My opinion is that that has been the goal of an influential part of the GOP for some time: the "cut it to the bone" or "make it small enough to drown in a bathtub" thinking isn't new.
I fully support citizenship for dreamers with a few caveats of my own about the details of any law that gives it more permanency than an EO.
But, the Supremes did not uphold DACA. That is a misleading assertion. They simply ruled that the first Trump administration did not follow the rules for changing a rule.
"We do not decide whether DACA or its rescission are sound policies," Roberts wrote. "The wisdom of those decisions is none of our concern. Here we address only whether the Administration complied with the procedural requirements in the law that insist on 'a reasoned explanation for its action.' "
Curtis, you’re right. And that illustrates 2 of my points: 1- that Roberts looks to protect the institutions and processes underpinning our government, and 2- that Trump ignores all processes and institutions unless he compelled to comply. As president, he never feels compelled, especially this second term.
Trump does push the envelope. I'm sure he knows that the Constitution is the law and that the Supreme Court rules on what the Constitution means (more variable than I would prefer). I believe he is trying to push his issues to the Supremes. If they slap him down and he doesn't comply, I will join those that want him out of office.
I will bet that if Trump prevails in court, it will not be accepted by the Trump haters,
"Democrats wanted to make every illegal immigrant a citizen, in the 2010 DREAM Act"
Factually incorrect. The DREAM Act was solely focused on undocumented immigrants that had been brought to the US as children and met certain qualifications, like:
- under 16 at time of entry
- in the US for at least 5 years
- were of good moral character (aka crime free)
- had a high school diploma/GED or admitted to a college/university
- had never been ordered to be deported/expelled
- were under age of 30 at the time of the Act
Left out of your statement about AOC's articles of impeachment for Justice Thomas was the contemporary discussion about his alleged failure to disclose gifts of significant value and failure to recuse himself from cases involving the givers of said gifts.
Ok “all” was overreach, I’ll grant that. But it would have been a significant event as those children are all adults now and some of them are being deported.
I've seen no news about "dreamers" being deported. If that's true, was it because they were involved in criminal activity before being naturalized? If so, the Delayed Action part of DACA could be invoked with justification. If not, it's a mistake that should be rectified. It is possible that life in the USA is all they know. It's conceivable, but not likely, that they cannot speak their parent's native language.
Which is, in my opinion, not good. At the youngest, you've got now-21 year olds and at the oldest now-44/45 year olds that may have spent their entire lives in the USA.
They're obviously soldiers, not just gang members. Look up El Salvador terrorists, how organized they are, how they move and were trained to be tough. These aren't regular gang bangers. They were trained better than al queda. Super tough guys trained to kill, steal, and destroy our country from within.
I'm not sure that institutional breakdown isn't what Trump-Musk-MAGA are purposefully working towards.
My opinion is that that has been the goal of an influential part of the GOP for some time: the "cut it to the bone" or "make it small enough to drown in a bathtub" thinking isn't new.
The cycle in question:
1) Cut essential services -> 2) Make services harder to utilize -> 3) Claim it's broken -> 4) Justify cuts -> back to 1
I fully support citizenship for dreamers with a few caveats of my own about the details of any law that gives it more permanency than an EO.
But, the Supremes did not uphold DACA. That is a misleading assertion. They simply ruled that the first Trump administration did not follow the rules for changing a rule.
"We do not decide whether DACA or its rescission are sound policies," Roberts wrote. "The wisdom of those decisions is none of our concern. Here we address only whether the Administration complied with the procedural requirements in the law that insist on 'a reasoned explanation for its action.' "
From:
https://www.npr.org/2020/06/18/829858289/supreme-court-upholds-daca-in-blow-to-trump-administration
Curtis, you’re right. And that illustrates 2 of my points: 1- that Roberts looks to protect the institutions and processes underpinning our government, and 2- that Trump ignores all processes and institutions unless he compelled to comply. As president, he never feels compelled, especially this second term.
Trump does push the envelope. I'm sure he knows that the Constitution is the law and that the Supreme Court rules on what the Constitution means (more variable than I would prefer). I believe he is trying to push his issues to the Supremes. If they slap him down and he doesn't comply, I will join those that want him out of office.
I will bet that if Trump prevails in court, it will not be accepted by the Trump haters,
"Democrats wanted to make every illegal immigrant a citizen, in the 2010 DREAM Act"
Factually incorrect. The DREAM Act was solely focused on undocumented immigrants that had been brought to the US as children and met certain qualifications, like:
- under 16 at time of entry
- in the US for at least 5 years
- were of good moral character (aka crime free)
- had a high school diploma/GED or admitted to a college/university
- had never been ordered to be deported/expelled
- were under age of 30 at the time of the Act
Left out of your statement about AOC's articles of impeachment for Justice Thomas was the contemporary discussion about his alleged failure to disclose gifts of significant value and failure to recuse himself from cases involving the givers of said gifts.
Ok “all” was overreach, I’ll grant that. But it would have been a significant event as those children are all adults now and some of them are being deported.
I've seen no news about "dreamers" being deported. If that's true, was it because they were involved in criminal activity before being naturalized? If so, the Delayed Action part of DACA could be invoked with justification. If not, it's a mistake that should be rectified. It is possible that life in the USA is all they know. It's conceivable, but not likely, that they cannot speak their parent's native language.
Which is, in my opinion, not good. At the youngest, you've got now-21 year olds and at the oldest now-44/45 year olds that may have spent their entire lives in the USA.
They're obviously soldiers, not just gang members. Look up El Salvador terrorists, how organized they are, how they move and were trained to be tough. These aren't regular gang bangers. They were trained better than al queda. Super tough guys trained to kill, steal, and destroy our country from within.
Great: let's have that proven in court.
Because I want him gone.
Impeachment might not be appropriate to Chief injustice Roberts, but it IS an option, and in his case, ought to be exercised.
For what?