Posted on 01/08/2020 11:05:31 AM PST by fwdude
NEW YORK (Reuters) - WA federal appeals court on Wednesday refused to set aside an injunction blocking the Trump administration from enforcing a rule that would withhold green cards from immigrants likely to require government assistance such as Medicaid or food stamps.
In a brief order, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan also set an expedited schedule for the White House’s appeal of a lower court ruling against the rule, with legal papers to be submitted by Feb. 14 and oral arguments to be held soon afterward.
The “public charge” rule unveiled last year would make it harder for immigrants who are poor or need government help to secure residency and stay in the country.
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
That rule has been around since 1884.
Enemy within,
Probably think of themselves as “citizens of the world”
If the court insists on admitting them, any benefits they require should be deducted from the Federal Court Pension Plan.
Why is Joe Q. Public&TaxPayer obligated to support illegals with any benefits in any way, form, fashion, etc.?
Becuz it’s the compassionate thing to do? Really?
For who? Those who sneak them in, those who foster them illegally, those who use them for their own socialist agenda?
Why?? Religious view aside, the camel can only hold so many straws before it stumbles and falls.
The Left knows that. The complicit blind-as-bats lamebrain media won’t say it tho.
Why is Joe Q. Public&TaxPayer obligated to support illegals with any benefits in any way, form, fashion, etc.?
Becuz it’s the compassionate thing to do? Really?
For who? Those who sneak them in, those who foster them illegally, those who use them for their own socialist agenda?
Why?? Religious view aside, the camel can only hold so many straws before it stumbles and falls.
The Left knows that. The complicit blind-as-bats lamebrain media won’t say it tho.
More grade point 2.0 judges...
Take a page from the book of democommies. Court order? Pffftttt! Ignore, proceed, repeat as needed.
In 1982 the SCOTUS declared that illegal aliens have a right to our taxes in the form of public schooling.
It was an unbelievable decision then, and is even more insane almost 40 years later.
The schools of California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas are now basically babysitting operations for the children of Mexico. They even get 2 or 3 free meals a day. All paid for by us.
The court alleged at the time that this was necessary due to the fact that it was an entitlement not linked to citizenship which was an absurd ruling.
This ruling goes even further and makes permanent residency an entitlement - as if the United States have no right to prevent ANYONE from skating in and taking up residence. No cash? No problem! We mandate that the citizenry has to subsidize you!
We can do nothing more important in this generation then killing that idea: that we owe our taxes to the rest of the planet on demand.
A nation founded in opposition to taxation would have it no other way.
I hope this nonsensical, tyrannical ruling is appealed pronto. I didn’t see that mentioned in the article.
Because liberals think that “Give us your poor, give us your tired’ means “Give us your ingrates who won’t lift a finger to help themselves, Ever, and we’ll take care of them at taxpayer expense, sop these ingrates can sit around smoking pot and drinking beer all day long while we give them nearly $45,000 a year to live on, while at the same time allowing legal citizen seniors, who worked all their lives, and were a productive group of people beneficial for this country, to only get around $10,000 a year to try to get by on”
The 9th Circuit and 4th Circuits have issued stays on injunctions by lower courts, and this court allows the injunction to stay in place.
Clearly, this will require a final ruling by the Supremes. The sooner the better, but I don’t know if SCOTUS will make sorting out these conflicting circuit court rulings a high priority.
When I learned about the US Constitution and the 3 branches of government, I got the impression that there was a separation of powers, and that the judiciary could only interpret the laws, not make demands as to how the country should be run, and certainly it couldn’t set national policy regarding immigration.
And, to the extent that the judiciary had the legal right to impose itself on the other branches, it would only be at the level Constitutionally equal to the Executive and Legislative branches, which is to say, at the Supreme Court level, not just some low-level pompous a-hole with delusions of relevance.
Why don’t they move these cases out out of these radical courts in the Manhattan and DC areas?
The current pathetic Supreme Court is more wont to “throw the case back” to the originating court to reconsider and correct it. That is ridiculous.
There are so many cancerous tumors in this Republic I don’t see how it can survive.
Do we HAVE to issue green card to whom ever asks? Can’t these people be vetted and if found wanting in any way be denied a green card. It wouldn’t have to be about having work waiting for them although that is a reasonable question to ask. If the answer is not what is wanted why couldn’t the process just be dragged out for weeks, months or years while a very thorough back round check in other areas is made?
” “throw the case back” to the originating court to reconsider and correct it.”
There are many “originating courts,” one in each of the districts where suits have been filed.
No, I think SCOTUS has no choice but to rule on this.
NO! Absolutely not!!!
Just because the GOPe was too spineless to impeach when Democrats ignored the court, don't think the Democrats will act the same towards Trump.
They've already voted to impeach and he did nothing wrong. Ignore court orders and you give never trumpers in the Senate a reason to vote to remove.
The right course is to appeal appeal all the way to SCOTUS if necessary. And use the lower court rulings against the Democrats every chance you get.
“When U.S. District Judge George Daniels in Manhattan ordered an injunction on Oct. 11, he called the rule “repugnant to the American Dream” and a “policy of exclusion in search of a justification.”
This is what passes for jurisprudence in the Federal Appeals Courts.
No legal reasoning offered at all. None!
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.