Supreme Court hands Biden victory, allows end to 'Remain in Mexico' policy

[pknopp]

for someone so anal on words, you sure seem to miss my own.

Asylum - apply in the US *or* a Port of Entry.

if someone comes through via that port, hear their case and make a decision.
if someone comes through 100 miles away in a swimfest, drive them to the court so they can have their case heard as soon as possible

i am giving them their "due process" according to

Due Process for Undocumented Immigrants, Explained (Published 2018)

President Trump wants unauthorized immigrants and asylum seekers deported “with no Judges or Court Cases.” What due-process rights do migrants have?

www.nytimes.com

you are simply being stubborn and putting your hands over your ears at this point. i have setup court and provided due process in accordance with our laws. your cleverly placed NUH UNH isn't holding up well.

They get their hearing as soon as possible. The problem is, with the back log that might be years now. There is not where to hold people for years and you aren't about to pay higher taxes for all of this either.

 

[Ralph Norton]

WINNING!

Abortion - check
Gun rights - check
Free speech/ school prayer - check
EPA overreach - check

So illegal aliens no longer have to remain in Mexico, for now. And that is "winning" in your book?
Dumb ass.

 

[pknopp]

trump has nothing to do with what i am talking about, sideshow bob. the court has ruled on it and i am focused on what can be done within the laws to deal with an obvious problem.

you're just trying to be "right" all the time and ignoring what i am saying so you can get a shot in.

No, I said you can change the laws. I then noted it may take a Constitutional Amendment so nowhere did I argue you couldn't address this through the law.

 

[iceberg]

They get their hearing as soon as possible. The problem is, with the back log that might be years now. There is not where to hold people for years and you aren't about to pay higher taxes for all of this either.

and as you CONTINUE TO FUCKING MISS - i said prioritize these hearings, get people down there to make decisions, decide, and stop the abuse.

ALL DONE WITHIN THE SYSTEM.

but hey - make up crap and now talk about who's paying for this.

tell urkraine to bugger off and send that $10bil to the border and fix our own issues.

 

[Meister]

The only thing stopping Trump would have been funding and he was able to get around this with the wall, right?

YOU think that was the only thing?
He stopped them at the border and sent back across to wait for their turn to have their case heard.
It worked, and it worked well. Now we have a clusterfuck, and you're cheering it.

 

[pknopp]

And at the same time, you were against Trump's wall, and the Remain in Mexico policy?

I'm calling BS on you, so just stop already. Do you even realize that you're justifying those Mexican coyotes, drug cartels, and human traffickers?

I was against the wall because it was only smoke and mirrors to avoid the actual problem. Jobs being offered.

The wall would never stop drugs from getting here.

 

[iceberg]

No, I said you can change the laws. I then noted it may take a Constitutional Amendment so nowhere did I argue you couldn't address this through the law.

who the fuck is changing laws?

i never did. show me where you said i need to change the laws. i gave them to you as written and provided a solution within what is written.

you are now off chasing price tags cause you got pwnd in this.

 

[pknopp]

YOU think that was the only thing?
He stopped them at the border and sent back across to wait for their turn to have their case heard.
It worked, and it worked well. Now we have a clusterfuck, and you're cheering it.

I'm stating the facts. Period.

 

[Failzero]

Cloward / Piven ( The Browning of America )

 

[iceberg]

YOU think that was the only thing?
He stopped them at the border and sent back across to wait for their turn to have their case heard.
It worked, and it worked well. Now we have a clusterfuck, and you're cheering it.

he's simply talking in circles intentionally mixing points together and lobbing in some sideshows along the way.

 

[Meister]

he's simply talking in circles intentionally mixing points together and lobbing in some sideshows along the way.

Didn't mention anything about the bussing and plane trips that Biden giving some of the illegals.
Must be in favor of them.

 

[iceberg]

I'm stating the facts. Period.

the problem is, stating facts isn't taking action.

you're taking action against anyone who is trying to deal with said "facts". you're arguing against ANYONE who is trying to fix an obvious problem as if they are committing a crime.

yet, i follow the law and you tell me im making stuff up too.

you're a confused lil pup at this point so busy chasing your tail you've dizzied yourself out. you either don't see immigration as a problem TO deal with or you're bored and nitpicking your dizzy little self.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that the Biden administration can repeal the Trump administration’s Migrant Protection Protocols, commonly known as the "Remain in Mexico" policy, reversing a lower court ruling.

Seems more a victory for the Constitution than for Biden.

The idea that one POTUS could not remove the EO of a past POTUS goes against the very nature and reason for EOs.

 

[iceberg]

Seems more a victory for the Constitution than for Biden.

The idea that one POTUS could not remove the EO of a past POTUS goes against the very nature and reason for EOs.

as spelled out, the remain in mexico did go against our constitution. i do agree that needs to be upheld and as a broad focus, glad it was.

but the problem remains. people get so busy with the window dressing they miss the flood on the floor.

 

[pknopp]

the problem is, stating facts isn't taking action.

Sorry, I don't get my Supreme Court robe until next month. Call on me then.

you're taking action against anyone who is trying to deal with said "facts". you're arguing against ANYONE who is trying to fix an obvious problem as if they are committing a crime.

yet, i follow the law and you tell me im making stuff up too.

you're a confused lil pup at this point so busy chasing your tail you've dizzied yourself out. you either don't see immigration as a problem TO deal with or you're bored and nitpicking your dizzy little self.

I argued against no one that wanted to change the laws.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

as spelled out, the remain in mexico did go against our constitution. i do agree that needs to be upheld and as a broad focus, glad it was.

but the problem remains. people get so busy with the window dressing they miss the flood on the floor.

I did not claim the policy went against the Constitution. What I think is against the Constitution is the idea that some EOs cannot be changed after that POTUS is gone.

An EO should not outlast the POTUS that issued it unless his predecessors want it to

 

[Flash]

The Supremes hit three grand slam home runs and struct out once.

That is a .750 batting average. Not too shabby.

 

[Meister]

I argued against no one that wanted to change the laws.

As polarized as Congress is, I doubt it will happen.

 

[iceberg]

Sorry, I don't get my Supreme Court robe until next month. Call on me then.




I argued against no one that wanted to change the laws.

you argue whatever you must in order to keep the conversation where it is.

 

[iceberg]

I did not claim the policy went against the Constitution. What I think is against the Constitution is the idea that some EOs cannot be changed after that POTUS is gone.

An EO should not outlast the POTUS that issued it unless his predecessors want it to

i didn't say you did. i said i did. but i also see "gray area" and that's where the fun usually begins.

i also 100% agree (i hope) that EO's are way out of hand and need a serious overhaul and definition.