Posted on 12/16/2018 11:36:41 AM PST by econjack
Why San Diego? It could have been Texas
Notice the difference? The path to McAllen is approximately 1,300 miles long; whereas the path to San Diego is approximately 2,700 miles long. So the caravan travelled more than twice as far as it needed to. Why in the world would they do that? They didn’t have their own vehicles, and they weren’t carrying enough food or resources to justify the longer journey.
There are two reasons. The first reason can be summed up in two words: Ninth Circuit. The caravan members have been advised by liberal immigration attorneys all along. Not only were the migrants coached on what to say when claiming asylum, they were also evidently coached on where to go.
Traveling the extra 1,400 miles to Tijuana/San Diego would take the migrants to the Ninth Circuit of the U.S. Court of Appeals, with its numerous judges willing to minimize the President’s statutory authority to restrict entry of aliens into the United States. And the presence of similar federal judges at the district level in California would increase the probability that the migrants’ attorneys would obtain an initial ruling in their favor.
And that’s exactly what happened. When President Trump exercised his authority under 8 U.S.C. 1182(f) to “impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate,” a federal judge in San Francisco issued a temporary restraining order blocking the President’s action. The Ninth Circuit will likely agree with the district judge. Even if the Trump Administration prevails in any appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, it will take at least a year to reverse the district judge’s ruling. The second reason for traveling twice the distance is that California is a sanctuary state with dozens of sanctuary cities like Los Angeles and San Francisco. Those jurisdictions will actively seek to protect the migrants who enter illegally from deportation.
On top of that, the state may interfere more directly with federal immigration enforcement. State Attorney General Xavier Becerra said recently that he might sue the federal government to stop the use of tear gas to defend the border or to stop the federal government from shutting down ports of entry. His argument is full of holes, but with the right judge that might not matter. In contrast, in Texas, law enforcement agencies like the Texas Department of Public Safety cooperate with federal officials to improve border enforcement. To be sure, there are some sanctuary cities in Texas too; but it’s nothing like California.
In short, the migrants’ attorneys made sure that the caravan went the extra mile—or extra 1,400 miles—to arrive where the rule of law is the weakest in the United States. And their advice appears to be paying off. Federal immigration enforcement personnel can still prevail, but the playing field is tilted against them.
Good point. I was asking the same question then, and hadn’t thought it through quite this specifically.
Wait till the MSM gets a hold of this.
The Texas route is filled with peril, mountains, and cartels trying to steal and sell children and women. Texas doesn’t give ‘em a free pass, either, whereas California is home free.
The only problem is that it makes out that DemocRATS hate Americans and prefers illegals.
They won’t do anything with it, since it goes counter to their goals.
Is there any serious move to break up the 9th Circuit?
This is very insightful. Can you post a link to the article? Or did you write it?
Easy. Cali is a so-called sanctuary state, Texas is not. Illegal aliens would feel much more welcome in Cali and would have much better welfare there. All the while there are tens of thousands of homeless Americans in Cali that aren’t treated nearly as well. If you were a kid, would you rather go to a candy store or a broccoli store?
Great. A POS nobody judge can reverse the President of the United States in an instant, but it takes a year to reverse the nobody.
a federal judge in San Francisco issued a temporary restraining order blocking the President’s action. The Ninth Circuit will likely agree with the district judge. Even if the Trump Administration prevails in any appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, it will take at least a year to reverse the district judge’s ruling
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
A federal judge just said obamacare was unconstitutional. It is still in business and everyone is ignoring the Judges ruling. Weird, right?
LA and SF since maybe 6 years ago:
Pulled over with no reg? You get towed for $450, $50 for each night in impound.
But illegals?
They are permitted to call a friend nearby and are permitted 20 min or more for the friend to arrive at the scene and drive the car away, no problem.
Very many times if you deal with Calif bureaucracy it seems like the whole state is set up in order to accomodate illegal aliens.
When I first heard about the caravan “walking” towards the U.S. border I posted that the caravan would be in Tijuana within a few days. I was right. My prediction was based on the facts mentioned in this article. Also, I knew that there is regular bus service from Tapachula, Mexican city on border with Guatemala, to Tijuana.
And they’ll be allowed to vote as soon as they get a driver’s license, which translates into more goodies and the ability to bring the whole family over.
It was written by Kris Kobach and I got it from his web site, but now I can’t find it there.
it takes a year to reverse the nobody.
Just to have another renegade nobody Judge do it again. For all you people who praise Trump for “doing it the right way” instead of going Andrew Jackson. Aren’t you glad Trump has allowed the Judiciary to hijack immigration policy?
These sturdy "migrants" have demonstrated they are quite capable of extended travel. Additionally, they seemingly have no right to be heard specifically by the 9th. Further, somewhere in the statutory scheme, the original federal agency that deals with applicants ought to have the discretion of which court they can be delivered to subject only to timeliness.
If all that is true, then why not just ship them to McAllen on a Border Patrol bus (or the nearest federal circuit that will faithfully apply the law)?
Which loses basis for the asylum request. If that was legitimate, you’d go to the nearest port of entry.
That was my experience in CA 30 years ago.
In Colorado, it is very difficult for ski resort operators to find low-cost employees (kitchen, housekeeping, etc>) 10 years ago, a family member was rear-ended by a slowly sliding auto resulting in minimal but visible damage. That driver spoke very difficult English, couldn't produce id of any sort and local PD couldn't find her in the state's system. But they let her call a friend to driver her and her auto home. As far as the PD was concerned, she didn't exist.
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.