F'dup Chapters in American History(The Trump Years) - - - - - - Part 15

[Thread Manager]

This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]533381[/split]

 

[Thread Manager]

This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]533145[/split]

 

[Sithborg]

ICE gonna have a field day with this

From what I've been hearing, they already have been. ICE sounds like they need a purge, badly. And they are only emboldened by Trump and Kelly.

Well, if there is any silver lining here, Trump has just turned Florida and Arizona blue.

I think the Arpaio pardon may have already done a lot of that work in AZ. On a pure, political analysis point of view, it is going to be fascinating watching AZ next year.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

I couldn't imagine living in the USA my entire life and then being deported for no good reason (America birth rate is plummeting, we actually need immigrants).

But evil is as evil does, to paraphrase Forrest Gump.

 

[Matt]

From what I've been hearing, they already have been. ICE sounds like they need a purge, badly. And they are only emboldened by Trump and Kelly.



I think the Arpaio pardon may have already done a lot of that work in AZ. On a pure, political analysis point of view, it is going to be fascinating watching AZ next year.

Undoubtedly. With the Republican primary and the general midterm, plus McCain's seat possibly opening, Arizona has become the state to watch over the next year. Also, I will say this. Between Arpaio and the Dreamers, Jeff Flake suddenly looks like a political genius for distancing himself from Trump in such a loud manner at the time that he did.

 

[Kelly]

As far as DACA is concerned, there will be several states that will fight it in court, and Trump has absolutely no argument as to why these young people who have been in this country the majority of their lives, who have done (themselves) everything correctly, who are in school, no criminal records, etc.....no argument for them to stand on.

DACA will be in the courts long after Trump is out of office.


However, and no, I'm not surprised, that Texas Attorney General is already posturing to sue the Federal Government if Trump does not follow through on getting rid of DACA. I swear the government we have in Texas is so damn out of touch with it's citizens it is unbelievable...idiots all of them.

All I can say is let Trump bow to his small ignorant base.....let him bow to them exclusively....just giving him more rope to hang himself.

 

[Sithborg]

Well, his argument seems to be that it isn't right to use executive orders to write immigration law. Which while I agree with, does not mean he should just unilaterally kill DACA with a time frame that is going to put a LOT of pressure on Congress. It will expire just as most states primaries will be going.

That he is doing this just as Congress returns to do some very, very much needed bills shows how ignorant he is of the process.

 

[Matt]

As far as DACA is concerned, there will be several states that will fight it in court, and Trump has absolutely no argument as to why these young people who have been in this country the majority of their lives, who have done (themselves) everything correctly, who are in school, no criminal records, etc.....no argument for them to stand on.

DACA will be in the courts long after Trump is out of office.


However, and no, I'm not surprised, that Texas Attorney General is already posturing to sue the Federal Government if Trump does not follow through on getting rid of DACA. I swear the government we have in Texas is so damn out of touch with it's citizens it is unbelievable...idiots all of them.

All I can say is let Trump bow to his small ignorant base.....let him bow to them exclusively....just giving him more rope to hang himself.

Honestly, with the addition of Gorsuch to SCOTUS, DACA would likely be held unconstitutional if Trump tried to renew it.

Its important to note, DACA is an executive action. Its not based in legislation. Any challenge in court by any dreamers will reflect that. Courts don't need an in-depth analysis here. It can be as simplistic as "you are here illegally, you have no legal basis to stay, then you have no grounds to base your challenge of your deportation on." They can't even really argue that they had some sort of entitlement through legislation because DACA was never based on legislation. The DACA was literally the executive branch choosing to not carry out the law by deporting those who are here unlawfully. Because Congress never codified it, it will be very easy to repeal with absolutely no legal blow back.

What we want to watch here is Congress. Congress could intervene by simply codifying DACA. In that case, Trump will have no choice but to carry out the law.

Well, his argument seems to be that it isn't right to use executive orders to write immigration law. Which while I agree with, does not mean he should just unilaterally kill DACA with a time frame that is going to put a LOT of pressure on Congress. It will expire just as most states primaries will be going.

That he is doing this just as Congress returns to do some very, very much needed bills shows how ignorant he is of the process.

In fairness, your first paragraph is precisely how DACA was created. It was the executive branch acting unilaterally.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

Well, his argument seems to be that it isn't right to use executive orders to write immigration law. Which while I agree with, does not mean he should just unilaterally kill DACA with a time frame that is going to put a LOT of pressure on Congress. It will expire just as most states primaries will be going.

That he is doing this just as Congress returns to do some very, very much needed bills shows how ignorant he is of the process.

Ssshhh. We want the orange clown posse to use up their political capital.

 

[Kelly]

Honestly, with the addition of Gorsuch to SCOTUS, DACA would likely be held unconstitutional if Trump tried to renew it.

Its important to note, DACA is an executive action. Its not based in legislation. Any challenge in court by any dreamers will reflect that. Courts don't need an in-depth analysis here. It can be as simplistic as "you are here illegally, you have no legal basis to stay, then you have no grounds to base your challenge of your deportation on." They can't even really argue that they had some sort of entitlement through legislation because DACA was never based on legislation. The DACA was literally the executive branch choosing to not carry out the law by deporting those who are here unlawfully. Because Congress never codified it, it will be very easy to repeal with absolutely no legal blow back.

What we want to watch here is Congress. Congress could intervene by simply codifying DACA. In that case, Trump will have no choice but to carry out the law.



In fairness, your first paragraph is precisely how DACA was created. It was the executive branch acting unilaterally.

I don't think so....call it a hunch, but I just don't think so.

 

[Matt]

I don't think so....call it a hunch, but I just don't think so.

I mean, it comes down to a due process challenge. That is how DACA deportees will have to fight it. They will have to claim that there is some process that has to be followed prior to deportation. But that's where it gets really simplified. They have no right to due process because no process is due under any source of law.

In law school, my administrative law professor defined due process perfectly. "What is due process? It is the process that is due." I realize that sounds circular but it makes perfect sense. Whatever you are due, you're entitled to. Nothing more, nothing less.

So what process is due to dreamers? Absolutely none. Process has to come from some source, whether its an employment contract, a law, or whatever. There has to be some source of or entitlement to process. But we don't have one here. We have the executive branch adopting a policy that is essentially "we choose not to enforce the law." That is, in a nutshell, what United States v. Texas was about, whether the government was acting lawfully in refusing to deport Dreamers. United States v. Texas ultimately left the matter unresolved because it was a 4-4 split (due to Scalia's death). But because of it, we know where Roberts and Kennedy's votes will fall. Throw Gorsuch in there, and its a pretty open and shut case for SCOTUS.

So that brings us back around to people challenging their deportation. If the government was acting unlawfully through the original DACA, we must recognize that the government can't create an entitlement through an illegal act because the government was acting unlawfully to begin with. You have no expectation or entitlement created by an unlawful act.

Let's assume I were to plan a bank robbery. I call the chief of police and say "hey buddy, I am robbing PNC tonight, don't arrest me." He says "Okay! I promise, my men won't arrest you." I am then arrested. I wouldn't be able to beat the charge on the grounds that the police chief told me I wouldn't be arrested for doing something illegal.

Similar rationale applies here. Dreamers can't say "our entitlement stems from the fact that the government was derelict in its duty by letting us stay, so we are entitled to the government continuing to be derelict in its duty." That argument doesn't even pass "the laugh test" (an informal term in the legal profession that is to say if the first reaction to an argument is laughing at the absurdity of it, its not a winning argument).

There has to be some legal basis that grants dreamers entitlement to residency. I just don't see one here. Not without an act of Congress.

 

[Dr Lee]

And with Congress being the make up it is.... there's not going to be anything that makes Dreamers legal in the US...

 

[Matt]

And with Congress being the make up it is.... there's not going to be anything that makes Dreamers legal in the US...

I dunno about that. Remember, Congress's first and foremost concern is always self-preservation. Surely Congressional Republicans will see why DACA repeal is harmful for their Party in key swing states like Florida, Arizona, New Mexico, and North Carolina. In fact, for that reason alone, I have no doubt that Senate Republicans would be on board with codifying DACA in some way. The question is, will enough House Republicans be willing to throw their hats in with Democrats so as to create a veto-proof majority.

 

[Dr Lee]

Hopefully that's what happens....

 

[Sithborg]

I don't know, it seems popular enough with enough R Congressmen to get it done.

The issue is, of course, that Sep is already packed. And I don't see it getting on the docket this year. Which leads to it being done in an election year, which, any supporters are likely to face a Trump endorsed primary. And the GOP fears primaries far more than they do Dem challengers.

I think it can get done, but not in the 6 month timeframe Trump is giving them. And that likely, ICE will start acting before the 6 month timeframe is up.

What Trump should've done is encourage the legislature to act on it, not give them a deadline. But, since he is a racist, it was never a priority for him.

 

[DJ Kornphlake]

He gave them the deadline so that he could shift any blame off of himself for the outcome.

 

[Kelly]

I don't know, it seems popular enough with enough R Congressmen to get it done.

The issue is, of course, that Sep is already packed. And I don't see it getting on the docket this year. Which leads to it being done in an election year, which, any supporters are likely to face a Trump endorsed primary. And the GOP fears primaries far more than they do Dem challengers.

I think it can get done, but not in the 6 month timeframe Trump is giving them. And that likely, ICE will start acting before the 6 month timeframe is up.

What Trump should've done is encourage the legislature to act on it, not give them a deadline. But, since he is a racist, it was never a priority for him.

Then I can assure you that they will find that the schools, universities and churches will be a far greater foe than they ever thought they would or could be. Trump's base is not large enough by any degree.....

 

[Sithborg]

And of course Trump is having Sessions give the presser on ending DACA.

He really doesn't want to deal with those questions.

 

[Dr Lee]

Just reason 400 for 'Why Trump is a coward'

 

[TheComicbookKid]

I mean, I can't really hate on Trump for ending DACA. Republicans abdicated their responsibility to fix the immigration system and instead just stoked immigration fear when they knew full well many states depend on immigrant labor and no amount of wall or fences would do anything.

Trump's hatred of Obama is forcing them to actually take stands on issues when they don't have 'Nobama' to fall back on.

 

[squeekness]

I couldn't imagine living in the USA my entire life and then being deported for no good reason (America birth rate is plummeting, we actually need immigrants).

But evil is as evil does, to paraphrase Forrest Gump.

Nothing like being deported to a country you don't know and may not even speak the language of. Cruelty at its finest.

 

[Sithborg]

Oh, Session's speech is pissing me off.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

Can someone explain why amnesty for these immigrants is not an option when the US birth trate is plummeting?

Don't we need more people?

 

[Sithborg]

Can someone explain why amnesty for these immigrants is not an option when the US birth trate is plummeting?

Don't we need more people?

Racism.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

Aaaaand Houston won't get the money they need until Trump gets his stupid wall approved.


There's a special hell for these people.