The President Trump Immigration Thread

[ArcadiaGP]

Trump is saying this will be re-visited in September.

Also, A Judge Blocks Trump Order on Defunding 'Sanctuary Cities'

 

[ghitch75]

Trump is saying this will be re-visited in September.

Also, A Judge Blocks Trump Order on Defunding 'Sanctuary Cities'

he needs to fire the judges.....

 

[OakRiver]

Trump is saying this will be re-visited in September.

Also, A Judge Blocks Trump Order on Defunding 'Sanctuary Cities'

Perhaps I am mis-remembering this, but didn't Obama threaten to withhold funding to states that ignored Federal law? Maybe NC and the transgender bathroom issue?

 

[SheepDog4Life]

Trump is saying this will be re-visited in September.

Also, A Judge Blocks Trump Order on Defunding 'Sanctuary Cities'

I didn't see that this injunction addressed AG Sessions' recent letters to a number of sanctuary cities... apparently, JAG grants are statutorily dependent upon the receiving agencies certifying that they comply with ICE detainer requests.

ETA: As the article below explains, no, the injunction does not prevent the AG and Secretary from enforcing existing law... it only prevents them from inventing new law... gee, glad we had a judge around to tell us that. Specifically, the ruling itself says it does NOT apply to using 8 U.S.C. 1373.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corne...s-ruling-against-mostly-meaningless-executive

 

[SheepDog4Life]

I think this portion of the WH statement on the "sanctuary" ruling is telling. Not only is a "single" district judge putting himself/herself in the role of both other branches of government, they are doing so for the entirety of the country... i.e. outside of their district jurisdiction and outside of the circuit of appeals in which they reside.

This case is yet one more example of egregious overreach by a single, unelected district judge. Today's ruling undermines faith in our legal system and raises serious questions about circuit shopping. But we are confident we will ultimately prevail in the Supreme Court, just as we will prevail in our lawful efforts to impose immigration restrictions necessary to keep terrorists out of the United States.

This is quickly becoming ripe for action by congress... the organisation and jurisdiction of federal courts is the realm of statutory law. IMO, congress could easily curtail this by limiting district and circuit decisions to the circuit of appeals... and could also sequester injunction attempts on the President and/or Congress to, for example, the DC circuit.

Only the Supreme Court is Constitutionally chartered. All subordinate courts are established by legislation.

tl;dr: District courts are acting as individual little "supreme" courts, issuing rulings outside their jurisdiction. This problem is easily fixable by Congress.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

First the Ninth Circuit rules against the ban & now it hits again on sanctuary cities-both ridiculous rulings. See you in the Supreme Court!

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/857177434210304001

And here's the full WH statement

 

[SheepDog4Life]

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/857177434210304001

And here's the full WH statement

According to Wikipedia, there are 677 US circuit court judges (some are currently vacant). That any one of them can override the legitimate powers of the President and/or Congress on a whim is oppressive, especially when they apply their so-called "rulings" beyond the confines of their jurisdiction.

The only check that congress has on this judicial abuse of power, short of impeaching judges, is to limit their decisions to their circuit and/or removing jurisdiction for certain types of cases to a single circuit (i.e. DC) or creating a new court specifically for such cases, immediately under the SCOTUS.

Time to "refine" Marbury.

 

[T.Lex]

According to Wikipedia, there are 677 US circuit court judges (some are currently vacant). That any one of them can override the legitimate powers of the President and/or Congress on a whim is oppressive, especially when they apply their so-called "rulings" beyond the confines of their jurisdiction.

That is not what is happening.

Based on legal principles, not whim, they (rightly or wrongly, in a legal sense) make a decision for their circuit. If it is a nationally-applicable law, it has the effect of enjoining the act outside of their circuit, but that's not really the judge's call.

Time to "refine" Marbury.

No, thank you.

 

[SheepDog4Life]

That is not what is happening.

Yeah, it is... Trump wasn't supposed to win. They don't like him... he says things that hurt their feelz. This is how they #resist.

Based on legal principles, not whim, they (rightly or wrongly, in a legal sense) make a decision for their circuit. If it is a nationally-applicable law, it has the effect of enjoining the act outside of their circuit, but that's not really the judge's call.

First, in this particular case, the cities had no actual standing. There has to be real or imminent harm for the judge to even take up the case... this isn't even Law 101, it's Law Kindergarten! Any real judge would have told them to leave and come back once the administration indicated they were going to take some specific, DEFINABLE action.

Second, the judge said in his order that the federal government cannot take any actions not allowable under statute... which is exactly what the EO said. The judge wrote a 45 page opinion BASED UPON STUMP SPEECHES AND TV INTERVIEWS!

Pure politics... from the bench. Dangerous.

 

[JTScribe]

I love Texas sometimes.

Texas prepares to begin locking up leaders in sanctuary cities - Hot Air Hot Air

 

[BugI02]

Yeah, it is... Trump wasn't supposed to win. They don't like him... he says things that hurt their feelz. This is how they #resist.



First, in this particular case, the cities had no actual standing. There has to be real or imminent harm for the judge to even take up the case... this isn't even Law 101, it's Law Kindergarten! Any real judge would have told them to leave and come back once the administration indicated they were going to take some specific, DEFINABLE action.

The problem, in microcosm is that 20 attorneys could make a comfortable living for the rest of Trump's first term arguing just that point, let alone the larger issues

Second, the judge said in his order that the federal government cannot take any actions not allowable under statute... which is exactly what the EO said. The judge wrote a 45 page opinion BASED UPON STUMP SPEECHES AND TV INTERVIEWS!

Pure politics... from the bench. Dangerous.

The problem in macrocosm is that the law is what a federal judge says it is unless and until his opinion is overturned by a higher court

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Mulvaney says the White House is seeking $2.6 billion in FY'18 for border wall program, including land acquisition, replacement wall and new wall costs.

 

[IndyDave1776]

The problem in macrocosm is that the law is what a federal judge says it is unless and until his opinion is overturned by a higher court

I would argue that you aren't all the way there with the problem. In practice, what you said is true, but that rests on great usurpation of power after the fashion of the infamous Roy Bean, who was well known for making up his own law as he went along.

 

[BugI02]

Agreed. A good start would be finding a way to restrict the applicability of a judges ruling to only his district or circuit instead of allowing it to apply nationally. Conflicting opinions from different circuits are often essential at getting the supremes to accept such cases, and a blanket injunction imposable by just one circuit interferes with this process as well as encourages judge shopping (notice how many of these cases were brought before the ninth)

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Judge Gregory apparently knows the "real" motive of Trump's EO. Amazing Trump would miss 43 out of 49 majority-Muslim countries.

http://coop.ca4.uscourts.gov/171351.P.pdf?platform=hootsuite

 

[jamil]

Judge Gregory apparently knows the "real" motive of Trump's EO. Amazing Trump would miss 43 out of 49 majority-Muslim countries.

http://coop.ca4.uscourts.gov/171351.P.pdf?platform=hootsuite

Well. Future presidents need to take heed that now their campaign statements will be used to determine future interpretation of their executive orders. A new law written by the judiciary.

 

[hoosierdoc]

A judge was going to rule against it for political reasons, tying to use intellect to evaluate their decision isn't possible

 

[ArcadiaGP]

"Quietly," the State Department Nearly Doubles Number of Refugees Entering U. S.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Waiting for SCOTUS to rule on Trump request to stay injunction against travel Executive Order

 

[Kutnupe14]

"Quietly," the State Department Nearly Doubles Number of Refugees Entering U. S.

Why hasn't this garnered any comments. DOUBLED? WTF?