Illegals

[WNYBuckHunter]

Lets keep it clean here guys. Thanks

[The_Field_Ager]

[Uptown Redneck]

On 2/6/2017 at 0:45 PM, philoshop said:

FWIW Uptown, it doesn't matter whether the judge calls himself a Republican or a Democrat. He's an all-out Progressive Liberal and a huge supporter of Black Lives Matter, Planned Parenthood, CAIR, and other pro-immigration causes, and Bush 43 put lots of these judges on the bench. The MSM is feeding you a whole pile of BS and you're eating it up with both hands. Look into some facts once in a while, because reality can be very enlightening.

Call him what you want but he over-ruled your idiot president's executive order putting the fool in his place. It's great having Liberal judges overturning the jackass policies of conservatives  

[Rattler]

2 hours ago, Uptown Redneck said:

Call him what you want but he over-ruled your idiot president's executive order putting the fool in his place. It's great having Liberal judges overturning the jackass policies of conservatives  

I think you will be crying again when the higher court puts Judge Robart in his place and make him look like a man who has little respect for jurisprudence.  Liberal Judges often prove they are the jackasses when they overturn the policies of conservative Presidents.

Wait for it.

 

[Water Rat]

[virgil]

Interesting idea.  Could the same concept be applied to the pro-life crowd?

[Rattler]

Sure.  Do you have any idea what hurdles people go through when they want to adopt?  There's a huge shortage of infants for people hoping to adopt.

Getting back to the judge who ruled against Trump's temporary immigration ban from a few select countries that sponsor terrorism:

Rich Lowry: "If the law means anything, the Trump administration will succeed in overturning the so-called court ruling against its travel ban. The nationwide stay of the ban issued by Judge James Robart, a Washington state-based federal district judge, is tissue-thin. It doesn't bother to engage on the substance, presumably because facts, logic and the law don't support Robart's sweeping assertion of judicial authority in an area where judicial power is inherently quite limited. This doesn't justify President Donald Trump tweeting that Robart is a 'so-called judge.' That slam earned Trump bipartisan blowback and may encourage other judges to tilt against Trump's ban in response to a perceived threat to the independence of the judiciary. But Robart's handiwork is shoddy and usurpatory, despite the fact that he is indeed a literal judge. ... Judge Robart may not like the Trump policy, but that doesn't mean that it is illegal or unconstitutional. His ruling is worthy of the generally unhinged opposition to President Trump. If the judge doesn't deserve the abuse that Trump heaped on him on Twitter, he produced what should rightly be considered so-called jurisprudence."

[Culvercreek hunt club]

This courts ruling will be overturned just based on the fact that the stay was issued with no reference to law or violation of law. Just based on what the judge "felt" was right. 

 

The law actually reads. (AND IT IS A LAW NOT A FEELING)

"(f) Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or non immigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate."

[NonTypical]

I'm not sure if this was in the news, but for the last 3 months that Obummer was in office, anyone illegals caught crossing the border with a child were allowed to stay. If they were caught, they have to wear an ankle bracelet monitoring device and were released. If they didn't have a child with them, they were sent back. I'm sure that there were many caught, but I wonder just how many made it through without being caught? From what I understand, once Obummer changed his policy, there was a mass exodus across the border as the illegals knew it wasn't going to last once Trump was sworn in. 

[Steve D]

Federal Government spent $15 million tax dollars on this last year per Obama:

US Homeland Security Has Setup A Hotline For Illegal Immigrants But Wait For It… Its Not For Reporting Illegal Activity. It’s Is For Illegal Immigrants To Complain About How They Are Being Treated By The Border Patrol Under Obama’s Amnesty.

http://usherald.com/illegal-immigrants-get-hotline/

 

[greg54]

22 hours ago, virgil said:

Interesting idea.  Could the same concept be applied to the pro-life crowd?

Yea lets see how many Libtards would come forward and "adopt" a refugee. Take them into their homes and feed , put clothes on their backs, educate and take care of when sick. And no government freebies either. If they feel so strongly and love them, let the left take care of everything they need. Maybe Chuck Schumer could start a "Adopt a Refugee Program"  Come on libtards, start making phone calls!

[philoshop]

Donate to the DNC in the next 24 hours and we'll send you a shiny new 'Warren for Prez' bumper sticker. But that's not all folks: We'll also send you your very own migrant, free of charge!! Act Now! Call 1-800-BSTUPID!

[Uptown Redneck]

On 2/7/2017 at 9:15 PM, Rattler said:

I think you will be crying again when the higher court puts Judge Robart in his place and make him look like a man who has little respect for jurisprudence.  Liberal Judges often prove they are the jackasses when they overturn the policies of conservative Presidents.

Wait for it.

 

Being ONCE AGAIN your president was struck down by the court, I am guessing the real jackass here is your idiot president, but then again everyone with brain all know what a raving POS the current president is.  

[Doc]

7 hours ago, Uptown Redneck said:

Being ONCE AGAIN your president was struck down by the court, I am guessing the real jackass here is your idiot president, but then again everyone with brain all know what a raving POS the current president is.  

Speaking of raving POS's.......... look who's back from the riots ....... lol.

[The_Field_Ager]

11 hours ago, Uptown Redneck said:

Being ONCE AGAIN your president was struck down by the court, 

There was no strike down. They are simply insisting on the 90 day review period 

[Rattler]

So we have now seen another example of an activist court that feels it can rule in violation of the law to support public policy that it likes.

There's no question the Ninth Circuit Court's ruling Thursday night upholding the stay against Donald Trump's lawful order on travel was entirely political and had nothing to do with Rule of Law.

Judicial meddling was absolutely egregious. The court essentially opposed Trump's order because the judges don't like it, and in the process they usurped presidential authority on matters of national security. They used possible harm to individuals to make a ruling about an entire class of people, which makes a hash out of the Supreme Court's doctrine on legal standing.

Trump could have executed this better, and the courts absolutely got it wrong. But it's important to realize that this was also strategically calculated to play out in one of two ways: Either Trump got his way with the order (he didn't), or his base is (rightly) fired up about an activist judiciary just in time for Supreme Court confirmation hearings. Trump wins either way.

There is a lot of time left in Trump's presidency, and this issue is not over.  Once again, wait for it.

 

 

[Rattler]

 "The fundamental point is that it is not just the executive or Congress that can abuse its power and overstep its bounds. The courts can, too, and no one is obligated to meekly accept their decisions. If the courts throw out Trump's travel ban, despite the black-and-white letter of the law giving him the authority to block aliens in the interest of national security, it will be a usurpatory act. In that scenario, the courts will have done more violence to our constitutional system than a foolish Trump tweet ever could." —Rich Lowry

[philoshop]

1 hour ago, Rattler said:

 "The fundamental point is that it is not just the executive or Congress that can abuse its power and overstep its bounds. The courts can, too, and no one is obligated to meekly accept their decisions. If the courts throw out Trump's travel ban, despite the black-and-white letter of the law giving him the authority to block aliens in the interest of national security, it will be a usurpatory act. In that scenario, the courts will have done more violence to our constitutional system than a foolish Trump tweet ever could." —Rich Lowry

I'm not generally a big fan of Rich Lowry's opinions regarding President Trump, but in this case he's absolutely correct.

This was not only a clear case of 'judicial activism', but it was also clear evidence that the activist judiciary in this country has the intent of undoing the US Constitution. This is not about a handful of people who were detained at airports, and it's not about the legality of President Trump's EO. It's now about the fundamental separation of powers.

[Rattler]

Judicial Activism is Unconstitutional!

 

9th Circuit Has Rulings Reversed 80% Of The Time By The Supreme Court

 

http://thefederalistpapers.org/us/9th-circuit-has-rulings-reversed-80-of-the-time-by-the-supreme-court

[Rattler]

TREY GOWDY NAILS IT ON THE 9TH CIRCUIT COURT

http://thefederalistpapers.org/us/boom-trey-gowdys-statement-on-9th-circuit-travel-ban-ruling