• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Migrants traveling to US sue Trump, government; claim violation of constitutional rights

MrWonka said:
Which it won't do, but that is irrelevant since the vast majority of illegal immigration doesn't happen that way.
Click to expand...

A wall stops 50% of the illegal immigrants. That's pretty substantial. And it also targets the most trouble some of the illegal alien population (those that havnt gone threw a documented process). Visa overstays have at least been veted once before. A wall targets the southern border illegal crossers.
 
MrWonka said:
Federal law would require us to let them in while their case was pending.
Click to expand...

Wrong.

They wait in Mexico for their interview to be scheduled.

This came up with the last caravan......and many refused to wait in Mexico and entered illegally.
 
trouble13 said:
Those are your opinions as others have a different opinion.
Click to expand...
Nope. Those are facts. Immigration, even illegal immigration is a net positive to the country overall. They actually create jobs, fill jobs that are hard to fill, increase GDP, and pay taxes.

The only way you could say keeping them out was "valuable" to our country is if you're a blatant racist in which case that's not an opinion that's a fallacy.

trouble13 said:
That other opinion won last election. They should get their wall.
Click to expand...

Republicans have lost the popular vote in 6 out of the last 7 presidential elections including the one in 2016. When President Obama won both the popular vote and electoral college in each of his elections Republicans filibustered everything that his supporters wanted so the Trumpsters can go **** themselves this time too.
 
jdog21 said:
A wall stops 50% of the illegal immigrants.
Click to expand...
False. 75% of illegal immigrants don't even cross the border illegally in the first place. They arrive on legal visas and then they overstay them. A wall will stop 0% of them. So at best your wall could only stop 50% of the rest which amounts to 12.5% of the total number of undocumented immigrants.
 
MrWonka said:
Federal law would require us to let them in while their case was pending.
Click to expand...
Can you site the law that requires us to let them in?
 
MrMike said:
Great point!

That would be a perfect reaction (of protest) to it!
Click to expand...

WTF are you people talking about? Seriously? Do really just not understand what Due Process is at all?
 
Parrish said:
More




By Edmund DeMarche, Amy Lieu | Fox News




A dozen migrants traveling by foot from Honduras to the U.S. to seek asylum filed a class-action lawsuit Thursday against President Trump, the Department of Homeland Security and others, claiming a violation of their due process under the Fifth Amendment.
The Fifth Amendment states that, "no person… shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law."

A recent PBS report cited former Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, who ruled in 1993 case that "it is well established that the Fifth Amendment entitles aliens to due process of law in a deportation proceeding."
Twelve Honduran nationals, including six children, are listed as plaintiffs in the lawsuit. The suit, which was filed Thursday in the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., said it is widely known that Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador are “undergoing a well-documented human rights crisis.” The lawsuit also claims that the plaintiffs’ right to the Administrative Procedures Act and the Declaratory Judgement Act were being infringed upon.
Click to expand...

Problem here is that they need to be on American soil for this suit to go ahead. Until they are in America and are picked up by immigration, they have no standing to pursue this case.
 
MrWonka said:
Trump has openly said that when they get here they will be met with military force and not allowed to enter. If our military opens fire on unarmed people(rocks don't count) seeking asylum that is a war crime. They have the right to request asylum, and in order to be deported, they would have the right to due process.
Click to expand...

You do realize they have a right to request asylum by going to the US consulate in Mexico. No need to come to the border for that.

So what is your solution?
 
jdog21 said:
A wall stops 50% of the illegal immigrants. That's pretty substantial. And it also targets the most trouble some of the illegal alien population (those that havnt gone threw a documented process). Visa overstays have at least been veted once before. A wall targets the southern border illegal crossers.
Click to expand...

It depends on just what is meant by "the wall," too.

Trump's "Wall" has always been a metaphor.

It means not just the physical walls and fences, but the high tech robotics and surveillance, the increased Border Patrol, the Military and the consequences for attempting to cross.

It means increased pain for those who come in for "visits" and stay illegally.

The wall is both physical and psychological and it's getting better every day.
 
Vox said:
Next they'll sue for the right to throw rocks at our troops without getting shot.

:D
Click to expand...

If Mexico allows them to throw rocks from their territory, that's something the Trump admin needs to take up with the gov. of Mexico.

I'm not sure what standing those that are allowed to apply for asylum are granted (if any), but people standing at the border on Mexican soil have no more standing in US courts than some random guy in Mexico City.

(I realize that your post was a joke.;))
 
<alt>doxygen said:
If Mexico allows them to throw rocks from their territory, that's something the Trump admin needs to take up with the gov. of Mexico.

I'm not sure what standing those that are allowed to apply for asylum are granted (if any), but people standing at the border on Mexican soil have no more standing in US courts than some random guy in Mexico City.

(I realize that your post was a joke.;))
Click to expand...

Trump will just tell Mejico that we're shooting the rock throwers.

We'll send a compensation of one American Dollar per rock thrower funeral to compensate Mejico.

If Mejico doesn't like it they can declare war on us.......

How did that go last time?
 
MrWonka said:
False. 75% of illegal immigrants don't even cross the border illegally in the first place. They arrive on legal visas and then they overstay them. A wall will stop 0% of them. So at best your wall could only stop 50% of the rest which amounts to 12.5% of the total number of undocumented immigrants.
Click to expand...

approximately 41% of undocumented immigrants based on the current survey data approach are visa overstayers
Click to expand...
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0201193

Says here you are wrong.
 
Vox said:
Trump will just tell Mejico that we're shooting the rock throwers.

We'll send a compensation of one American Dollar per rock thrower funeral to compensate Mejico.

If Mejico doesn't like it they can declare war on us.......

How did that go last time?
Click to expand...

Actually, aren't they technically in Mexico illegally?
 
Yet again, a thread full of buffoons following the lead of a dishonest OP spout their usual idiocies. "Deeerrp constitution no apply to illegals!" is not an intelligent response to this thread.

The Fox article actually links to the federal complaint (that launches the suit), and so you need to read that if you want to know what they're saying.
 
Vox said:
Odd.......because angry white men are the ones who shed their blood fighting to establish this country and build it and keep it free.

No Borowitz types......they were busy whining and crying and making fun of the people who died to protect their right to whine.

Borowitz is getting boring. He seems to be running out of comedy inspiration.
Click to expand...

And none of those angry white men had "Trump" as a surname. Somehow, all of my friend's dads served in either WWII or Korea. Trump's dad served in neither, just like corporal bone spurs never served. Yet, he is the most militant chicken-hawk.
 
jdog21 said:
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0201193

Says here you are wrong.
Click to expand...

MrWonka said:
False. 75% of illegal immigrants don't even cross the border illegally in the first place. They arrive on legal visas and then they overstay them. A wall will stop 0% of them. So at best your wall could only stop 50% of the rest which amounts to 12.5% of the total number of undocumented immigrants.
Click to expand...

MrWonka said:
Given that 75% of undocumented immigrants come here legal visas and simply overstay them your stupid wall can't be more than 25% effective right off the bat. That's before you start considering the reality that Ladders exist. Tunnels can be dug. Boats can go around. Trucks with secret compartments cross the border every day.
Click to expand...

Just for good measure so when you chime in you can at least you facts, here is another done by what many consider to be a liberal leaning immigration studies organization.
DHS Overestimates Visa Overstays for 2016; Overstay Population Growth Near Zero During the Year - The Center for Migration Studies of New York (CMS)
while overstays account for a large percentage of the newly undocumented, they represent less than half (44 percent) of the overall undocumented population, and they are less likely than illegal border crossers to be long-term residents
Click to expand...
 
MrWonka said:
Then he would be the one charged with a War crime.
Click to expand...

Interesting argument... would that mean the caravan can be counted as an invading army, then?
 
trouble13 said:
More proof that we NEED a wall.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I467 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Pssst.


Shhhhhh, don't tell anyone, but Mexico has ladder technology. I've seen one myself, a real beauty, extends to 40 feet.


EDIT: Oh ****, my bad. I forgot to mention, $40 ladders can be used to go over walls, even ones that cost tens of billions of dollars. Trust me on this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom