Texas can arrest and deport

[Zincwarrior]

Too late. Already blocked again. Random stops will have to wait.

 

[TheYellowKing]

No, first up, first amendment if the lib cult gets power b

They're already destroying that on numerous chat boards and social medias if you have the wrong opinion

 

[TheYellowKing]

Too late. Already blocked again. Random stops will have to wait.

"RaNdOm StOpS" cause swimming across the Rio Grande and jumping a border fence sure screams RaNdOm StOp

You're an absolute retard

 

[Zincwarrior]

"RaNdOm StOpS" cause swimming across the Rio Grande and jumping a border fence sure screams RaNdOm StOp

You're an absolute retard

So only line of support of the Rio Grande?

 

[TheYellowKing]

So only line of support of the Rio Grande?

 

[Zincwarrior]

View attachment 919978

Answer the question. Only Line of Sight from the Rio Grande?

 

[Mac-7]

Too late. Already blocked again. Random stops will have to wait.

Now you know why we need the wall to stop them at the border

And trump in the white house again to make the mexicans play ball

 

[WEATHER53]

I know....all the long winded, peer reviewed, self righteous dissertations spat out with intellectual snicker and condescencion on why the Ballot bans would stay.....all gone in one fel swoop. lol

A moment of joy for the thought and fact judicial process

 

[whitehall]

Lefties are horrified that Texas can arrest criminals who enter the U.S. illegally but at the same time they want to put a presidential candidate in jail and seize his property. WTF is wrong with these people?

 

[TheYellowKing]

Answer the question. Only Line of Sight from the Rio Grande?

Lol you're not my supervisor I don't have to answer shit
Cry about it

 

[WEATHER53]

The SC is wreaking havoc on its own established precedent. The TX law is unconstitutional just as AZ's was.

Arizona v. United States is a case decided on June 25, 2012, by the United States Supreme Court holding that states may not implement their own immigration laws. The case concerned Arizona's immigration-related law SB 1070, enacted in 2010. At issue was whether federal immigration law preempts state immigration law.

Arizona v. United States

Ballotpedia: The Encyclopedia of American Politics

ballotpedia.org

They are not implementing nor creating new law . They are enforcing what feckless won’t

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

We need to crank up production of razor wire, zip tie handcuffs and fuel up the deportation busses.

.

Just need to build a few hundred trebuchets. The condition the illegals will be in when they splat on the other side of the ride will be Mexico's business.

I mean, Mexico could have fixed it all at their southern border.

.

 

[Zincwarrior]

Lol you're not my supervisor I don't have to answer shit
Cry about it

So you don't have a clue how not to violate the rights of US Citizens with this law. Got it.

 

[Marener]

6-3. Arrest and deport.

For the meantime, Texas has a right to protect their border.

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that it will allow Texas to enforce for now a contentious new law that gives local police the power to arrest migrants.

The conservative-majority court, with three liberal justices dissenting, rejected an emergency request by the Biden administration, which said states have no authority to legislate on immigration, an issue the federal government has sole authority over.
That means the law can go into effect while litigation continues in lower courts. It could still be blocked at a later date.
_____________________
The law in question, known as SB4, allows police to arrest migrants who illegally cross the border from Mexico and imposes criminal penalties. It would also empower state judges to order people to be deported to Mexico.

Supreme Court allows Texas to enforce immigration law

The Biden administration sued to block the law, saying it tramples on the federal government’s exclusive authority to oversee immigration issues.

www.nbcnews.com

This SCOTUS decision is pretty disgraceful. The Texas law clearly violates long established legal precedent.

If SCOTUS wants to dismantle that precedent after hearing that case, there their prerogative, but that’s not what this issue decided.

The Texas circuit court issued an administrative stay on a district court decision stopping the law from going into effect. The administrative stay was totally inappropriate because these are supposed to be very short stays, not lasting weeks or months as the appellate court was trying to do. The appellate court was trying to achieve a backdoor stay pending appeal because they couldn’t actually issue a stay pending appeal since the law has no chance of standing based on current precedent.

Basically it’s conservative justices screwing with the system to achieve an outcome.

 

[Zincwarrior]

This SCOTUS decision is pretty disgraceful. The Texas law clearly violates long established legal precedent.

I believe SCOTUS just kicked it back. The appellate court has not blocked it pending arguments.

 

[Marener]

I believe SCOTUS just kicked it back. The appellate court has not blocked it pending arguments.

Their use of an administrative stay is entirely inappropriate and a pretty transparent effort to allow the law to be in force without having to meet the requirements for a stay pending appeal.

 

[Delldude]

Basically it’s conservative justices screwing with the system to achieve an outcome.

Due to president Biden, (the federal government) , not doing their job at the border. If that isn't an impeachable offense, I don't what is.

 

[Zincwarrior]

Due to president Biden, the federal government , not doing their job at the border. If that isn't an impeachable offense, I don't what is.

Evidently you don't know what is then.

 

[Delldude]

Evidently you don't know what is then.

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

 

[Curried Goats]

Due to president Biden, (the federal government) , not doing their job at the border. If that isn't an impeachable offense, I don't what is.

Then you don't know what an impeachable offense is.


Impeachment is a political process, Dummy, so an impeachable offense is one you can get a conviction in the House and Senate in. Good luck with that, Chump.