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.
Declare it illegal immigrant season, and sell hunting permits?
Eventually, at some point, the border will need to be secured by wall or by firepower.
while you are guarding the border, all the illegals are on your side of the border, looking over your shoulder, watching you guard the border they already crossed!!!!!
Dems have made america swallow a poison pill. Just try to round up the terrorists and people 'awaiting' a court date years from now. The media and ems and activists will go bonkers!!!! and repubs will stand there wringing their helpless hands.
The time to guard the border has past.
Now what are the idiot republicans going to do even if the boder is locked air tight, which it will not be unless Trump is elected in 2024.
The law is set up to eventually consume itself and the scotus decision by law is the correct one, the position by the biden admin, however, is contrary to law and common sense and turns the three legged stool of our government into a one legged stool now toppling over.
There are expectations and assumptions in our government where the scotus decision is expected t be met with a response from a responsible and ethical government. We have no responsible and ethical government.
Truly a case of leaning backward and expecting to be caught by a partner who is otherwise occupied picking their nose.
And what is the alternative? Is it not 8 U.S. Code § 1182 - Inadmissible aliens
The fact is what the current Administration is doing is not authorized by statutory law
It was just explained to you that actually, it IS authorized by statutory law. One little word... "may," ...not "shall." The Biden Admin is exercising their legal discretionary power to NOT return illegal aliens to the contiguous territory from which they came pending further proceedings.
The remedy is for Congress to change the language of the statute.
while you are guarding the border, all the illegals are on your side of the border, looking over your shoulder, watching you guard the border they already crossed!!!!!
Dems have made america swallow a poison pill. Just try to round up the terrorists and people 'awaiting' a court date years from now. The media and ems and activists will go bonkers!!!! and repubs will stand there wringing their helpless hands.
The time to guard the border has past.
Now what are the idiot republicans going to do even if the boder is locked air tight, which it will not be unless Trump is elected in 2024.
The law is set up to eventually consume itself and the scotus decision by law is the correct one, the position by the biden admin, however, is contrary to law and common sense and turns the three legged stool of our government into a one legged stool now toppling over.
There are expectations and assumptions in our government where the scotus decision is expected t be met with a response from a responsible and ethical government. We have no responsible and ethical government.
Truly a case of leaning backward and expecting to be caught by a partner who is otherwise occupied picking their nose.
Lucy holding the football for charlie brown.
the biden admin is guilty of treason and a trial.
Any time I see Biden and treason in the same writeup, it gets rep from me.
I literally just posted the Supreme Court interpretation of the statute, and how they ruled it applies. Perhaps you should consider their role: the word Supreme is a hint.
And you should read what the Court stated. Now, provide the wording where the Court stated section 1225(b)(2)(C) allows detention to be foregone. Discretionary simply means the provision in question may or may not be followed. Now what is the alternative? Does 8 U.S. Code § 1182 - Inadmissible aliens come to mind?
We are talking about what statutory law provides. Simply because it is cited in a dissenting opinion does not change what statutory law provides. And what it provides is cited by Alito:
"Congress offered the Executive two—and only two—alternatives to detention. First, if an alien is “arriving on land” from “a foreign territory contiguous to the United States,” the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) “may return the alien to that territory pending a [removal] proceeding.” §1225(b)(2)(C). Second, DHS may release individual aliens on “parole,” but “only on a case-by-case basis for urgent humanitarian reasons or a significant public benefit.” §1182(d)(5)(A)".
I don't mind you repeating that cite over and over because it explicitly confirms that statutory law allows for "parole", which is release within the country.
And you should read what the Court stated. Now, provide the wording where the Court stated section 1225(b)(2)(C) allows detention to be foregone. Discretionary simply means the provision in question may or may not be followed. Now what is the alternative? Does 8 U.S. Code § 1182 - Inadmissible aliens come to mind?
.
I know you're frustrated, many of us are. BUT... the language of 1225(b)(2)(C) specifically allows the US AG to release illegal aliens arriving from contiguous territories into the US pending further proceeding, likely the proceeding which would adjudicate whether they would be approved to enter the US or will be ordered to be deported.
Again, the remedy is for Congress to change the language of the statute. SCOTUS cannot legislate from the Bench (at least they're not supposed to).
I know you're frustrated, many of us are. BUT... the language of 1225(b)(2)(C) specifically allows the US AG to release illegal aliens arriving from contiguous territories into the US pending further proceeding, likely the proceeding which would adjudicate whether they would be approved to enter the US or will be ordered to be deported.
Again, the remedy is for Congress to change the language of the statute. SCOTUS cannot legislate from the Bench (at least they're not supposed to).
I believe there are exceptions during a pandemic though. According to the left we are still in it and new strains keep popping up so why are these people being allowed into our country right now?
I believe there are exceptions during a pandemic though. According to the left we are still in it and new strains keep popping up so why are these people being allowed into our country right now?
While that's true, that is still at the discretion of the current Admin, which at this time happens to be Biden's Admin. They have chosen to act as if we're not in a pandemic for the purpose of processing illegal aliens.
And you should read what the Court stated. Now, provide the wording where the Court stated section 1225(b)(2)(C) allows detention to be foregone. Discretionary simply means the provision in question may or may not be followed. Now what is the alternative? Does 8 U.S. Code § 1182 - Inadmissible aliens come to mind?
.
Comes to your mind. I happen to think it probably came to the Supreme Court's Justices mind, also, and the majority did not interpret it the same way you do. Your time would probably be better spent lobbying Congress to make the law more to your liking.
I don't mind you repeating that cite over and over because it explicitly confirms that statutory law allows for "parole", which is release within the country.
Quote the wording from the statute you are referring to. There are specific rules governing release under "parole".
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.
