Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yes really, no court has found DACA to be an illegal action and it has been around for 6 years, the order adds some sensibility to our lack of cohesive plan to address the 11 million illegal immigrants living in the US.
and that is not the court's job, isn't it? The court is to interpret our law and constitutions, not creating new law that contradicts to our current law. I predict DACA is done when it reaches SCOTUS.
It's actually up to the Congress to address the 11 million illegal immigrants, not the court or the POTUS. DACA is a bandaid to the solution, not a permanent fix.
Yes really, no court has found DACA to be an illegal action and it has been around for 6 years, the order adds some sensibility to our lack of cohesive plan to address the 11 million illegal immigrants living in the US.
Obama said he couldn't do it but he did it anyway. Why don't you address his statements? Amnesty does not add any sensibility to fixing the illegal immigration problem. It was tried back in 1986 and now we have at least quadruple the number of illegal aliens here today.
Trump's EO was illegal. US law says they can claim asylum anywhere. If you don't like that you change the law.
Except you can't change the law, because every Democrat in the house and senate has done nothing for 2 years but obstruct and discredit and make sure that nothing fitting a conservative agenda will pass, forcing Trump to use EOs which they can then claim fits right into him being a Dictator
We no longer live in a democratic republic, but a banana republic
The asylum rules are a result of our membership in the United Nations, namely the "1951 Refugee Convention." The US "Refugee Act of 1980" was written to conform to the treaty. How can we change the rules? Get out of the UN!
The asylum rules are a result of our membership in the United Nations, namely the "1951 Refugee Convention." The US "Refugee Act of 1980" was written to conform to the treaty. How can we change the rules? Get out of the UN!
So far, people are so worked up about a exceedingly small group of people illegally traversing the border and then claiming asylum that some of the suggestions to rectify the situation on this thread include rewriting the Constitution, withdrawing from the United Nations (and the Security Council), and promoting the jettisoning of the rule of law by having the executive ignore the judiciary. Simply amazing.
11-20-2018, 08:49 AM
i7pXFLbhE3gq
n/a posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by TEPLimey
If only we could eliminate that Constitution and its pesky Article III you might have something there.
Actually Article III doesn't even require that there be lower courts. It just allows for them. The Judiciary Act established the lower courts - in 1789.
Even in 1789 they saw that having everything go straight to the Supreme Court was unworkable. I suppose it should come as no surprise that people who despise the rule of law would want to create an unworkable system though.
I wonder how the poster feels about Republican attempts to expand the number of lower court judges now that they have a Republican president.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
