Trump continues to win. SCOTUS will not grant cert to review deportation of illegal immigrants!

[AsianTrumpSupporter]

U.S. top court leaves intact ruling against Central America asylum seekers

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court sidestepped a turbulent debate over illegal immigration on Monday, turning away an appeal by a group of asylum-seeking Central American women and their children who aimed to clarify the constitutional rights of people who the government has prioritized for deportation.


The families, 28 women and 33 children ages 2 to 17 from El Salvador, Honduras and Guatemala, had hoped the justices would overturn a lower court's ruling preventing them from having their expedited removal orders reviewed by a federal judge.


That Philadelphia-based court said the status of the families, all apprehended in Texas and later held in Pennsylvania, was akin to non-citizens who are denied entry at the border and they were not entitled to a court hearing to challenge that decision.


Immigration has become an even hotter topic than usual in the United States since President Donald Trump took office in January. His administration has ordered construction of a border wall with Mexico intended to curb illegal immigration, and plans to expand the number of people targeted for expedited removal, a process that applies to non-citizens lacking valid entry documents.


The families have said they were escaping threats, violence and police authorities unable or unwilling to help in their home countries...


...The women challenged in federal court the rejection of their asylum claims, alleging a violation of their right to due process under the U.S. Constitution.


In August, the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia said they may be treated the same way as non-citizens seeking initial admission to the United States, who do not have any constitutional rights of review if denied entry.


The women appealed to the Supreme Court.


There has been a 93 percent drop since December of parents and children caught trying to cross the Mexican border illegally into the United States, which U.S. officials attribute to the Trump administration's tough policies.

Thank God for President Trump and Justice Gorsuch!

#MAGA #Winning

 

[bripat9643]

U.S. top court leaves intact ruling against Central America asylum seekers

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court sidestepped a turbulent debate over illegal immigration on Monday, turning away an appeal by a group of asylum-seeking Central American women and their children who aimed to clarify the constitutional rights of people who the government has prioritized for deportation.


The families, 28 women and 33 children ages 2 to 17 from El Salvador, Honduras and Guatemala, had hoped the justices would overturn a lower court's ruling preventing them from having their expedited removal orders reviewed by a federal judge.


That Philadelphia-based court said the status of the families, all apprehended in Texas and later held in Pennsylvania, was akin to non-citizens who are denied entry at the border and they were not entitled to a court hearing to challenge that decision.


Immigration has become an even hotter topic than usual in the United States since President Donald Trump took office in January. His administration has ordered construction of a border wall with Mexico intended to curb illegal immigration, and plans to expand the number of people targeted for expedited removal, a process that applies to non-citizens lacking valid entry documents.


The families have said they were escaping threats, violence and police authorities unable or unwilling to help in their home countries...


...The women challenged in federal court the rejection of their asylum claims, alleging a violation of their right to due process under the U.S. Constitution.


In August, the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia said they may be treated the same way as non-citizens seeking initial admission to the United States, who do not have any constitutional rights of review if denied entry.


The women appealed to the Supreme Court.


There has been a 93 percent drop since December of parents and children caught trying to cross the Mexican border illegally into the United States, which U.S. officials attribute to the Trump administration's tough policies.

Thank God for President Trump and Justice Gorsuch!

#MAGA #Winning

Imagine what would have happened if Hillary had won the election.

 

[JakeStarkey]

all of which has done nothing to stop the massive overflow of illegal immigrants through our airports and across the Canadian border

 

[WEATHER53]

Attempted crossings down 93% is Huge

 

[bripat9643]

all of which has done nothing to stop the massive overflow of illegal immigrants through our airports and across the Canadian border

Trump will get to that in due time.

 

[washamericom]

U.S. top court leaves intact ruling against Central America asylum seekers

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court sidestepped a turbulent debate over illegal immigration on Monday, turning away an appeal by a group of asylum-seeking Central American women and their children who aimed to clarify the constitutional rights of people who the government has prioritized for deportation.


The families, 28 women and 33 children ages 2 to 17 from El Salvador, Honduras and Guatemala, had hoped the justices would overturn a lower court's ruling preventing them from having their expedited removal orders reviewed by a federal judge.


That Philadelphia-based court said the status of the families, all apprehended in Texas and later held in Pennsylvania, was akin to non-citizens who are denied entry at the border and they were not entitled to a court hearing to challenge that decision.


Immigration has become an even hotter topic than usual in the United States since President Donald Trump took office in January. His administration has ordered construction of a border wall with Mexico intended to curb illegal immigration, and plans to expand the number of people targeted for expedited removal, a process that applies to non-citizens lacking valid entry documents.


The families have said they were escaping threats, violence and police authorities unable or unwilling to help in their home countries...


...The women challenged in federal court the rejection of their asylum claims, alleging a violation of their right to due process under the U.S. Constitution.


In August, the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia said they may be treated the same way as non-citizens seeking initial admission to the United States, who do not have any constitutional rights of review if denied entry.


The women appealed to the Supreme Court.


There has been a 93 percent drop since December of parents and children caught trying to cross the Mexican border illegally into the United States, which U.S. officials attribute to the Trump administration's tough policies.

Thank God for President Trump and Justice Gorsuch!

#MAGA #Winning

should we allow Cspan and cameras into the hallowed chambers ?

 

[washamericom]

all of which has done nothing to stop the massive overflow of illegal immigrants through our airports and across the Canadian border

has there been a sudden rush sparkey ?
massive overflow of illegal immigrants through our airports and across the Canadian border - Google Search

do canada and toro know about this ?

 

[JakeStarkey]

hasn't there? of course there has and you can't prove differently

 

[longknife]

SCOTUS Steps Up on Asylum Seekers

What’s the big deal? Well, once again, non-citizens claim the same rights as citizens. In this case, they claimed the constitutional right to have their case reviewed by a federal judge.

That Philadelphia-based court said the status of the families, all apprehended in Texas and later held in Pennsylvania, was akin to non-citizens who are denied entry at the border and they were not entitled to a court hearing to challenge that decision.

And SCOTUS ruled that court was correct.

More @ U.S. top court leaves intact ruling against Central America asylum seekers - One America News Network

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

U.S. top court leaves intact ruling against Central America asylum seekers

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court sidestepped a turbulent debate over illegal immigration on Monday, turning away an appeal by a group of asylum-seeking Central American women and their children who aimed to clarify the constitutional rights of people who the government has prioritized for deportation.


The families, 28 women and 33 children ages 2 to 17 from El Salvador, Honduras and Guatemala, had hoped the justices would overturn a lower court's ruling preventing them from having their expedited removal orders reviewed by a federal judge.


That Philadelphia-based court said the status of the families, all apprehended in Texas and later held in Pennsylvania, was akin to non-citizens who are denied entry at the border and they were not entitled to a court hearing to challenge that decision.


Immigration has become an even hotter topic than usual in the United States since President Donald Trump took office in January. His administration has ordered construction of a border wall with Mexico intended to curb illegal immigration, and plans to expand the number of people targeted for expedited removal, a process that applies to non-citizens lacking valid entry documents.


The families have said they were escaping threats, violence and police authorities unable or unwilling to help in their home countries...


...The women challenged in federal court the rejection of their asylum claims, alleging a violation of their right to due process under the U.S. Constitution.


In August, the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia said they may be treated the same way as non-citizens seeking initial admission to the United States, who do not have any constitutional rights of review if denied entry.


The women appealed to the Supreme Court.


There has been a 93 percent drop since December of parents and children caught trying to cross the Mexican border illegally into the United States, which U.S. officials attribute to the Trump administration's tough policies.

Thank God for President Trump and Justice Gorsuch!

#MAGA #Winning

Imagine what would have happened if Hillary had won the election.

They'd be moving into your house about now as "guests by executive order".

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Dumb RWNJs distracted by non-issues just guaranteed there will never ever again be a legal, ethical election in the US.

You stupid fools. For the life of me, I will never understand why you want to be owned by the 1% or why you want Citizen's United to control our elections.

 

[Markle]

hasn't there? of course there has and you can't prove differently

Please show your source and link proving your point that there IS a "massive overflow of illegal immigrants through our airports and across the Canadian border".

If you cannot, at least admit you are lying.

 

[JakeStarkey]

hasn't there? of course there has and you can't prove differently

Please show your source and link proving your point that there IS a "massive overflow of illegal immigrants through our airports and across the Canadian border".

If you cannot, at least admit you are lying.

Your affirmation, sparkle, so put up your evidence. Oh, you don't have any? That reminds of an earlier version before your reincarnation. I accept your admission of defeat.

 

[Markle]

You stupid fools. For the life of me, I will never understand why you want to be owned by the 1% or why you want Citizen's United to control our elections.

Your ignorance and desperation are duly noted.

You believe the "right" kind of Socialism would work. That is foolish.

The Citizen's United decision confirmed decisions made over 100 years ago. It also simply ruled that certain provisions in the McCain/Feingold were unconstitutional. Why not simply write a constitutional law?

Obviously, the amount of spending is not important to you. Sec. Hillary Clinton spent $1.2 BILLION to LOSE. Who do you think was the source of much of those funds? Donald Trump spent slightly more than $600 MILLION to WIN!

So please explain how I am "owned" by the 1%. Without whom our country would crumble.

 

[Markle]

Your affirmation, sparkle, so put up your evidence. Oh, you don't have any? That reminds of an earlier version before your reincarnation. I accept your admission of defeat.

A cute far left Progressive effort to deflect. It is impossible to prove a negative, which you know. I am simply asking you to prove a positive. You claim we have had this massive influx. Prove it or you are a liar.

To help with your memory, I'll post the request again.

Please show your source and link proving your point that there IS a "massive overflow of illegal immigrants through our airports and across the Canadian border".

If you cannot, at least admit you are lying.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

hasn't there? of course there has and you can't prove differently

Please show your source and link proving your point that there IS a "massive overflow of illegal immigrants through our airports and across the Canadian border".

If you cannot, at least admit you are lying.

You've got to be kidding. Or stupid. Or -- ??

You stupid fools. For the life of me, I will never understand why you want to be owned by the 1% or why you want Citizen's United to control our elections.

Your ignorance and desperation are duly noted.

You believe the "right" kind of Socialism would work. That is foolish.

The Citizen's United decision confirmed decisions made over 100 years ago. It also simply ruled that certain provisions in the McCain/Feingold were unconstitutional. Why not simply write a constitutional law?

Obviously, the amount of spending is not important to you. Sec. Hillary Clinton spent $1.2 BILLION to LOSE. Who do you think was the source of much of those funds? Donald Trump spent slightly more than $600 MILLION to WIN!

So please explain how I am "owned" by the 1%. Without whom our country would crumble.

One person, one vote is hardly "socialism".

You say you know that the 1% controlled the country in the past but then, that you don't understand that they still do or why that means you are owned.

In any event, we're stuck with it now and for a lot of years to come.

Because RWNJs are just too damn dumb to think for themselves.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Your affirmation, sparkle, so put up your evidence. Oh, you don't have any? That reminds of an earlier version before your reincarnation. I accept your admission of defeat.

A cute far left Progressive effort to deflect. It is impossible to prove a negative, which you know. I am simply asking you to prove a positive. You claim we have had this massive influx. Prove it or you are a liar.

To help with your memory, I'll post the request again.

Please show your source and link proving your point that there IS a "massive overflow of illegal immigrants through our airports and across the Canadian border".

If you cannot, at least admit you are lying.

And again, I wonder why RWNJs don't have access to Google and why they ALWAYS have to be spoon fed.

 

[DarkFury]

Your affirmation, sparkle, so put up your evidence. Oh, you don't have any? That reminds of an earlier version before your reincarnation. I accept your admission of defeat.

A cute far left Progressive effort to deflect. It is impossible to prove a negative, which you know. I am simply asking you to prove a positive. You claim we have had this massive influx. Prove it or you are a liar.

To help with your memory, I'll post the request again.

Please show your source and link proving your point that there IS a "massive overflow of illegal immigrants through our airports and across the Canadian border".

If you cannot, at least admit you are lying.

And again, I wonder why RWNJs don't have access to Google and why they ALWAYS have to be spoon fed.

He asked you for a link and you have refused or at the very least UNABLE to back your smack. Your cowardice is duly noted.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Your affirmation, sparkle, so put up your evidence. Oh, you don't have any? That reminds of an earlier version before your reincarnation. I accept your admission of defeat.

A cute far left Progressive effort to deflect. It is impossible to prove a negative, which you know. I am simply asking you to prove a positive. You claim we have had this massive influx. Prove it or you are a liar.

To help with your memory, I'll post the request again.

Please show your source and link proving your point that there IS a "massive overflow of illegal immigrants through our airports and across the Canadian border".

If you cannot, at least admit you are lying.

And again, I wonder why RWNJs don't have access to Google and why they ALWAYS have to be spoon fed.

He asked you for a link and you have refused or at the very least UNABLE to back your smack. Your cowardice is duly noted.

DarkFury

No he didn't.
Your stupidity is duly noted.

Answer my question: why can't RWNJs ever educate themselves? Like YOU, for example. All you do is whine about how its black's and Hispanic's fault you're a failure, and lie about how Joe Arpaio is your BFF and he's going to give you the info you need to find me.

Grow up. If you're got a question, look it up.

And quit your constant whining and lying.

 

[JakeStarkey]

DarkFury, TomHorn, Rambunctious, they are a crew, yes.