Posted on 06/23/2023 6:18:48 PM PDT by Macho MAGA Man
“ Justice Thomas disappoints.
So the outcome of the Supreme Court implies the USA has no borders and only illegals have standing.”
*******************************************
Justice Thomas NEVER disappoints me. It has been long established that CONGRESS has plenary power over immigration. THEY CERTAINLY WOULD HAVE STANDING while the states don’t.
-PJ
I am. More proof trumps picks weren’t that great
Before we do that can we move somewhere we can protect when all hell breaks loose?
So house Republicans would have to bring the case? If that’s the case this country is beyond done because those losers won’t do anything.
It would seem they don’t have the power to enforce it
-PJ
That ruling pretty much put the nail in the coffin of our formerly free and secure nation. As millions of military aged men are streaming across our border, and actually being flown in by our own State Department from South American and African countries, we as citizens now have little recourse. States are now subject to federal dictates informing them they MUST let illegal aliens be allowed into their jurisdictions and illegal aliens can even be enticed and encouraged to travel to the U.S.
And, I assume that the federal government can now also now dictate that they be given state benefits as well. What’s to stop them? Our political representatives? Law enforcement agencies? SCOTUS?
The citizens of our nation have been basically ordered to keep paying our taxes, prepare for increases in those, and move aside for those from other countries to come in and take over our housing, our jobs, and our freedoms.
We are now a “former” nation!
There are a few major opinions remaining for this term of Court which should be released next week. College race-based admissions, student loan forgiveness, a major first Amendment case, and whether state legislatures have the right to draw their own districts. I have little hope that either will be decided on the side of freedom.
"Legally, SCOTUS was right on this: Immigration and the enforcement of its laws are federal matters, [...]"
With all due respect ought-six, the Supremes wrongly ignored that the word immigration doesn't even appear in the Constitution. So the feds have no express power to make immigration laws imo.
"From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added]." —United States v. Butler, 1936.
The feds only have the express constitutional power to establish citizenship requirements which desperate Democrats and RINOs are probably anxious to do with illegal immigrants in front of 2024 elections.
"Article I, Section 8, Clause 4: To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization [emphasis added], and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;"
You need to look at Supreme Court precedent. You’d see that Congress has clearly been recognized as having unrestricted power the set immigration laws.
I doubt the Justices thought that the government would take their ruling in this manner. However, they should know by now that if you give a progressive an inch, they will destroy a country.
I really hate it when articles do not include a paragraph such as:
The court’s decision can be read here:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/22-58_i425.pdf
Regarding precedent...
"If it were, in fact, an unconstitutional exercise of power in congress to pass a law establishing the bank, nothing can manifest the impropriety of over-stepping the limits of the constitution, more than the act which we have just noticed. It shows that the most unauthorized acts of government may be drawn into prescedents to justify other unwarrantable usurpations [emphasis added]." —Article 1, Section 8, Clause 6, St. George Tucker, Blackstone's Commentaries 1:App. 262--64, 1803.
When the Supremes cannot reference a constitutionally enumerated power that reasonably justifies an action of the constitutionally limited power federal government it's called a scandal.
If it weren’t for the weather I’d be heading to northern Idaho.
Not too many ‘migrants’ would fit in there.
Each of the several States has their own laws and police and courts, their own departments and agencies, and their own National Guard units. Plus you have a pretty good chance of meeting your idiot state Rep. at the grocery store.
And we get what, exactly, from our WICKED EXPENSIVE government? I’ll spot you most of the military and maybe the National Weather Service, but “consent of the governed” is running thin lately.
SCROTUS is fedgov
Fedgov does not want to recognize states rights and the lesser magistrate doctrine. Actually fedgov powers derive from the states, so if fedgov won’t do the job securing the country the states have to. And if the states wont the people have to.
Dammit.
Unforgivable the States have to deal with reality.
The Federal Government refused to do its duty, “So the outcome of the Supreme Court implies the USA has no borders and only illegals have standing.”
"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."
"He shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed."
Not for Biden, no! He’s a Usurper!
enemies all
In the midst of the Whiskey Rebellion, Washington observed:
"It is my duty to see the Laws executed. To permit them to be trampled upon with impunity would be repugnant to that duty."
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.