Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Supreme Court Authorizes Trump to Deny Asylum to Central Americans
Wall Street Journal ^ | September 11, 2019 | Brent Kendall and Jess Bravin

Posted on 09/11/2019 3:54:43 PM PDT by billorites

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-40 last
To: billorites

Well, bless the Supremes’ hearts. It was already on the books, not that libs follow the laws.


21 posted on 09/11/2019 4:59:10 PM PDT by bgill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: billorites
Trump could have denied asylum 31 months ago.

8 U.S.C. §1182(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 nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.”

22 posted on 09/11/2019 5:00:37 PM PDT by zeestephen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: billorites

Let’s cut to the chase - So even those that enter the 9th circuit territory can be turned back now ???


23 posted on 09/11/2019 5:02:13 PM PDT by 11th_VA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
I am not convinced the courts have authority to decide executive policy, if said policy is based on law.

Seem to me the counter arguments, were _not_ based on law at all, but were based on previous executive police, law-from-thin-air (judicial legislation) or supposed UN authority. In most nations, UN is the authority on immigrant due to existing UN agreements.

Fight, lawful USA. Slay the beast hatched in DC, while it is young and small.

24 posted on 09/11/2019 5:03:03 PM PDT by veracious (UN=OIC=Islam; USgov may be radically changed, just amend USConstitution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: veracious

Jail for judges who decide any case in which they have no lawful jurisdiction or based on anything but legislative (legal) law.

PERIOD. Hear ye, hear, ye.


25 posted on 09/11/2019 5:05:20 PM PDT by veracious (UN=OIC=Islam; USgov may be radically changed, just amend USConstitution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: rhinohunter

A welcome samckdown to the SF punk Judge Jon tiger


26 posted on 09/11/2019 5:08:04 PM PDT by gibsonguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: umgud
Re: what is the status of would-be Mexican illegals?

We have a special treaty with Mexico and Canada.

If the Mexicans are not seeking asylum, they can be almost immediately returned to Mexico, without a judicial process.

But - we have to catch them first.

27 posted on 09/11/2019 5:10:02 PM PDT by zeestephen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: zeestephen; BRL

Thanks


28 posted on 09/11/2019 5:12:45 PM PDT by umgud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Flick Lives
In other words following international law concerning 'refugees'.
29 posted on 09/11/2019 5:21:11 PM PDT by A strike (Import third world become third world)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: 11th_VA
Let’s cut to the chase - So even those that enter the 9th circuit territory can be turned back now ???

Yes, but the 9th Circuit also ruled the same way today. The SCOTUS ruling makes it nationwide.

30 posted on 09/11/2019 5:24:36 PM PDT by IndispensableDestiny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: morphing libertarian

No, the left is using the court system for politics. Trump is trying to abide by the rule of law. If Congress was worth a damn, they would impeach and remove these judges. I don’t blame Trump at all.


31 posted on 09/11/2019 5:41:07 PM PDT by McCarthysGhost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

My granddaughter went to Guatamala on vacation just a few months ago.I kid you not.


32 posted on 09/11/2019 5:46:52 PM PDT by Mears
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: McCarthysGhost

The rule of law is in the Emergency Declaration act of 1974. CONGRESS IS THE CHECK ON PRESIDENTIAL EMERGENCY POWERS NOT THE JUDICIARY. The congress failed to over turn the declaration. Trump is deferring emergency response to any of 200 federal judges. Either we have an emergency or we don’t.


33 posted on 09/11/2019 5:54:34 PM PDT by morphing libertarian ( Use Comey's Report, Indict Hillary now; build Kate's wall. --- Proud Smelly Walmart Deplorable)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: zeestephen

He did. Supreme Court shut him down.


34 posted on 09/11/2019 6:03:04 PM PDT by Spktyr (Overwhelmingly superior firepower and the willingness to use it is the only proven peace solution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: billorites; All
The “media” and democrats continue to leave out the key word: ILLEGAL.

Of course, The Stupid Party continues to fail calling them out on this. It’s embarrassing being a Republican aligned with these dopes.

35 posted on 09/11/2019 6:35:17 PM PDT by Cobra64 (Common sense isnÂ’t common anymore.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: billorites

The wise Latina and the Glorious Ginsburg whom I suspect from her dissent is still alive.


36 posted on 09/11/2019 6:43:53 PM PDT by MIchaelTArchangel (Has anyone checked on Ginsburg's health recently?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: antidemoncrat
So will an Obama appointed judge try to overrule this? <<

of course...lol...they dont know anything about the “Constitution” or the rule of law...He ran on and got elected on...We're “FUNDEMENTALY CHANGING” the way Amerika works!...

we need results...not Due process,,,

37 posted on 09/11/2019 6:57:02 PM PDT by M-cubed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Spktyr
Re: 8 U.S.C. §1182(f)

Re: He did. Supreme Court shut him down.

No.

The first and only time Trump used 1182(f) was for excluding refugees from terrorist countries. If that case went to the Supreme Court, that's news to me.

In 1965, Teddy Kennedy sponsored amendments that blocked a president from discriminating against aliens on the basis of race, religion, etc.

The Judge said Trump was blocking only refugees from Muslim countries, and that Trump had previously made biased statements against Muslims in his campaign.

Trump could have easily side stepped the issue by saying, “OK. In that case, I block ALL refugees from ALL countries!”

Obviously, Trump will never do that.

Instead, Trump sent Deep State, pro-immigration, career DOJ lawyers into court to defend his case.

Two and a half years later, as far as I know, his LOL-DOJ lawyers are still arguing Trump's case through the lower courts.

38 posted on 09/12/2019 2:32:40 AM PDT by zeestephen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: morphing libertarian

any deferment to the court after declaring an emergency is weak and an abdication of powder. What would happen off these decisions went the other way? How would that lessen the emergency? The appropriate and determined use of power is what is needed in a president.


You are wrong (in my opinion). We live in a Republic and we have a Constitution. The founders set it up so that there would be some checks and balances between the three.

I personally would not want to live in a country where the President could ignore either congress or the courts.

I may not like what Congress is doing nor do I like the Courts interfering in what the President is doing, but that is the way our system works.

“The appropriate and determine use of power is what is needed in a President”. Well the last President proudly announced he had a “pen and a phone” when Congress did not go along with his plans. He was doing what you propose President Trump do.

I did not like it when Obama did it, and I would not like it if President Trump did it.

As I said at first, this is just my opinion.


39 posted on 09/12/2019 4:35:20 AM PDT by CIB-173RDABN (I am not an expert in anything, and my opinion is just that, an opinion. I may be wrong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: CIB-173RDABN

not every action is checked by the other two. The check for emergency declarations is by the congress not the judiciary. You can’t respond to an emergency and protect the country if 200 federal judges can control your decisions.


40 posted on 09/12/2019 6:20:37 AM PDT by morphing libertarian ( Use Comey's Report, Indict Hillary now; build Kate's wall. --- Proud Smelly Walmart Deplorable)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-40 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson