Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Texas Stripped of Powers in Border Security Bill
Newsweek ^ | Feb 06, 2024 at 9:32 AM EST | By Sean O'Driscoll Senior Crime and Courts Reporter

Posted on 02/06/2024 7:55:48 AM PST by Red Badger

Conservatives have attacked a provision of the new border security bill that would only allow legal challenges to be made in Washington D.C.

The bill would strip the power of Texas and other states to challenge some of the its provisions in their local federal court.

Conservative commentators were quick to denounce the provision, contained on page 221 of the bill. Bill Shipley, who was a federal prosecutor for over 20 years, decried the its court provisions on X, formerly Twitter, on Sunday.

"This would prevent plaintiffs - like the State of Texas - from filing suit in Texas federal courts. This is corrupt," he wrote.

After outlining the provisions under which immigrants can seek judicial review of a deportation order, the bill states:

"The United States District Court for the District of Columbia shall have sole and original jurisdiction to hear challenges, whether constitutional or otherwise, to the validity of this section or any written policy directive, written policy guideline, written procedure, or the implementation thereof."

The right of judicial review for illegal immigrants about to be deported has proved controversial.

In 2022, a Louisiana federal judge blocked the Biden administration from ending Title 42, a pandemic-related border restriction that allows for the immediate expulsion of asylum-seekers and other migrants.

Reacting to the latest provisions in the border security bill, conservative writer and self-style "deportation scientist" Mike Howell wrote on X that the bill "puts far left DC district court in charge."

(Excerpt) Read more at newsweek.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; Government; Mexico; Politics/Elections; US: Texas
KEYWORDS: aliens; border
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-63 next last

1 posted on 02/06/2024 7:55:48 AM PST by Red Badger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

You really have to wonder whether it’s deliberate or what kind of weak idiots the republicans are that they agreed to such things as this when they are negotiating.

If you want my opinion, first it’s deliberate and second they are a bunch of lazy dopes and they let their staffs write these things and they don’t even pay attention to it.


2 posted on 02/06/2024 7:57:30 AM PST by Williams (Stop Tolerating The Intolerant)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

The union has usurped too much power from the states already. We demand restoration.


3 posted on 02/06/2024 7:58:06 AM PST by bk1000 (Banned from Breitbart)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

Thanks for pointing this one out.


4 posted on 02/06/2024 7:58:44 AM PST by Sacajaweau ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

Well I guess the republicans had to give up some additional concessions because after all they already achieved only 2 million more coming in this year /s and even that isn’t a limit because the controls that are supposed to click in at that point are never going to happen.
The whole bill is a dinner call to illegals to come running.


5 posted on 02/06/2024 7:59:09 AM PST by Williams (Stop Tolerating The Intolerant)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

I have no words suitable for FR.


6 posted on 02/06/2024 7:59:38 AM PST by stevio (Fight until you die.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

Oh, isn’t that nice, assigning ALL jurisdiction to the DC Circuit, composed of four Obama nominees and three Biden nominees.

How convenient.

I guess they don’t like the 5th Circuit, which has jurisdiction over Texas, with its 12 Republican nominees (6 Trump) and 5 Democrat nominees.


7 posted on 02/06/2024 7:59:46 AM PST by cotton1706
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Williams

We are not electing our bestest and brightest............


8 posted on 02/06/2024 8:00:26 AM PST by Red Badger (Homeless veterans camp in the streets while illegal qs are put up in hotels.....................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

The United States District Court for the District of Columbia shall have sole and original jurisdiction to hear challenges,

This is Absolute Confirmation that Article 3, section 2 of the US Constitution PROHIBITS inferior courts from hearing ANYTHING when a State is a Party to the Action, all Previous rulings against ANY State should be Ignored since the Supreme Court did not hear the Case in Original Jurisdiction.

In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction.


9 posted on 02/06/2024 8:00:54 AM PST by eyeamok
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Williams

If you want my opinion, first it’s deliberate and second they are a bunch of lazy dopes and they let their staffs write these things and they don’t even pay attention to it.

My opinion too except the evidence suggests that there’s only one party in Washington DC, they want all the power and all your money.


10 posted on 02/06/2024 8:01:19 AM PST by Pete Dovgan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Williams

The more we learn the worse it is. This thing is a nightmare. Damn the GOPe for trying to shove down our throats.


11 posted on 02/06/2024 8:01:40 AM PST by gibsonguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

10th Amendment!!!
Unconstitutional!!


12 posted on 02/06/2024 8:01:49 AM PST by Terry L Smith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

Title 42 expired in 2023 and Biden wouldn’t save it. In response, in May, the House passed HR2, a very comprehensive border package “Save the Border Act of 2023”....Includes a wall...and everything you could ask for to stop this invasion.


13 posted on 02/06/2024 8:01:55 AM PST by Sacajaweau ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Williams

“You really have to wonder whether it’s deliberate or what kind of weak idiots the republicans are that they agreed to such things as this when they are negotiating.”

Remember when Paul Ryan slipped provisions specifically prohibiting using provisions of the Secure Fence Act to build a border wall into the 2016 Omnibus? And then later specifically prohibiting using concrete to build any border wall.

These are all intentional. They are desperate to get their insidious provisions into law. Because once Trump is president again, illegal immigration is OVER!


14 posted on 02/06/2024 8:02:43 AM PST by cotton1706
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

[[The bill would strip the power of Texas and other states to challenge some of the its provisions in their local federal court. ]]

Which of course the republicants would be required to obey, and would be prosecuted to the hilt if they didnt- but democrats get to ignore all laws already on the books that they don’t like and never suffer any consequences for it. There are laws AGAINST illegals storming our borders, but the left ignore those laws. BUT, if a republican ignores a demand by the left- tH3y can expect to be punished to the hilt


15 posted on 02/06/2024 8:03:18 AM PST by Bob434
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

What a complete and utter sellout.


16 posted on 02/06/2024 8:03:39 AM PST by NWFree (Sigma male 🤪)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

I am by no means an expert in the unique relationship between Texas and the federal government, based on the specifics of the annexation of the Republic of Texas into the US. It would seem to me, however, that of all the states, the one state that the Feds could not tell what to do would be Texas because of the state’s unique relationship, including the ability to secede and become its own republic again.


17 posted on 02/06/2024 8:04:19 AM PST by chajin ("There is no other name under heaven given among people by which we must be saved." Acts 4:12)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

The bill is unconstitutional on its face.

Limiting redress to ONE court for the entire US?

That’s not how a Republic works!


18 posted on 02/06/2024 8:04:44 AM PST by Skywise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bob434

It seems to me that the provision is unconstitutional on its face.

Denying a state and it’s citizens due process is blatantly unconstitutional..............


19 posted on 02/06/2024 8:05:06 AM PST by Red Badger (Homeless veterans camp in the streets while illegal qs are put up in hotels.....................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

Border Security Bill MY ASS. Somebody needs to look up the definition of the word “Security”. Open This bill is a poke in the butt of the AMERICAN PEOPLE by the commie RAT bass turds. It should be called Joe Pedo’s Murder Rape and Pillage Bill of Aiding and Abetting for Foreigner Invaders.


20 posted on 02/06/2024 8:05:52 AM PST by FlingWingFlyer ( Joe Pedo's America! The Motel 6 to the world. Joe's Border Patrol will keep the light on for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-63 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson