DACA

[wmw999 2,593]

Yes, I think that Obama starting the ball rolling by signing the DACA action (or really lack thereof), and then when Trump says that he's terminating something that most people seem to think prioritizes productive people, and turning it over to Congress, that's about right. It was their job in the first place, the issues just been sort of forced now.

And since Obama increased the deportations of criminals, its disingenuous to say he stopped enforcing immigration law.

But hey, as long as there is spin and political hay, let's sling some shit.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[kallend 2,156]

Skwrl

... which is why I provided legal reasoning for my position. See how it works?

I actually don't support DACA, although I do think it was Constitutional.

However, I do support cogent legal reasoning, however, which RushMC's arguments are short on.

Hey Jeff, anyone would think you are a lawyer........

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 2,156]

airdvr

*********Lol, you answer a question with a statement and then ask the other person to refute the statement that didn't answer the question.

Lawyers on both sides said this would be overturned.

kallend does not care because laws and constitutional limitations only apply to Repuplicans

Well, no. Not really. https://pennstatelaw.psu.edu/sites/default/files/documents/pdfs/Immigrants/LawProfLetterDACAFinal8.13.pdf

I've yet to read an equivalently well researched analysis that concludes that it is unconstitutional. If you guys have one, I'm eager to read it.

Pro-tip: things aren't "unconstitutional" because you don't like them.

And vice versa.

Can you cite a valid ruling from any federal court which ruled DACA unConstitutional?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[airdvr 210]

Just look up DAPA. In effect the same XO. Didn't make it past the 5th circuit.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[kallend 2,156]

airdvr

Just look up DAPA. In effect the same XO. Didn't make it past the 5th circuit.

Try again:

Can you cite a valid ruling from any federal court which ruled DACA unConstitutional?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[airdvr 210]

kallend

***Just look up DAPA. In effect the same XO. Didn't make it past the 5th circuit.

Try again:

Can you cite a valid ruling from any federal court which ruled DACA unConstitutional?

Not yet.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[kallend 2,156]

airdvr

******Just look up DAPA. In effect the same XO. Didn't make it past the 5th circuit.

Try again:

Can you cite a valid ruling from any federal court which ruled DACA unConstitutional?

Not yet.

Translation - NO.

Until overturned after judicial review an executive order has a presumption of constitutionality.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[airdvr 210]

kallend

*********Just look up DAPA. In effect the same XO. Didn't make it past the 5th circuit.

Try again:

Can you cite a valid ruling from any federal court which ruled DACA unConstitutional?

Not yet.

Translation - NO.

Until overturned after judicial review an executive order has a presumption of constitutionality.

Absolutely agree John however, if you look at DAPA it's essentially the same thing as DACA except it was designed for the parents.

I'm torn on this one. After watching some of the stories on the people who might be uprooted I'm inclined to scale it back some. Maybe only apply it to folks who arrived after the XO. Give the ones already here a path to citizenship. I certainly don't want to see people who've been here since the middle 80's booted out.

My concern is once again we are offering an enticement to illegals who haven't yet arrived. Their greatest hope is to gain citizenship. We need to revise our immigration laws to make it easier to come here. But until we secure the borders its a moot point.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[kallend 2,156]

airdvr

************Just look up DAPA. In effect the same XO. Didn't make it past the 5th circuit.

Try again:

Can you cite a valid ruling from any federal court which ruled DACA unConstitutional?

Not yet.

Translation - NO.

Until overturned after judicial review an executive order has a presumption of constitutionality.

Absolutely agree John however, if you look at DAPA it's essentially the same thing as DACA e

Good. Now all except rushmc are agreed that DACA is/was Constitutional. And his opinions are generally only good for entertainment value anyway.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[JerryBaumchen 1,469]

Hi Iago,

Quote

I'm no fan of pres BHO

With the exception of this, I agree with your post.

I believe that we should & must control our borders. I also believe that any so called 'wall' is not the way to go. However, every country must have the authority to determine just who they want to live within their countries; there is nothing new in this.

I feel sorry for young people who were brought here by parents ( or others ) when they were not in control of what was going on. These people have lived here most of their lives & we should make provisions for them. *

But, lets do our best to prevent this from continuing into the future.

The real question will be just what the legislation that ( hopefully ) gets passed will look like.

Jerry Baumchen

* For those have become serious criminals, lets just get rid of them.

[billvon 3,121]

Awesome tweet from Trump today:

"Does anybody really want to throw out good, educated and accomplished young people who have jobs, some serving in the military?"

Answer - yes, yes you do. Don't forget - they are rapists and criminals.

[ryoder 1,590]

Awesome tweet from Ann Coulter today: https://twitter.com/AnnCoulter/status/908285561194078208

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[rushmc 23]

billvon

Awesome tweet from Trump today:

"Does anybody really want to throw out good, educated and accomplished young people who have jobs, some serving in the military?"

Answer - yes, yes you do. Don't forget - they are rapists and criminals.

Actually, you are conflating two different groups about whom he has tweeted about......

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Go on, explain.

[billvon 3,121]

>Actually, you are conflating two different groups about whom he has tweeted
>about......

True. On the one side you have illegal immigrants, and on the other side you have illegal immigrants. Two very different groups.

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

billvon

>Actually, you are conflating two different groups about whom he has tweeted
>about......

True. On the one side you have illegal immigrants, and on the other side you have illegal immigrants. Two very different groups.

Well, on the one side, you have the "Dreamers" who came to the US as kids, brought by their parents. They had no choice. They have (used to anyway)to go through an application process and demonstrate that they would be an asset to the country. Many are going to college, many are in the military.

On the other side, you have Trump's "Bad Hombres". They came to deal drugs, rape and pillage.

Kinda funny that Obama made an effort to welcome the first group and deport the second.

And Trump decided that was a bad idea. Illegal. Unconstitutional.

And deportations are down.

Go figure.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[fasted3 0]

airdvr

Surprised you guys aren't losing your collective minds over this.

First, they came for the dreamers, and I did nothing; I was not a dreamer.

Yeah, my head is exploding. I'd rather deport trump supporters.

But what do I know?

[winsor 236]

fasted3

***Surprised you guys aren't losing your collective minds over this.

First, they came for the dreamers, and I did nothing; I was not a dreamer.

Yeah, my head is exploding. I'd rather deport trump supporters.

Give me a break. Sending people back to their place of origin when they have no legal right to be here is hardly equivalent to sending people to Dachau.

If you're in Mexico without citizenship or visa, you get the boot.

Same goes for Argentina.

Same goes for Turkey,

Etc.

The folks who came to Ellis Island and did not pass screening got sent back.

The endless supply of people coming from locales where fecundity outstrips resources is not our problem. If anything, it is incumbent upon us to take heed of how bad things get if population gets past the tipping point, since we are by no means immune.

We should thus not reward people who bypass channels to be here.

Also we should not reward people who have offspring they cannot afford. If you can't feed 'em, don't breed 'em.

Reversible sterilization as a requirement for public assistance would help. If you can't afford the procedure for reversal, you can't afford kids. If your right to breed is more important than the support, either do without or go somewhere you can have your cake and eat it too.

We're in debt up to our eyeballs, and in no position to be the sugar daddy of the world.


BSBD,

Winsor

[billvon 3,121]

>Sending people back to their place of origin when they have no legal right to
>be here is hardly equivalent to sending people to Dachau.

Sending an American woman to Saudi Arabia might be pretty bad. She might forget and uncover her head, or drive. And then she'd be in prison.

How would you feel about being told you were being sent to China forever, due to an issue you never knew about until you saw some paperwork from decades prior? Or losing your pilot's license because of something your mother did?

>We're in debt up to our eyeballs, and in no position to be the sugar daddy of the
>world.

That is an excellent point. And the _last_ thing we need to be doing is deporting hardworking taxpayers.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

winsor

******Surprised you guys aren't losing your collective minds over this.

First, they came for the dreamers, and I did nothing; I was not a dreamer.

Yeah, my head is exploding. I'd rather deport trump supporters.

Give me a break. Sending people back to their place of origin when they have no legal right to be here is hardly equivalent to sending people to Dachau.

If you're in Mexico without citizenship or visa, you get the boot.

Same goes for Argentina.

Same goes for Turkey,

Etc.

The folks who came to Ellis Island and did not pass screening got sent back.

The endless supply of people coming from locales where fecundity outstrips resources is not our problem. If anything, it is incumbent upon us to take heed of how bad things get if population gets past the tipping point, since we are by no means immune.

We should thus not reward people who bypass channels to be here.

Also we should not reward people who have offspring they cannot afford. If you can't feed 'em, don't breed 'em.

Reversible sterilization as a requirement for public assistance would help. If you can't afford the procedure for reversal, you can't afford kids. If your right to breed is more important than the support, either do without or go somewhere you can have your cake and eat it too.

We're in debt up to our eyeballs, and in no position to be the sugar daddy of the world.


BSBD,

Winsor

Exterminating Jews would free up a lot of housing in New York and would quickly solve any homelessness in the area.

Plus, why keep people in the US who constantly want to belong to a different country.

[winsor 236]

SkyDekker

Exterminating Jews would free up a lot of housing in New York and would quickly solve any homelessness in the area.

Plus, why keep people in the US who constantly want to belong to a different country.

Hey, it worked for Germany.

In 1923 12% of German population was Jewish. The economy was in shambles and some 600,000+ people (largely Christian) were to die of starvation and starvation related causes.

A few eggs got broken, but fast forward to today.

The Jewish population in Germany rounds off to 0%. Germany is an economic powerhouse, and there is no 'low income housing' because there is no low income. Muslims constitute some 14% of the population, but they are generally Gastarbeiters who do the jobs that are beneath Germans.

So I guess you're right, if it worked there it could work here. I'll run it by my Rabbi.


BSBD,

Winsor