why is it just? because you simply agree with the policy? will you support trumps right to enact EO's now with zero justification and have the next president not be able to rescind them without justification? that's where we are heading
Supreme Court slaps down Trump again on DACA
- Thread starter Concart
- Start date
why is it just? because you simply agree with the policy? will you support trumps right to enact EO's now with zero justification and have the next president not be able to rescind them without justification? that's where we are heading
that's not what they ruled on, you idiot. the SJC isn't there to enact policy. are you stupid?
He sues constantly and loses nearly always. So much for conservative reticence to resort to the judicial branch. Hypocrites will be hypocritical. It's what they do.
You'll have to take that up with the Supreme Court.
they didn't rule on the policy, retard.
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
actually he's won far more than he's lost....
According to the Borowitz Report, Trump is planning to override the Supreme Court by forming his own Supremer Court. lol
This is Jack's position: "I support kids that were brought up in America from not being deported to a place they know nothing about. (seems like a no-brainer)"
This is Grind's response: "that's not what they ruled on, you idiot. the SJC isn't there to enact policy. are you stupid?"
So, they didn't rule on Jack's Position?
Jack responds to Grind: "You'll have to take that up with the Supreme Court."
Grind again responds in desperation: "they didn't rule on the policy, retard."
... and your point is ... what?
“The U.S. Constitution grants Congress the exclusive right to legislate in the area of immigration. Most of the relevant laws, including the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), are found in Title 8 of the United States Code. State governments are prohibited from enacting immigration laws.”
hg.org
Have you ever even read the Constitution?
Jacky, I thought that I explained that the S.C. did not rule on the legality of DACA.
It ruled on the procedure to rescind the E.O. by Obama that included illegal children brought to this country, illegally, by their illegal parents.
It must be filed with the Congressional Record, etc.
This will all be done with the necessary changes and then the S.C. will rule whether the Obama E.O. changed the immigration law without Congress approving the change.
It did and is therefore illegal to include illegal children under DACA.
Try to retain this for more than a couple of hours, Jacky.
Cohort is exactly right, they did not rule on the policy.
DACA is what a just nation does. We do not punish children for the sins of their mothers and fathers. Do *you* support sending an English-speaking American kid back to Guatemala when he's 15, a place he last saw when he was 3? What about sending an American soldier, whose parents brought her here as an infant, back to a slum in Mexico?
Airstrip One
Completely Effed
It's pretty funny that we still have to debate over Article II legislation.
And, uh, ... what has that got to do with me expressing MY Opinion on the Subject?
T. A. Gardner
Serial Thread Killer
I posted nothing about separating "dreamers" from their parents. All I said, is their parents are criminals. If the parents are deported, then minor children are deported with them. If the children are adults, they can be separately deported for being here illegally. It's just too bad if they spent most of their life here in an illegal status because of their worthless, criminal parents. If you don't like that then get Congress to change the immigration laws.
your point is totally irrelevant. the supreme courts job is not to make policy. if you feel the policy is a good idea, lobby congress to enact an actual law. that's what it's there for.
I think we know what the duties of the USSCt. are. In this case, they correctly rejected the administration's arguments as flawed. Your point?
The Supreme Court randomly sided with illegal DACA protections for people whose VERY EXISTENCE here is a crime. Their presence here is illegal, void, invalid, and illegitimate...but a court that has zero authority to do anything like what it just did, arbitrarily invents random rights for people they have zero jurisdiction over out of thin air, based on literally nothing.
We are officially at the "make up whatever we feel like" part of abandoning everything this country stands for.
They did not "randomly" side with DACA. Like some of Trump's earlier losses in the courts, he did not bother to follow the procedural requirements of the Administrative Procedures Act for repealing executive orders. He needs better lawyers.
Neither did Obama,the EO was illegal to begin with -why follow APA after that?
Airstrip One
Completely Effed
I think Trump should begin every act of Article II legislation with the phrase "In accordance with the absolute liberties of DHS v Regents of UC..."