They have no right to ignore law.
They swear an oath to uphold the law.
Courts have no right to make law. They only vet the law to ensure it complies Constitutionally. Quote chapter and verse where the executive cant enforce written already vetted law.
They should all be recalled.
Oh i definitely agree with you, but that wont make anyone listen.
Quoting chapter and verse would require me spend more time than id like looking up the chapters and verses. But, ill give the first examples that come to mind.
The president has the statutory authority to regulate who can be legally admitted into the United States. When he tried to enact a policy restricting people from certain terrorist harboring countries, the policy was ruled unconstitutional.
The president, via his attorney general, has the statutority authority to enforce federal law. Specifically, in this case, immigration law. To arrest and in any way punish an illegal alien who has a child in tow, requires either the child be locked up with the parent (ruled unconstitutional) or the child seperated from the parent while the parent is incarcerated (ruled unconstitutional).
So, if its illegal (legal according to statute, but not according to court ruling) to seperate the child from the parent, and its illegal to put the child in jail too, that only leaves one possibility.
If your a law enforcement officer, and it has been ruled unconstitutional for you to detain someone, then doing so anyway is a felony.
No law enforcement officer wants to be arrested for kidnapping because his interpretation differs from the court. If the law enforcement officer claims "i was upholding my oath", and the court replies "we are the final arbiters of the meaning of your oath", then the rest of the world, and all of its enforcement authority sides with the court.
Because, the federal court system has their own enforcement branch, and a monopoly on the issuing of arrest warrants.