This transcript is automatically generated
Well despite the growing chorus of voices question the president's gun control proposals that actions.
Our next -- say is executive orders are constitutional and joining us for more defense attorney Fox News contributor our pride dollop.
Attorney former crumble prosecutor Dave Jenkins thank you both for being here faith but let's start with the share who.
Along with other.
People are saying in this and and and law enforcement.
-- there just are going to enforce laws that they deemed to be on constitution.
-- we have a problem because -- something called preemption.
Which means federal loss if there's a state law -- -- conflict with the federal law the federal law will be the law that -- doing so.
They're going to have any real issue -- they just sit back and say we don't care that he's -- and now on the books we're just not going to abide by the end over.
-- doing what's that.
And immigration law which the president says don't enforce.
Both are on the books.
Which one -- you gonna prosecute.
The policy as president of says don't enforce a law that is the law are you gonna prosecute the -- says the -- on his judgment isn't isn't.
And like immigration -- not gonna force it -- Well all -- -- in this particular case it's.
If they share decides not to abide by federalized decides to sit back and say I'm not going to enforce if he's going to happen issue.
Aren't you -- -- -- the sheriff obviously isn't but it seemed strange to me anyway to be a great American his intentions.
Clearly in coming in the right amen brother.
If every share of reacted that way to every law that he thought.
Every federal law.
I think about gun control of the of the new marijuana laws and all this sure we would and other key in the United States of America be the best example -- governor of a lawyer now.
Now brown V board of education.
You have to let black kids at the school they should know this is Allstate would all that happened what happened that now.
You know I really don't anticipate this going where it's 58 years of -- -- -- -- found that.
That's a great example but let me ask you this is in the sheriff didn't say that is gonna violate the law.
No one has said -- your -- have a requirement -- apologizes land -- auto.
We're doing this like what -- your fancy courtroom today Estrada other -- and I I just wanna know I mean.
He's not violating a law he says I mean should we sure we incarcerate sheriffs who don't.
-- force immigration law because the Obama Justice Department says don't do that.
I mean how do you sort this -- counselor.
Well what what age would you how the way you sorted out is you look at what these executive orders and let's just take what aspect of it.
These semiautomatic when he extended clips OK if the -- the United States of America the federal government knows that faith.
Has all of these weapons in our home and they called the -- in our -- we need you to go get them we don't want her to have these weapons in her possession.
And he's is -- -- I'm not saying they gonna come -- well.
But the step FB ID EA -- -- all the what evidence for.
What about I'm saying again.
What law is violated.
And -- by the share.
Let's look at -- -- let's look at this point these sheriffs say he wrote a letter and he sat at any law that if things he's first he's still have first amendment rights than that -- -- -- -- I -- -- -- public management rights to but there are restrictions and regulations on -- on both the first and the second and then -- just because the second namely DT the right to bear -- the discussion does not and they're just -- with the First Amendment the right to free speech -- look at all the free speech and we -- -- -- telecommunications yeah.
I'm no -- but I'm just -- I'm just a bigger country born here I just -- -- I'm from Louisiana out of pocket there we're governor communicate well Brooklyn yeah.
That reality is this year as saying in his judgment.
This -- on these orders and and I'm saying hypothetical.
That they are unconstitutional he will not while it is -- he -- he's but I cannot be Supreme Court just he had.
Still the legal front throughout Asia but he's not trying to invalidate.
The federal law or the judgment of the president.
He's saying simply that is the elected sure of that count.
He's not gonna enforce.
Neither one -- you has and you know what you're very good answer -- But neither want to have you has answered my question which is what is the difference between is not enforcing that law.
For which there is no violation.
And big -- by this president not to enforce immigration law.
We respect our laws on the book can really get in trouble -- -- -- in the immigration law he won't -- law on the books he's enforcing.
-- on the book Sarah -- -- British on the there are.
-- -- -- Company in trouble we ask -- to get hit a lot of that happening that shouldn't ever getting it -- sheriffs are not much but no merit in troubled about hooking.
Or drug pill taker model all of -- there -- issues.
Post Rupert what I was gonna say 88 -- -- -- -- at that the federal government tax listen we're gonna go after individuals for not enforcing the -- that's when you want to have Apollo I wanna know is what law has he violated he had not yeah.
-- got so big -- they are the federal they are being an impressive into radical behavior after -- -- -- counselors -- -- you know the great thing about.
This that you're the jackpot -- the vivid yeah.
Thank you both sides of respects commitments.