Posted on 02/23/2020 1:35:22 AM PST by fwdude
The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Trump administration on Friday night in a case that contested the president’s “public charge” rule, which critics have called a “wealth test” for legal immigrants.
The policy in question, the Immigration and Nationality Act, would make it harder for immigrants who are “likely at any time to become a public charge” to obtain green cards. The policy discourages legal immigrants in the process of obtaining permanent legal status or citizenship from using public assistance, including Medicaid, housing vouchers and food stamps.
The case heard by the court, Wolf v. Cook County, sought to reject the policy’s effect in Illinois. The district court filed a preliminary injunction, which temporarily halted the policy in the state and sent the case to the Supreme Court. On Friday, the five conservative justices ruled in favor of the stay, while the liberal justices opposed it.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
So we can now clean up the green card mess too? This is really going to take a while with illegals and green carders. So if an illegal is on gov. services, can that be considered as a reason to deport them also?
l8r
I thought ‘Rats want a wealth tax.
How are they going to get “their” money if the peeps have no wealth?
>> which critics have called a “wealth test” for legal immigrants.
oh, like Norway and other countries the left admires???
The left has slavish admiration for Canada, which also REQUIRES immigrants to be self-supporting and tax paying.
Norway requires immigrants earn at least $47k/year.
Hasn't the "public charge" rule always been the law and the Democrats are just mad that he's enforcing it?
That’s always been the law.
Is this what set Sotomayer off?
The Wide Latina weighed in with her usual public fart.
And this is why we need to have 4 more years of Pres trump.......The SCOTUS. If one of them leaves Trump needs to be the one to nominate the replacement
Seeking the same answer here. The Wise Latina certainly became angry and outspoken. Source of discontent found?
When we moved to Spain in 2016 we had to pass a background check, prove we could support ourselves and pay for a year’s worth of health insurance in advance. Perhaps Trump should follow Spain’s (socialist country) example. Even better, Spain doesn’t pay you any benefits if you have never worked for them and damn few if you have. They will turn you away from health clinics if you are sick and don’t have insurance. They are so tight with benefits the African migrants who land on the coast hop on the first bus for the French border. If the USA treated immigrants the same way they probably wouldn’t have much of an immigration problem.
“Seeking the same answer here. The Wise Latina certainly became angry and outspoken. Source of discontent found?”
Don’t forget, she immigrated from Puerto Rico - so she has some psychological connection with people from south of the border.
Russia requires you to show either an active job or a sum on account that comes to almost three months of the median salary to obtain permanent residence.
So it’s not the Trump Administration’s policy? A judge ruled against the law?
This is the first step in heading towards the goal of removing illegals from the public dole.
Illegal Alien children children should also expelled from the schools. The money wasted on ESL and should be returned to the taxpayers or used to improve those schools that are failing.
The last step is to locate and deport every illegal alien and their children. Further there needs to be a redefinition of birth citizenship. Mere presence on our soil does not confer citizenship.
I don’t think moving from PR is immigrating. It is a US territory and no passport needed to come here or go there.
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.