Florida State Seminoles

[hedge]

And, speaking of riling up the morons, we now have 25 governors (of guess which states) signing on with Texas in defiance of federal immigration laws. Individual states don't get to make up their own immigration policies...

[hedge]

Riling up the morons indeed...

[hedge]

[hedge]

From IC, a response to a poster telling someone to read some National Review article in support of Texas:

For the record, McCarthy's argument relies on the following, utterly false assertion: It is almost incomprehensible how a person remotely familiar with our constitutional system could write:

"When it is said that the states must comply with federal law, that means statutory law, not the whims of the executive branch."

To be clear, foreign policy is exclusively the prerogative of the president, subject only to the exceptions written into the constitution (e.g. declaring war). States have no sovereign interests at all. If the president orders our military to deploy to a place, the state of Texas cannot say, "nope, we're not going." If the president signs a peace treaty, the state of Texas cannot say, "nope, we're still at war." If the president says that our policy toward Mexico is going to be X, the state of Texas cannot say, "nope, we're going to do Y."

That is why immigration is exclusively within the province of the executive branch. The "power to exclude" is very obviously one of the powers the states gave up in the federal compact. Not some of it; all of it. For instance, they cannot exclude any American from their territory. They also cannot exclude any person with authorization to be in the United States -- whatever the source of that authorization.

This isn't even a close question. Not remotely. To agree with Abbott here is to say not only that you do not understand our system of government; it is also to thumb your nose at it. You're basically doing South Carolina 1861 and yes, I understand very well which side of that conflict this poster in question would have taken.

[aTm]

Its worthless to even talk about. The United States would not allow an independent Texas to exist no matter what. The American propaganda would be closer to making Texas as worse than Nazis, not just “misguided individualists who cant take care of themselves.” It would be a return to that bad old days of the 1970s where critical energy resources are controlled by all unfriendly states.

This is a dumb “Constitutional crisis” all the federal government has to do to make it go away is enforce its own laws. All that is happening will be the Democrats escalating the crisis so they can make it seem like the “President” cant do anything without Congress when in fact the whole apparatus for dealing with this is all in his control. Hell, Trump was actively fighting it against a hostile Congress just a few years ago. Thats where this is going. Red team will be able to vilify blue team as invasion allowing communists and blue team will be able to say that red team is causing it, we want to fix it but they wont pass a law or authorize me to spend a trillion so look they really dont care!

[hedge]

So what do we do?

[hedge]

I just took a walk around the neighborhood, there are a few new houses going up, you don't need to guess who was out there on a Saturday morning do the work. We need more immigrants, not less...

[hedge]

"all the federal government has to do to make it go away is enforce its own laws."

Sounds easy. What laws are you talking about and in what way (and why) are they not being enforced?

[aTm]

So what do we do?

Watch it. Laugh? Cry? Or you could try “voting” lmao

[hedge]

[innocentbystander]

I just took a walk around the neighborhood, there are a few new houses going up, you don't need to guess who was out there on a Saturday morning do the work. We need more immigrants, not less...

No. We need for I-C-E to bust the supervisor, shut down the build, and shut down the contractor (and prosecute him) for breaking employment law. He is too cheap to pay what he would have to pay for labor if it were US citizens doing the work, He is breaking the law to make more profit on the sale of the house. That makes him a criminal. We don't need more houses. We need medical breakthroughs.

[innocentbystander]

From IC, a response to a poster telling someone to read some National Review article in support of Texas:

For the record, McCarthy's argument relies on the following, utterly false assertion: It is almost incomprehensible how a person remotely familiar with our constitutional system could write:

When it is said that the states must comply with federal law, that means statutory law, not the whims of the executive branch.

To be clear, foreign policy is exclusively the prerogative of the president, subject only to the exceptions written into the constitution (e.g. declaring war). States have no sovereign interests at all.

No.

NRO is correct. The IC is incorrect. The executive branch MUST ENFORCE EXISTING FEDERAL IMMIGRATION LAW. It is compulsory. Immigration law is NOT a "foreign policy." They simply choose to ignore the law because they don't like it and don't want to enforce it. The INSTANT that happens, the executive is saying to the legislative...

While I am here, I am king.

No. NFW. That IS being un-Constitutional. The executive branch creates "foreign policy" and Executive Orders in the ABSENCE of existing federal law. That authority does not give the executive the power to supersede existing federal law.

Every argument I hear from the left and democrats in defending Biden's refusal to enforce the law boils down to, well, if they want Biden to do something about immigration then congress needs to do their job and make a new law for comprehensive immigration reform.

NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

That is not the way it works. If congress can't create that law (and they can't, for the 4 reasons that just gave less than 12 hours ago) then the law we have on the books for immigration regarding the Southern border is still in effect. It has been that way since 1986 when it was made into law. All migrants that came here prior to 1986 and crossed unlawfully, are given amnesty. After that, nothing. That is the federal law. The end. Its just that when that law was created in 1986, the left (who created the law) never thought in their wildest imagination that the right would demand that we stick to it. Well, we need to stick to it. That amnesty was a one-time-shot or else the bill never would have been signed INTO law.

POTUS Biden is instructed by the DNC to hire Mayorkas to specially NOT enforce the 1986 immigration law as a "foreign policy." This is by design. Because the state of Texas knows that the federal government is breaking their own law, they could make that argument in a federal court with a federal judge. SADLY, they can only win in court if that federal judge was appointed by Trump or Dubya not Obama or Biden. Either way, its a Constitutional crisis. But still reason enough for Abbott to tell the Supremes and to tell Biden to go piss up a rope. He is protecting the lives of Texans.

[hedge]

"He is too cheap to pay what he would have to pay for labor if it were US citizens doing the work"

Let me guess, if he did that, then you'd be blaming Biden and the democrats for high housing costs...

[hedge]

"Every argument I hear from the left and democrats in defending Biden's refusal to enforce the law"

Please explain what law he is refusing to enforce and how is he refusing to enforce it. How is he doing anything different than what Trump was doing? Except sending way more potential immigrants back than Trump did, I mean...

[hedge]

According to new data published last month, the Biden Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has removed a higher percentage of arrested border crossers in its first two years than the Trump DHS did over its last two years. Moreover, migrants were more likely to be released after a border arrest under President Trump than under President Biden.

In absolute terms, the Biden DHS is removing 3.5 times as many people per month as the Trump DHS did. These figures are important for understanding how each administration has carried out border enforcement.

During the Trump administration, DHS made 1.4 million arrests—what it calls “encounters”—in fiscal years 2019 and 2020 (24 months). Of those people arrested, only 47 percent were removed as of December 31, 2021, which includes people arrested by Trump and removed by Biden, and 52 percent were released into the United States.

Under Biden, DHS made over 5 million arrests in its first 26.3 months, and it removed nearly 2.6 million—51 percent—while releasing only 49 percent. In other words, the Trump DHS removed a minority of those arrested while the Biden DHS removed a majority. Biden managed to increase the removal share while also increasing the total removals by a factor of 3.5.

... Of course, the absolute numbers of releases have been higher under President Biden, but that reflects much higher arrivals, not any meaningful change in policy.

... The pandemic‐​era authority called “Title 42” had enabled Border Patrol since March 2020 to quickly expel most crossers to Mexico. That ended in May 2023—after March 31, 2023, which was when the new data for Biden’s term cuts off—so the release percentage has probably increased since then. But, as noted above, the release percentage was also significantly higher during the Trump administration before Title 42. Of course, fluctuations will happen, but the point is clear: the Biden administration has not overturned immigration enforcement. ..."

https://www.cato.org/blog/new-data-show ... rump-biden

[Jungle Rat]

Kill them all

[aTm]

"He is too cheap to pay what he would have to pay for labor if it were US citizens doing the work"

Let me guess, if he did that, then you'd be blaming Biden and the democrats for high housing costs...

Team blue would like to ban single family housing altogether, so they arent importing people to build housing anyway. Anyway, immigration should be easy and entering illegally should be difficult and disincentivized.

[innocentbystander]

"Every argument I hear from the left and democrats in defending Biden's refusal to enforce the law"

Please explain what law he is refusing to enforce and how is he refusing to enforce it. How is he doing anything different than what Trump was doing? Except sending way more potential immigrants back than Trump did, I mean...

The 1986 comprehensive immigration law (that Trump enforced that Biden doesn't) stipulates enforcing the border and apprehending illegal aliens crossing where we do not have entry points. Biden empowered Mayorkas to rescue illegal aliens, enable them, give them sandwiches, and bring them into the country with amnesty. ALL OF THEM claim that they need asylum. None of them do. Trump knew that. When he was having Tom Horman call the shots, he just threw them all back across the border. None of those were called official "deportations" because they never stood before a judge.

[hedge]

"Anyway, immigration should be easy and entering illegally should be difficult and disincentivized."

Already asked a couple of times, but please explain this easy process, as well as how to disincentivize and make it difficult to enter illegally...

[innocentbystander]

"Anyway, immigration should be easy and entering illegally should be difficult and disincentivized."

Already asked a couple of times, but please explain this easy process, as well as how to disincentivize and make it difficult illegally...

Wall