Sotomayor says Republican-appointed justices have bias

[Billy_Kinetta]

A little bias toward the Constitution, eh sweetheart? I suspect any opinion other than your own would raise issues of bias with you.

This particular case, Wolf v. Cook County, deals with the Trump administration's expansion of situations where the government can deny visas to non-citizens looking to enter the U.S. Federal law already says that officials can take into account whether an applicant is likely to become a "public charge," which government guidance has said refers to someone "primarily dependent on the government for subsistence.” In the past, non-cash benefits such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), forms of Medicaid, and certain housing assistance did not count, but the Department of Homeland Security issued its new public charge rule in 2019 which did include these benefits.

Sotomayor issues blistering dissent, says Republican-appointed justices have bias toward Trump administration

 

[Billy_Bob]

The only blistering is on Sotomayors ass... I believe there is a cream for that..

 

[OldLady]

The only blistering is on Sotomayors ass... I believe there is a cream for that..

If you could keep your mind out of people's panties, you might be worth listening to.

 

[TroglocratsRdumb]

Sotomayor ruled that white employees do not have any Civil Rights in employment.
She is a racist and that is why Obammy chose her.

 

[DGS49]

Leftists like her have forgotten (if they ever knew) what country they serve. They have forgotten that the purpose of immigration laws is to promote a better, more productive, more creative society FOR THE PEOPLE ALREADY HERE, and NOT for the people who want to come and/or live here.

It is obvious and undeniable that granting citizenship, or even permanent residency, to those who are not NET CONTRIBUTORS to the society is destructive. This principle can be altered for TRUE REFUGEES (not economic refugees), but only in limited numbers and only when the U.S. had a role in creating the intolerable situation in their home countries.

If there were any better illustration of why this country NEEDED Donald Trump in position to re-make the Federal judiciary, I'm not aware of it.

 

[justoffal]

The only blistering is on Sotomayors ass... I believe there is a cream for that..

Hey Bill Clinton wanted to count rental deficits as taxable income. Point is NOTHING is free.

Jo

 

[justoffal]

Leftists like her have forgotten (if they ever knew) what country they serve. They have forgotten that the purpose of immigration laws is to promote a better, more productive, more creative society FOR THE PEOPLE ALREADY HERE, and NOT for the people who want to come and/or live here.

It is obvious and undeniable that granting citizenship, or even permanent residency, to those who are not NET CONTRIBUTORS to the society is destructive. This principle can be altered for TRUE REFUGEES (not economic refugees), but only in limited numbers and only when the U.S. had a role in creating the intolerable situation in their home countries.

If there were any better illustration of why this country NEEDED Donald Trump in position to re-make the Federal judiciary, I'm not aware of it.

Sotomayor forgets....it's not her own money she wants to give away.

Jo

 

[harmonica]

she's a RACIST--no doubt about it !!!!!!
Sonia Sotomayor Quotes

 

[CrusaderFrank]

A little bias toward the Constitution, eh sweetheart? I suspect any opinion other than your own would raise issues of bias with you.

This particular case, Wolf v. Cook County, deals with the Trump administration's expansion of situations where the government can deny visas to non-citizens looking to enter the U.S. Federal law already says that officials can take into account whether an applicant is likely to become a "public charge," which government guidance has said refers to someone "primarily dependent on the government for subsistence.” In the past, non-cash benefits such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), forms of Medicaid, and certain housing assistance did not count, but the Department of Homeland Security issued its new public charge rule in 2019 which did include these benefits.

Sotomayor issues blistering dissent, says Republican-appointed justices have bias toward Trump administration

Thats why Trump needs a second term and veto proof majority in both houses

 

[Zorro!]

Sotomayor ruled that white employees do not have any Civil Rights in employment.
She is a racist and that is why Obammy chose her.

PUNCH BACK TWICE AS HARD: Cruz scorches Sotomayor over court critique and her bias.

“I read it a little bit like an arsonist complaining about the noise from the fire trucks,” Cruz said of Sotomayor’s dissenting opinion in Wolf v. Cook County, which dealt with regulations placing restrictions on non-citizens applying for visas to enter the U.S.​

A lower court had issued a nationwide injunction against the administration, blocking the regulations, although the Cook County case only dealt with an Illinois injunction. Sotomayor used her to dissent to rail against the administration for its repeated tactic of applying for emergency stays so injunctions could be put on hold.

“It is hard to say what is more troubling,” Sotomayor wrote, “that the Government would seek this extraordinary relief seemingly as a matter of course, or that the Court would grant it,” she wrote.​

Cruz aptly noted that the Trump administration would not have to take such measures if judges were not granting an unusual number of nationwide injunctions.

“If you look to the facts of what’s happening with nationwide injunctions, I think it will explain why the Department of Justice has had to ask the Supreme Court to intervene over and over again,” Cruz said.​

Indeed.

Cruz noted that one-third of all nationwide injunctions have come from California courts, and that two-thirds of the states have not produced any.

“So you have a handful of courts that are driving this."​

Cruz also pointed to the disparity between the number of nationwide injunctions granted against the Trump administration compared with previous administrations.

“In the eight years of the George W. Bush administration, district courts issued a total of 12 universal injunctions against the Bush administration,” he said. "In the eight years of the Obama administration, district courts issued 19 universal injunctions against the Obama administration. In just three years of the Trump administration, we have already had 55 national universal injunctions issued against the federal government."​

The administration is fighting back against activist judges who are trying to interfere with politics.

"We have a handful of judges who are operating effectively as part of the resistance movement, putting themselves in the way of Trump policies they happen to disagree with."​

Trump Weighs In:

“I just thought it was so inappropriate, such a terrible statement for a Supreme Court justice,” he said. “She’s trying to shame people with perhaps a different view into voting her way, and that’s so inappropriate.” Trump had previously tweeted about Sotomayor's dissent, calling it "a terrible thing to say."​