The President Trump Immigration Thread

[jamil]

Please recall that there is already an act, that dates from the late 1800s I believe, that gives the FedGov title to the land within a stated distance from the actual border and is only in doubt in a few places mostly in Texas and New Mexico where deeds were granted prior to the act (and in some cases prior to the settlement of the border lines). No easement necessary, just exercise existing authority. Adverse possession not an issue because no Federal property tax, so they can't be said to have been paying taxes on the land in lieu of the deed holder

As I said, if it's private property, and not in an easement, then have at it. Godspeed. Do your thing. Just pay for it privately.

 

[Ingomike]

I don't think it's a constitutional populism at all. I see people justifying things just because it's their side. I'm not talking about here per se, but throughout the country, and some things I hear some Trump supporting pundits say.

Where the middle swings is where we always go, and we've never really been two parties ideologically. The political beliefs are and have always been diverse, it's just that the extremes are pretty phat right now. But we have only two pigeon holes within which we all have to fit our political beliefs, Republican or Democrat. I don't think we'll see an increase in third parties at all. We'll see a battle for control of the two. Trumpism has pretty much taken over the Republican party, which I do not see as a great thing. And the battle is still waging for control over the Democrats, but it looks to me like the AOC faction is making pretty good headway.

The reason I called it constitutional populism is I mostly hear about folks wanting to follow the constitution on the left including defending our borders. The left is all about suppression of ideas they don't like and are currently pushing many clearly unconstitutional ideas.

 

[BugI02]

As I said, if it's private property, and not in an easement, then have at it. Godspeed. Do your thing. Just pay for it privately.

Most of it WOULD NOT be private property, unless you consider federal land to be private property, nor would the government have to get an easement on what it already owns

 

[Dead Duck]

You guys seriously arguing over whose property the wall is getting built on?

Who would be stupid enough to buy property on a country's border and NOT consider there is an easement in the contract. Weird though that all the property owners down there against the wall are also Trump haters, so **** em.



This wall is getting built.... PERIOD.
All this worthless petty bickering over it is a waste, it's getting built regardless. There is nothing illegal or unconstitutional about it. The wall is one of many things that need to be in place for the border to be secured. Money, lawsuits, permissions, manpower, etc... All be damned. We have needed this wall for so ****ing long and we finally have a president in office that has the balls to do the right thing and build it.

Those who don't approve of this are Trump haters, illegal alien humpers and/or anti-Americans. So grow a set, raise your flag and stand next to it like the rest of us patriots.

 

[nonobaddog]

Please recall that there is already an act, that dates from the late 1800s I believe, that gives the FedGov title to the land within a stated distance from the actual border and is only in doubt in a few places mostly in Texas and New Mexico where deeds were granted prior to the act (and in some cases prior to the settlement of the border lines). No easement necessary, just exercise existing authority. Adverse possession not an issue because no Federal property tax, so they can't be said to have been paying taxes on the land in lieu of the deed holder

Around here adverse possession does not have anything to do with property taxes but rather property usage. People just use land that is not theirs for enough years and then claim it. Of course there are more details and it varies from state to state. The property tax is owed by the current owner before such action and by the new owner after such action.

 

[JettaKnight]

You guys seriously arguing over whose property the wall is getting built on?

Who would be stupid enough to buy property on a country's border and NOT consider there is an easement in the contract. Weird though that all the property owners down there against the wall are also Trump haters, so **** em.

My guess is the wall can be built MILES from the actual border in some places for various reasons.



I'd be more upset if they were Trumpers, but also NIMBYs. At least if what you say is true, then they're consistent.

 

[BugI02]

Around here adverse possession does not have anything to do with property taxes but rather property usage. People just use land that is not theirs for enough years and then claim it. Of course there are more details and it varies from state to state. The property tax is owed by the current owner before such action and by the new owner after such action.

Over here in Outdiana, you have to have been maintaining the property (mowing, tree trimming etc) as well as paying taxes on it (so such cases usually involve erroneous property tax assessment/surveying)

 

[KLB]

Most of it WOULD NOT be private property, unless you consider federal land to be private property, nor would the government have to get an easement on what it already owns

Jamil seemed to be talking about the wall being built in that article. You seem to be talking about the whole thing.

 

[BugI02]

Upon further review, I believe you may be correct

 

[ArcadiaGP]

State Dept. will now allow customs officials deny entry to people they believe are coming to the U.S. specifically to give birth, so their children can have U.S. citizenship.

 

[printcraft]

Why in the **** was this not already a thing? Talk about a broken system.

 

[jamil]

Most of it WOULD NOT be private property, unless you consider federal land to be private property, nor would the government have to get an easement on what it already owns

Then I do care. Federal land is public property.

 

[JettaKnight]

Then I do care. Federal land is public property.

Cliven Bundy approves of this post.

 

[BugI02]

Then I do care. Federal land is public property.

see #3828 and #3829, we may be talking about different circumstances (just don't say anything about 5G or 802.11ax)

Awaiting your sashay into Area 51 or Thule because it's public property

 

[Kutnupe14]

Cliven Bundy approves of this post.

Ha! The “public property,” Bundy means, is for his use only. Or does one think he’d have been ok if another rancher moved in that piece of turf?

 

[jamil]

see #3828 and #3829, we may be talking about different circumstances (just don't say anything about 5G or 802.11ax)

Awaiting your sashay into Area 51 or Thule because it's public property

I have no idea what you’re talking about. I’m not inclined to give it much thought.

 

[BugI02]

3828 and 3829 - possible I'm talking general and you're talking specific

Disappearing 5G thread

Logical extension of the belief Federal land is public property

 

[ArcadiaGP]

On 5-4 vote, Supreme Court lets Trump administration start enforcing new immigrant wealth test, designed to screen out green card applicants seen as being at risk of becoming "public charges".

 

[printcraft]

That would make us the only country in the world doing that right?!
Sounds racist or something.








Right?

 

[nonobaddog]

I believe Germany has a policy in place where immigrants have to meet a financial standard too.
There may be others too as a result of the past invasions.