Posted on 11/23/2018 10:38:08 AM PST by Liberty7732
An Obama appointed federal judge ordered the Trump administration to resume accepting asylum claims from migrants regardless of the point of entry and how the entry occurred — in direction contradiction to both the immigration law and to the Supreme Court’s ruling this year.
In dismissing the administration’s new policy requiring that only asylum applicants who entered the country through designated points of entry be processed, Judge Jon S. Tigar of the United States District Court in San Francisco held that the Trump Administration was essentially rewriting immigration law.
Advocates against President Trump successfully argued before the judge that immigration law required people fleeing persecution to be allowed to seek safety in the United States regardless of how they arrived in the country.
There’s only one problem with the advocacy groups’ arguments and with the judges ruling; the language within the Immigration and Naturalization Act (INA) itself. The fact is that Congress foresaw the possibility of explosive situations like the one in Central America.
For that reason, 8 U.S.C. §1182(f) of the INA reads, in part, “Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate” [emphasis added.]
That is exactly what the President did.
What Judge Tygar purposely ignores is that Section 1182(f) of the INA actually gives the President the authority to respond to issues such as the one developing in Central America in whatever manner he feels appropriate. Consequently, the President’s proclamation is completely consistent with the powers afforded to him by Congress.
To make matters even dicier for Judge Tigar, the Supreme Court has already weighed in on the issue. In Trump v. Hawaii, the Supreme Court decided on June 26, 2018, that the President was granted “broad discretion” in dealing with aliens attempting to enter the country.
So, where are we in this situation?
Unfortunately for our nation’s security, the court’s ruling essentially amounts to an invitation to all foreign nationals attempting to gain illegal entry into the United States to pursue their entry at all possible costs. The urgency of the matter, particularly in light of the growing wave of migrants accumulating south of the board, makes affirmative action by the White House a must.
First, it is imperative that the President undertake the appellate process with all possible haste. The President must seek emergency judicial review to the Ninth Circuit. Of course, the Ninth Circuit with its consistent liberal agenda will uphold the lower court’s ruling.
The President must then rapidly proceed to the Supreme Court where this case will undoubtedly be overruled.
“must then rapidly proceed to the Supreme Court “
No, he should ignore the stay until it can be proven otherwise illegal in court, which it won’t.
When are these feces judges going to be thrown out?
I am sometimes stunned at judicial rulings. And this is one such time.
We just recently saw the Supreme Court uphold the travel ban instituted by Trump. That case was based on the laws which give the president latitude in his executive authority, to ban the entry of aliens into the US.
So how can this liberal judge, ignoring that precedent set just months ago by a superior court, issue such an injunction?
Also, in the travel ban case, Clarence Thomas noted that we may need to investigate the use of these pre-emptive nationwide injuctions issued by a single federal judge.
Thomas noted that while the plaintiffs had the right to file lawsuits, that the policy should be implemented and in effect pending the results of court action, NOT to have a situation where any executive action is blocked by a single court, until it winds its way to the Supreme Court for final resolution.
That makes sense to me. The executive order of the president should be enforced and in effect while leftists sue, rather than them being able to simply block actions for indefinite time periods pending the Supreme Court eventually hearing the case.
Judge Tiger undoubtedly got his high fives from his liberal friends, but legally, this dude has less legal knowledge than I do.
With Roberts mad at Trump it’s going to get worst
These lawless rulings have to be ignored.
To appeal them is to imply that the Judicial Branch is supreme over all others and can legislate and seize Executive Branch powers at will.
I am increasingly disappointed by how our “great fighter” Donald Trump accepts and enables all this Judicial overreach.
Why can’t the president’s lawyers push this away?
They get stumped every single time by the same kind of Judges who appear to be writing new laws!
Things like this are why I hope the president does not seriously challenge someone like Zuckerberg of Facebook.
The Whitehouse Lawyers are not likely to be up to it.
They would be steamrolled.
Not savvy enough to anticipate unnecessary roadblocks of dubious legality. Hopefully, this will change over the next two years.
The Democrat infiltration of the judiciary is not just about politics.
It is to allow the leaders of the Democrat Party to commit crimes with no fear of punishment.
“In dismissing the administration’s new policy requiring that only asylum applicants who entered the country through designated points of entry be processed, Judge Jon S. Tigar of the United States District Court in San Francisco held that the Trump Administration was essentially rewriting immigration law.”
No. Liberal judges like this one have become the
Executive and Legislative Branches of our government.
Tell them to try to enforce it, and continue to do as the commander in chief has ordered
Judges are lawyers. Most DC and state-level politicians are lawyers. Most lawyers are Democrats. These are the key swamp rats that defile America.
Many courthouses need to be met right now with multitudes of patriot men with torches, pitchforks, tar, feathers and rails.
tagline
SCJ Roberts will be the wild card if this gets to the Supreme Court in a month or two. BUT if Justice GinzzBorg is still sidelined then puke Roberts becomes less dangerous. Unless he votes with the three remaining libs on the Supreme court, making a 4-4 tie, thus letting the 9th's decision on asylum stand.
...in [direct] contradiction to both the immigration law and to the Supreme Court's ruling this year.
I'm not 100% sure that will be the outcome.
The rest of the 9th Circus knows what the Supreme court said. They might not want to be smacked down again.
Moreover, the more they decide things politically, the more pressure on the Senate to break them up.
Given the wide geographical area represented, and the growth in the population since the boundaries were set, that would be a move long needed.
So this lower court Tigar guy has declared both current law and the prior SCOTUS ruling to be unconstitutional. Got it.
“Tell them to try to enforce it, and continue to do as the commander in chief has ordered”
I this is precisely what they want President Trump to do. They are provoking that type of response with the intent to use that reaction to damage him and his administration. That would create a certain “constitutional crisis” with the Executive and Judicial branches in opposition.
It would be great to have such a confrontation between the branches to more clearly delineate the boundaries between the branches.
This why the Democrat gangsters were fighting tooth and nail to keep Kavanaugh off the Supreme court. And to keep that 9th seat vacant forever. Because the supreme court can reverse these lower court Obama and Clinton judges.
Clarence Thomas needs to write this decision and include language barring future interference from the black robe tyrants at federal state or local level.
“...in [direct] contradiction to both the immigration law and to the Supreme Court’s ruling this year.”
I know, right. That this ‘judge’ could even imagine such a ruling is a blatant tell of his political agency.
If he is not barred from law within 6 months...
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.