[Pearls Before Swine]

How can the reversal of a policy that was unconstitutional in its enactment be unconstitutional in its reversal?

Obama understood that it was better to ask forgiveness than permission. Well, better in the sense of more effective here, not “better” in some moral or legal sense.

[DoughtyOne]

I thought the SCOTUS had already ruled on this.

DACA was not protected.

This is the third or fourth go-round on this.

Didn’t the Hawaiian judge ruled against. Then there was another. I believe the SCOTUS ruled on it once, and then refused to review.

It’s over, isn’t it?

[Windflier]

The President has it within his statutory and constitutional authority to suspend all grants of asylum, should he choose to do so. This was reaffirmed by the SCOTUS in June of this year, in the case, Trump v. Hawaii, No. 17-965 in the Supreme Court of the United States.

“8USC 1182(f) and 1185(a) By its terms, §1182(f) exudes deference to the President in every clause. It entrusts to the President the decisions whether and when to suspend entry, whose entry to suspend, for how long, and on what conditions. It thus vests the President with “ample power” to impose entry restrictions in addition to those elsewhere enumerated in the INA.”

[ataDude]

What did you expect from 9th Circuit? (It IS the most overturned court in the US).