Trump moves to eliminate nearly all asylum claims at U.S. southern border

[Grim17]

Re: Trump administration erects another barrier to immigrants seeking U.S. asylum

Does that standard apply to a democratic president also? When they believe something needs to be done they can just violate federal law?

I'm not going to play that game... Sorry...

I'm speaking to this specific case and that's it.

.

 

[BlueTex]

Re: Trump administration erects another barrier to immigrants seeking U.S. asylum

I'm not going to play that game... Sorry...

I'm speaking to this specific case and that's it.

.

No worries, the courts will deal with this specific case quickly and easily.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Grim17]

Re: Trump administration erects another barrier to immigrants seeking U.S. asylum

No worries, the courts will deal with this specific case quickly and easily.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I take it then that you oppose what Trump did? If that's the case, then why do you oppose his actions?

Do you believe that there's a crisis at the border?

Do you agree that immigrants exploiting our asylum laws is a serious problem in need of an immediate solution?

.

 

[calamity]

Re: Trump administration erects another barrier to immigrants seeking U.S. asylum

From Reuters

Trump administration erects another barrier to immigrants seeking U.S. asylum
​

NEW YORK/WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Trump administration on Monday unveiled a new rule to bar almost all immigrants from applying for asylum at the southern border, requiring them to first pursue safe haven in a third country through which they had traveled on the way to the United States.

The Department of Homeland Security, in a statement issued with the Department of Justice, said the rule would set a “new bar” for immigrants “by placing further restrictions or limitations on eligibility for aliens who seek asylum in the United States.”

The American Civil Liberties Union called the new rule “patently unlawful” and vowed to file a lawsuit against it, while a host of experts also questioned its legality.

“The interim regulation violates the clear language of the law in several respects,” Stephen Legomsky, a former chief counsel of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, told Reuters in an email.

COMMENT:-

Well, so much for international law, American law, and "The Rule of Law".

On the other hand, Mr. Trump's "base" will eat this up like Joey Chestnut eats hot dogs and that's all that counts as far as Mr. Trump is concerned.

PS - Expect the number of Republican Senators who speak out against this new order (and the consequential derogation of Congress' treaty approval power) to roughly equal the number of people you can comfortably seat in a "bargain airline" economy class international flight.
​

Meanwhile the welcome mat was laid down from here to Norway, with tax incentives galore for anyone proving they are pure white.

 

[calamity]

Re: Trump administration erects another barrier to immigrants seeking U.S. asylum

I take it then that you oppose what Trump did? If that's the case, then why do you oppose his actions?

Do you believe that there's a crisis at the border?

Do you agree that immigrants exploiting our asylum laws is a serious problem in need of an immediate solution?

.

The only serious problem in the USA is trump and his useful idiots. That much is obvious.

 

[ocean515]

Re: Trump administration erects another barrier to immigrants seeking U.S. asylum

From Reuters

Trump administration erects another barrier to immigrants seeking U.S. asylum
​

NEW YORK/WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Trump administration on Monday unveiled a new rule to bar almost all immigrants from applying for asylum at the southern border, requiring them to first pursue safe haven in a third country through which they had traveled on the way to the United States.

The Department of Homeland Security, in a statement issued with the Department of Justice, said the rule would set a “new bar” for immigrants “by placing further restrictions or limitations on eligibility for aliens who seek asylum in the United States.”

The American Civil Liberties Union called the new rule “patently unlawful” and vowed to file a lawsuit against it, while a host of experts also questioned its legality.

“The interim regulation violates the clear language of the law in several respects,” Stephen Legomsky, a former chief counsel of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, told Reuters in an email.

COMMENT:-

Well, so much for international law, American law, and "The Rule of Law".

On the other hand, Mr. Trump's "base" will eat this up like Joey Chestnut eats hot dogs and that's all that counts as far as Mr. Trump is concerned.

PS - Expect the number of Republican Senators who speak out against this new order (and the consequential derogation of Congress' treaty approval power) to roughly equal the number of people you can comfortably seat in a "bargain airline" economy class international flight.
​

Good move.

Anything to counter the invasion by foreign nationals the New Democratic Party has helped to create.

Get this blitzkrieg the left created slowed, and maybe the real asylum seekers will be able to get the help they need and deserve.

 

[calamity]

Re: Trump administration erects another barrier to immigrants seeking U.S. asylum

Does that standard apply to a democratic president also? When they believe something needs to be done they can just violate federal law?

CNN is not “far left.” So there is that. Fail.

 

[Grim17]

Re: Trump administration erects another barrier to immigrants seeking U.S. asylum

The only serious problem in the USA is trump and his useful idiots. That much is obvious.

So there is no problem huh?

I'm sorry, but "orange man bad" is not a foundation for intellectual discussion, or any discussion at all for that matter.

.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Re: Trump administration erects another barrier to immigrants seeking U.S. asylum

Does that standard apply to a democratic president also? When they believe something needs to be done they can just violate federal law?

Yep, see DACA/DAPA.

 

[apdst]

Sure, I'll do your homework..

(A) Safe third country
Paragraph (1) shall not apply to an alien if the Attorney General determines that the alien may be removed, pursuant to a bilateral or multilateral agreement, to a country (other than the country of the alien’s nationality or, in the case of an alien having no nationality, the country of the alien’s last habitual residence) in which the alien’s life or freedom would not be threatened on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion, and where the alien would have access to a full and fair procedure for determining a claim to asylum or equivalent temporary protection, unless the Attorney General finds that it is in the public interest for the alien to receive asylum in the United States.

8 U.S. Code SS 1158 - Asylum | U.S. Code | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute

That proves you wrong. You know that, right?

 

[TheParser]

Re: Trump administration erects another barrier to immigrants seeking U.S. asylum

Thanks for my first chuckle of the day.

Like all of his other moves to curb unauthorized immigration, this one will also fail.

All of his attempts to get control of the border have been nothing burgers.

The powers that be in this country (the Dems, some Republican entrepreneurs, the media, academia, and the activists) want open borders, and open borders they shall have.


President Trump, whom I voted for and would do so again, would be much happier going back to his business, where his word is law.

 

[apdst]

Odd that there are numerous supreme court cases addressing exactly that... Why do you think that is?

Link?

 

[ttwtt78640]

Re: Trump administration erects another barrier to immigrants seeking U.S. asylum

I take it then that you oppose what Trump did? If that's the case, then why do you oppose his actions?

Do you believe that there's a crisis at the border?

Do you agree that immigrants exploiting our asylum laws is a serious problem in need of an immediate solution?

.

Yes, but that does not convey 'law making' power to the POTUS.

 

[BlueTex]

That proves you wrong. You know that, right?

Sure, sure.. explain how it proves me wrong..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[j-mac]

Re: Trump administration erects another barrier to immigrants seeking U.S. asylum

From Reuters

Trump administration erects another barrier to immigrants seeking U.S. asylum
​

NEW YORK/WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Trump administration on Monday unveiled a new rule to bar almost all immigrants from applying for asylum at the southern border, requiring them to first pursue safe haven in a third country through which they had traveled on the way to the United States.

The Department of Homeland Security, in a statement issued with the Department of Justice, said the rule would set a “new bar” for immigrants “by placing further restrictions or limitations on eligibility for aliens who seek asylum in the United States.”

The American Civil Liberties Union called the new rule “patently unlawful” and vowed to file a lawsuit against it, while a host of experts also questioned its legality.

“The interim regulation violates the clear language of the law in several respects,” Stephen Legomsky, a former chief counsel of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, told Reuters in an email.

COMMENT:-

Well, so much for international law, American law, and "The Rule of Law".

On the other hand, Mr. Trump's "base" will eat this up like Joey Chestnut eats hot dogs and that's all that counts as far as Mr. Trump is concerned.

PS - Expect the number of Republican Senators who speak out against this new order (and the consequential derogation of Congress' treaty approval power) to roughly equal the number of people you can comfortably seat in a "bargain airline" economy class international flight.
​

Is there such a thing as "seeking better economic conditions" asylum eligible?

Sent from my SM-T587P using Tapatalk

 

[apdst]

Sure, sure.. explain how it proves me wrong..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It says the AG can designate a safe third country.

 

[MrWonka]

Whats todays excuse for the democrat controlled house not passing legislative reforms?

That the reforms don't solve the original problem and in fact make the problem worse while wasting billions of dollars.

 

[BlueTex]

It says the AG can designate a safe third country.

LOL... which country have we signed a bilateral or multilateral safe third country agreement with?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[apdst]

LOL... which country have we signed a bilateral or multilateral safe third country agreement with?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The paragraph you posted is the exception to the law.

 

[BlueTex]

The paragraph you posted is the exception to the law.

You didn’t answer the question. Which countries has the US signed third safe country agreements?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Dragonlady]

At the willingness of its sovereign members...

I was responding to a post that said that the EU countries had borders, and separate criteria for entry. I was pointing out that it did not, and that the EU has open borders for citizens of member nations. It's one of the BREXIT sticking points - what to do about the Brits currently living and/or working in other EU countries.

 

[trixare4kids]

Trump’s ‘blatantly illegal’ immigration rules end asylum protections | US news | The Guardian

You were saying?

Nice try, but no.
Your source doesn't prove that Trump said, "seeking asylum is not legal."

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Re: Trump administration erects another barrier to immigrants seeking U.S. asylum

Your talking about a Safe Third Country Agreement with Mexico. Like we have had with Canada for a long time.

You wouldn't have said that if you had actually read the article.

So it is already current law, and the power was given to the AG and the President to make an agreement with a country if they deem them safe.

You are only partially correct because, in this case there is no "agreement" what there is is an arbitrary Presidential Fiat.

So again this is the rule of law.

Except, of course, when it isn't.

Plus international law applying to refugees currently states a refugee or someone wanting asylum should apply for asylum at the first safe country they enter, this would be Mexico for all those countries south of Mexico.

The law says that they "should" not that they "must" and the law is rather sketchy on exactly what a "safe country" is AND the decision as to whether they have reached a "safe country" is pretty much left up to the individual that is looking for that "safety".

PS - What you are looking to establish is a system whereby a person seeking refugee/asylee status can only cross one border in their search for safety - REGARDLESS of whether crossing that border actually increases their safety.

PPS - What you are ACTUALLY looking to establish is a system whereby (for all practical purposes) no person is allowed to seek refugee/asylee status in the United States of America (certain historical exceptions in favour of "White Christians" will, of course, be maintained REGARDLESS of the politics and past behaviour of any "White Christian" that the US government thinks will be "useful").

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Re: Trump administration erects another barrier to immigrants seeking U.S. asylum

I'm not going to play that game... Sorry...

I'm speaking to this specific case and that's it.

.

If I agree that it is OK for a "Republican" (whatever that means) President to ignore the laws of the United States of America, will you agree that it is OK for a "Democrat" (whatever that means) President to ignore the laws of the United States of America?

Or are you going to stick with the currently operative, latest version of the officially "Team Trump" endorsed, White House approved, position that

It is quite proper for the President of the United States of America to ignore the laws of the United States of America PROVIDED that that President is a "Republican President" but any "Democrat President" who is even hinted at as having in the slightest degree come close to violating ANY law of the United States of America should be immediately impeached and thrown out of office (and so should the people next in the line of presidential succession until a Republican is reached.".
​

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Re: Trump administration erects another barrier to immigrants seeking U.S. asylum

I take it then that you oppose what Trump did? If that's the case, then why do you oppose his actions?

Does "Because his actions violate the laws of the United States of America." have the slightest meaning to you?

Do you believe that there's a crisis at the border?

There is NOW.

Do you agree that immigrants exploiting our asylum laws is a serious problem in need of an immediate solution?

If you don't like the laws, then there are designated legal processes whereby the laws can be changed to ones that you do agree with.

Possibly your elected representatives in the House and Senate should get off their butts and actually do what they are being paid to do.

On the other hand, I do suppose that that could be accomplished simply by passing legislation authorizing the President to rule by degree (which would have the added advantage of freeing all of those Senators and Representatives to do what is REALLY important [which is to raise money for their re-election campaign expenses {such as luxury hotels, expensive cars, redecorating their homes, and hiring anyone who is even remotely related to them for jobs with no actual duties but high salaries}]).