Posted on 01/28/2020 10:17:47 PM PST by ransomnote
The nationwide injunction ploy is a loophole in the US Constitution that needs to be closed with an amendment. This is yet another reason for an Art V convention. Only SCOTUS should be able to slap a nationwide injunction on a Presidential EO until final adjudication of said claim/harm.
This a loophole in the US Constitution that progs have been exploiting for decades.
You have to make a law that says you have to follow existing law?
WOP's
Tyrants in black robes as Mark Levyn says
Secret Agent Man wrote:
“Also we need to get smaller inferior courts under control.
a district judge does not have the power to create a narionwide ban/stay on ANY piece of law. district judges have jurisdicition FOR ONLY THEIR DISTRICT. The appelates only have jurisdiction in their own circuits, not any other circuits.
WE NEED TO STOP RECOGNIZING these unconstitutional bans. they are not nationwide and these smaller courts do not have nationwide authority. They were never given nationwide authority.”
They also need to undo the nationwide bans already enacted by those district courts.
Mid-eighties, my US citizen half brother & his Aussie-born wife & kids had to be sponsored by my parents when my brother wanted to return to the US.
He had never given up his US citizenship.
They had to help him with his business and anything else financial, so he and family wouldn’t become a public charge.
Yep - my Dad’s Dad got off Ellis Island, settled in Wilksbarre, PA, got a bicycle and peddled bug and tar remover.
Never had much money but they eked it out and the kids all became solid middle class citizens with a couple in WWII and Korea to boot.
The standards used at Ellis Island were designed to keep freeloaders and diseases out of the country. It worked.
Glad to see someone realize that and go back to it.
There was another “Ellis” island, Galveston Texas. Lots of immigrants from southern and eastern Europe came through there. Anyone with a disease was sent to Quarantine island, now knows as Pelican Island. That was in the 1920’s.
Would anyone know how this affects refugees and policies towards them?
The Supreme Court could issue a court order that limits the power of the district judges to apply only in thier districts and reserve the right for a national ruling to be at the appelate court level and be limited to a minimum of a 3 judge panel before implementation.
Every spouse of an immigrant has to do the same, today.
Only illegals get everything free, and it is against the law.
Those exist TODAY!
They are ignored by illegals and those who help them. It is illegal.
back in the eighties, I became close friends with and English girl who was here to manage a property owned by Lord Palumbo, she was monitored very closely by INS to make sure she wasn’t “taking a job from an American”, she had more problems than any illegal does today. The only US asset she drew on was driving on our roads, but our government treated her like a criminal.
longstanding Federal law that newcomers to this country must be financially self-sufficient and not a “public charge” on our country and its citizens.
Not so fast. It takes 67 senate votes for removal. And federal judges don't run for reelection.
Gorsuch and Thomas but not Roberts, who voted with the leftist judges last month against Trump's asylum policy. Roberts voted with the conservatives to support Trump's "public charge" policy this time (see article).
Exactly how it worked for my granddad Nick. I think their sponsor became responsible for them financially if they became destitute.
if you get a tourist visa for Australia they want to know your financial means...that was some three decades ago
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.