Could anyone be shielded from legal liability if they can prove that they were carrying out direct (illegal) orders from the President, or would they be legally required to refuse to
implement illegal orders?
Not exact matches
«(Tuesday's)
order doesn't change the Department of Justice's position on the facts: DACA was
implemented unilaterally after Congress declined to extend benefits to this same group of
illegal aliens,» O'Malley said.
That being said, Lawrence Dale was correct in that the TREB was
implementing policy in
order to limit his ability to operate his business model and that, whether you like it or not, is both wrong and
illegal.
Apparently REBBA 2002 «frowns» on its use, but for reasons of ethics about disclosure of other offer details in
order to
implement, not because the clause or use of the clause is «
illegal.»