump redo the executive order?” No, he can’t redo the executive order. The chief justice of the United States Supreme Court signaled to Donald Trump to go pound sand on this. That no matter how many times this comes up, it isn’t gonna change here. You are not going to change the Obama policy on DACA or DREAMers. We’re not gonna let you do it. Doesn’t matter what the law is, we’re not gonna let you do it. We don’t want you to get rid of a bunch of kids, whatever the liberal thinking is on this, but mostly, folks, this is all personal.

John Roberts, A, did not want to be the chief justice to deny the signature legislation of the first African-American president. That was Obamacare. It was not constitutional as it was written. It contained a federal government mandate that people buy a product. The federal government cannot do that. It’s clear as a bell in the Constitution, Fourth Amendment. The chief justice rewrote the bill and allowed that government mandate to be called a tax, which the government can do. The government can tax anybody for anything, any time, anywhere.

He was not gonna do down in history, he was not gonna go down on the pages of the Washington Post as the Supreme Court chief justice who denied the first African-American president his signature legislation. He wanted to be the chief justice of the Supreme Court who was presiding when it happened. It is abundantly clear to me that the chief justice may as well be deep state.

Now, when I say that, I’m talking about something specific. A guarantor and protector of the Washington establishment. I’m not talking about conspiracies here. I think Roberts, and because of some things that I have been told over the years, Roberts is a guy that thinks the Washington establishment as the ruling force of American life and politics is inviolate. And he is not going to participate in any effort to undermine it or allow it to be disempowered.

And so since that’s Trump’s agenda, Trump’s objective, Roberts just isn’t gonna let it happen. It’s not a mystery, and I’m probably again get shellacked for saying this, because the media and the Democrats want you to believe that Roberts is ruling with a steady devotion to the law. He’s not doing that in this case. There was nothing constitutional about DACA in the first place.

You listen to liberals in the media talk about it today, nothing to do with law. It’s all about these are the wonderful children of DACA. These are the DREAMers. They’re the best among us, and they came here against their will. Some were not even born here when their parents got here, and they are the essence of innocence, and they are poor, and they want to become Americans, and it simply is not right that we would deport them and send them back to wherever it is they came.

That’s what has replaced the law here. And you can listen, turn on any mainstream news network or reporter guest on a network, and this is the way they’re looking at this, that the children have been saved and that John Roberts did it. And, believe me, Roberts loves getting this kind of credit.

Now, just to share with you a story from Microsoft news. But that oftentimes is not the actual source. Anyway, here it is. “The US Supreme Court dealt President Donald Trump’s efforts to choke off immigration a fresh blow Thursday when it rejected his cancellation of the DACA program protecting 700,000 ‘Dreamers,’ undocumented migrants brought to the United States as children.”

President Trump had sought to expel many of the millions of people living here who entered the country without immigration documents, i.e., illegally. “The high court said Trump’s 2017 move to cancel his predecessor Barack Obama’s landmark Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program was ‘arbitrary and capricious’ under government administrative procedures.”

All it did was essentially cancel the Obama executive order, which they refer to here as Obama’s landmark Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals. So Obama’s executive order was landmark. Trump’s erasing it and canceling it, arbitrary and capricious. It’s thoughtless and it’s inhumane and has no compassion. We can’t send these children home. We cannot subject them to a life that they don’t know when the only life they have known is that of America. And then they trot out their polling data, which shows that 60 some odd percent of the American people do not want to send the DREAMers home, which, I don’t know, could be true.

“The judgement on a five-to-four vote, with Chief Justice John Roberts siding with the court’s four liberal members, stressed that it was not an assessment of the correctness of the 2012 DACA program itself.”

This is the beauty. The chief judge has to say, “By the way, this decision is not on the merits.” You know what that means? This decision is not on the law. We’re not saying that the president can’t do what he wants to do here. We’re just saying we’re not gonna let it happen. It’s supposed to mollify Trump a bit. It’s supposed to, “Well, it’s not that you’re wrong, sir. It’s just that we don’t like that you’re doing it. And we don’t like how you’re doing it, and so you can’t do it.”

But when you hear the chief justice stress that it was not an assessment of the correctness or incorrectness of the program itself, it means they have decided to rule on this without considering the law.

“Instead, they said the Trump administration had violated official government procedures in the way they sought to quickly rescind DACA in September 2017 based on weak legal justifications.”

But it’s not on the merits. It’s just the Trump administration had very weak legal justification. Obama’s executive order was classic law school A material. But this stuff from Trump, oh, my God. It’s embarrassing. We couldn’t even spend much time on this, it’s so infantile.

“The ruling suggested there are legal administrative methods Trump could cancel DACA, putting the onus back on the administration if it wants to pursue the issue.” The ruling suggested there are legal administrative methods that Trump could use to cancel DACA. Yeah, but what they’re really saying is, bring any of them back up here and same thing’s gonna happen to ’em. Throwing down the gauntlet here.

They know, they know what Trump’s policy on immigration is. They know he wanted to build a wall. They know that he wanted to end open borders. Washington establishment does not want open borders ended, and they don’t want a wall. They want a never-ending stream of underclass people in the world streaming into this country to prop up the need and the power of the Washington establishment’s government.

This is what pushback looks like.


RUSH: Here’s Joe in southwest Florida. You’re next, sir. Great to have you with us.

CALLER: Hey, Rush. Longtime listener, first-time caller, and I’m glad I got through. You read the ruling wrong today. The ruling doesn’t say that DACA stands. What the ruling essentially said was the states must follow executive orders whether they are unconstitutional or not. They punted.

RUSH: Okay. I’ll go along with that.

CALLER: So what they’re saying is they want Trump to write an executive order that ends DACA. That’s what the ruling says. It doesn’t say DACA stands. It says that the state —

RUSH: I know. I didn’t say it did. They didn’t rule it on the merits. They didn’t rule on the constitutionality of it or the legality of it or not.

CALLER: So we’re not losing here. It’s in Trump’s hands. He can write the executive order this afternoon and send it to Roberts for formatting errors.

RUSH: You see, that’s where we — I don’t think Roberts is ever gonna end DACA.

CALLER: Well, I don’t care because he just wrote a ruling that said all states must follow executive order. Write the executive order, Trump. Essentially they ruled they can turn this thing off or turn it on depending on who’s president. So turn it off. That simple.

RUSH: Basically the message is that the people who have positions of authority and power in the Washington establishment are gonna stop Donald Trump dead in his tracks on anything he wants whenever they can. And they’re going to come up with alternatives that he must take that will be impossible, too time-consuming. But the thing they want is what they’ve already got: Supreme Court says “no” to Trump. Whatever the headlines are, they’re devastating and it’s all personal.

It’s like “Supreme Court tells Trump, Supreme Court denies Trump, Supreme Court tells Trump to pack it. Tells Trump whatever.” That’s the headlines that they wanted and what they got. They want everybody to see that Trump is impotent when it comes to the real power in Washington, D.C., the Supreme Court. It would be interesting to see if the remedy for this is simply another executive order. I can’t see John Roberts, “Okay. Okay. Okay. Yeah, that looks good. Okay. Here we go. DACA’s over.” I don’t see it. I don’t see it. But it would be great if you’re right.


RUSH: Rockford, Illinois. Jim, great to have you, sir. Hello.

CALLER: Hi. Rush, am I on?

RUSH: You are.

CALLER: Okay. I wanted to provide a nuance to your comment earlier today about the Roberts siding with the liberal justices as being anti-Trump. I think it’s more anti-Trump comment that was made earlier in his tenure about there being Obama judges and Bush judges and Clinton judges.

RUSH: Right.

CALLER: I think he’s trying to protect what he wants his image of the court to be, and that is that it’s not influenced by politics. And when there are instances where he can venture from his conservative jurisprudence to some extent and side with the liberal judges, that his court over the number of years that he’s serving as the chief justice is not gonna be assigned the moniker of being a purely conservative court rendering conservative decisions and basically confirming Trump’s perception of there being solely conservative judges and liberal judges.

RUSH: Right. What about the law?

CALLER: Well, are you talking about this particular —

RUSH: No, I’m saying in your analysis of Judge Roberts you never once talked about whether or not he should obey it, pay attention to it, factor it.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This