[[It was long believed that immigrants to the United States should not impose social burdens]]
HA!- illegals are costing this country between $400 BILLION DOLLARS and $600 BILLION DOLLARS (and this estimate was from a decade or more ago) PER YEAR when all the costs, both direct and indirect, are added together- and indirect cause would be say an illegal injured a citizen, gets put in prison- taxpayers pay for the incarceration, (This is direct cost) but the indirect costs would be the injured citizen loses job, insurance goes up, has to hire attorney etc
Several studies were done to estimate the costs- and they were a staggering $600 BILLION DOLLARS Every single year- even back then- probably close to, or even over 1 TRILLION DOLLARS per year now
the wall costs what? a one time fee of $25 BILLION DOLLARS, with annual fee of say $100 million or so? Build the Wall! We will save many hundreds of billions of dollars every single year provided we kick all the deadbeats who came here just for gov handouts out as well
Nearly 70% of actual ‘immigrants’, and illegals, are on some kind of government welfare program- they are draining our economy- it’s a lie that illegals make us money- they do not- they cost us hundreds of billions of dollars a year!
Can we please incorporate into the new rules a requirement that all city, state, and federal democrat politicians and their democrat family members be required to house, feed, and care for said ‘immigrants’ for a period of not less than one year or until the ‘immigrants’ are financially independent?
Why are federal DISTRICT judges still allowed to do this? Do they no longer adhere to SCOTUS? Have they gone rogue? Does anyone on SCOTUS care? Is America under the control of a Judicial Oligarchy (well... YES!)?
They have an unwritten obligation to vote Democrat.
Only in the tiny, corrupted minds of liberal know-nothings who want to force others to do the charity they never practice themselves.
And, of course he and the rest of the Democrats would feel exactly the same way, and hold exactly the same positions if these groups were likely to vote Republican.
Pass a Law saying Judges can only advise and not overturn Lawmakers but a Judge will overturn it ,LOL
FR: Never Accept the Premise of Your Opponent’s Argument
Desperate Democrats are again trying to rewrite history imo.
To begin with, let's consider federal government support for non-citizens to be foreign aid, regardless if such people are residing on US soil. The problem with foreign aid in that context is that Justice Joseph Story had warned that Congress cannot used the General Welfare Clause as an excuse to justify foreign aid.
”If the tax be not proposed for the common defence, or general welfare, but for other objects, wholly extraneous, (as for instance, for propagating Mahometanism among the Turks, or giving aids and subsidies to a foreign nation, to build palaces for its kings, or erect monuments to its heroes,) it would be wholly indefensible upon constitutional principles [emphases added].” —Justice Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution 2
Next, Justice Joseph Story had also indicated that the Constitution's provision to return fugitives to the state where they allegedly committed a crime for trial, Article IV, Section 2, Clause 2, was inspired by international law, ultimately a security precaution in stark contrast to Democrats now arguing for open borders for undocumented Democrats.
“Article IV, Section 2, Clause 2: A Person charged in any State with Treason, Felony, or other Crime, who shall flee from Justice, and be found in another State, shall on Demand of the executive Authority of the State from which he fled, be delivered up, to be removed to the State having Jurisdiction of the Crime [emphasis added]."
"It has been often made a question, how far any nation is, by the law of nations, and independent of any treaty stipulations, bound to surrender upon demand fugitives from justice, who, having committed crimes in another country, have fled thither for shelter. Mr. Chancellor Kent considers it clear upon principle, as well as authority, that every state is bound to deny an asylum to criminals, and, upon application and due examination of the case, to surrender the fugitive to the foreign state, where the crime has been committed. Other distinguished judges and jurists have entertained a different opinion. It is not uncommon for treaties to contain mutual stipulations for the surrender of criminals; and the United States have sometimes been a party to such an arrangement [emphasis added].
But, however the point may be, as to foreign nations, it cannot be questioned, that it is of vital importance to the public administration of criminal justice, and the security of the respective states, that criminals, who have committed crimes therein, should not find an asylum in other states; but should be surrendered up for trial and punishment [emphasis added]. It is a power most salutary in its general operation, by discouraging crimes, and cutting off the chances of escape from punishment. It will promote harmony and good feelings among the states; and it will increase the general sense of the blessings of the national government. It will, moreover, give strength to a great moral duty, which neighbouring states especially owe to each other, by elevating the policy of the mutual suppression of crimes into a legal obligation. Hitherto it has proved as useful in practice, as it is unexceptionable in its character." —Justice Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution 3:§§ 1802–3, 1833.
The post-civil war congressional record expands the issue of state security to the national level where non-citizens are concerned.
More specifically, Congress had condemned renegade states that wrongly give non-citizens the power to vote. It was appropriately argued imo that giving non-citizens the power to vote effectively nullified the "uniform Rule of Naturalization Clause" (1.8.4), weakening the Union.
"Article I, Section 8, Clause 4: To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;"
" If the States can admit to the elective franchise those who are not citizens, thereby neutralizing the votes of citizens, not only the Federal power of naturalization becomes a nullity, but” * * * * "a minority of citizens by the aid of aliens may control the government of the States, and through the States the government of the Union [emphasis added]." —Appendix to the Congressional Globe, 1868. (See near middle of 1st column.)
" Whatever difference there may be as to what other right appertain to a citizen, all must agree that he has the right to petition and also to claim the Protection of the Government. These belong to him as a member the body politic, and the possession of them is what separates citizens of the lowest condition from aliens and slaves. To suppose that a State can make an alien a citizen or confer on him the right of voting would involve the absurdity of giving him the direct and immediate control of the action of the General Government [emphasis added], from which he can claim no protection and to which he has no right to present a petition." —Appendix to the Congressional Globe, 1868. (See bottom half of 1st column.)
Corrections, insights welcome.
Remember in November 2020!
MAGA! Now KAG! (Keep America Great!)
Immigrants should again be required to have a Sponsor who will be financially responsible for them
“”is repugnant to the American Dream “”
And yet, it worked for many, many years before people like the mayor of NYC decided they KNEW better. It’s really amazing how people like him turn everything on its head to gain WHAT? Beats me!