Mass Deportation and Immigration Catch-All | CIA using drones to spy on Mexican drug cartels

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 1K
  • Views: 33K
  • Politics 

Trump Moves to End Entry Program for Migrants From 4 Nations​

The president sought to end a program that allowed migrants fleeing Cuba, Nicaragua, Venezuela and Haiti to fly into the United States and remain in the country for up to two years.

www.nytimes.com

Trump Moves to End Entry Program for Migrants From 4 Nations

The president sought to end a program that allowed migrants fleeing Cuba, Nicaragua, Venezuela and Haiti to fly into the United States and remain in the country for up to two years.
www.nytimes.com www.nytimes.com

“… The program, known as humanitarian parole and introduced by the Biden administration in early 2023, allowed migrants from Cuba, Nicaragua, Haiti and Venezuela to fly into the United States if they had a financial sponsor and passed security checks. Migrants who entered under the program could stay for up to two years, unless they found other ways to stay long term.

As of late last year, more than 500,000 migrants had entered the country through the initiative.

The program, which Mr. Trump ordered the head of the Department of Homeland Security to end, served as one of two major legal pathways the Biden administration put in place to try to discourage migrants from crossing into the country illegally.

The Trump administration already moved earlier Monday to shut down the other program — a government app that allowed migrants to schedule appointments to enter the country at legal ports of entry. …

… the Biden administration had already said in October that it would allow the permission for migrants from the four countries to lapse after their two years ran out, forcing hundreds of thousands of people to find other methods to stay in the country or face deportation.“
 
Note the following text included in one executive order:

Sec. 5. Criminal Enforcement Priorities. The Attorney General, in coordination with the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Homeland Security, shall take all appropriate action to prioritize the prosecution of criminal offenses related to the unauthorized entry or continued unauthorized presence of aliens in the United States.

That's right. The priority is NOT people who have committed offenses in the US. The priority is offenses related to unauthorized entry or presence -- i.e. just migrants doing their jobs and not hurting anyone.
 
Whatever form it takes, I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever that the next four years will see a MASSIVE expansion of executive power at the expense of the legislature, the courts and the states. I still can’t figure out how so many people who think of themselves as small government advocates have been deluded into supporting this movement. I don’t think it’s a stretch at all to say that Democrats are more conservative than 2025’s version of MAGA.
 
lawtig02 said:
Whatever form it takes, I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever that the next four years will see a MASSIVE expansion of executive power at the expense of the legislature, the courts and the states. I still can’t figure out how so many people who think of themselves as small government advocates have been deluded into supporting this movement. I don’t think it’s a stretch at all to say that Democrats are more conservative than 2025’s version of MAGA.
Click to expand...
They were never small government advocates. They were always for a government that benefits them, and as long as it benefits straight white Christian nationalists then they are fine with it.
 
lawtig02 said:
Whatever form it takes, I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever that the next four years will see a MASSIVE expansion of executive power at the expense of the legislature, the courts and the states. I still can’t figure out how so many people who think of themselves as small government advocates have been deluded into supporting this movement. I don’t think it’s a stretch at all to say that Democrats are more conservative than 2025’s version of MAGA.
Click to expand...
Given the structural advantages Republicans have in the senate, and the tendency toward gridlock (especially as long as the filibuster remains part of the senate process) transferring power from the legislature to the executive would probably be a long-term structural advantage for Democrats.
 
Calheel said:
Given the structural advantages Republicans have in the senate, and the tendency toward gridlock (especially as long as the filibuster remains part of the senate process) transferring power from the legislature to the executive would probably be a long-term structural advantage for Democrats.
Click to expand...
What SCOTUS giveth, SCOTUS can taketh away.
 
nycfan said:

Bluesky

bsky.app bsky.app

IMG_4644.jpegIMG_4645.jpeg
Click to expand...
I have been saying this all along. It is an administrative nightmare and might be an impossibility.

Maybe for a while you could prove parent’s citizenship status by their birth certificate (if available) and the fact that they were born before 1/20/2025 but in the distant future one would have to produce birth certificates going back to relatives born before 2025.
 
lawtig02 said:
Whatever form it takes, I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever that the next four years will see a MASSIVE expansion of executive power at the expense of the legislature, the courts and the states. I still can’t figure out how so many people who think of themselves as small government advocates have been deluded into supporting this movement. I don’t think it’s a stretch at all to say that Democrats are more conservative than 2025’s version of MAGA.
Click to expand...
Then you don't know what the definition of political conservative is.
 
Kingpin said:
Well 2 were from Ga where the high profile murder took place.
Click to expand...
Yeah, sometimes you need to make a political vote, even when it is a dumb law. If you vote everything on principle, you won't be voting after the next election.
 
ChapelHillSooner said:
I have been saying this all along. It is an administrative nightmare and might be an impossibility.

Maybe for a while you could prove parent’s citizenship status by their birth certificate (if available) and the fact that they were born before 1/20/2025 but in the distant future one would have to produce birth certificates going back to relatives born before 2025.
Click to expand...
Classic Republican policy proposal - do something mean and cruel and deceptively simple that would require a massive administrative effort just to begin to administer. Sort of like idiotic "drug test people on welfare" proposals but way more work and also blatantly unconstitutional just for fun.
 
Callatoroy said:
Then you don't know what the definition of political conservative is.
Click to expand...
What do you think is politically conservative? Do you think it includes expanding the scope of the government's intrusion into your personal life while also significantly expanding the amount of government administrative effort required to accomplish that intrusion, as the EO on birthright citizenship does? That certainly doesn't sound like what modern American conservatism claims to be.

ETA: though if what you mean is that political conservatism has historically been founded in belief in a strong, often unelected executive (like a king) who exercises absolute power, then I suppose you have a point.
 
lawtig02 said:
Whatever form it takes, I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever that the next four years will see a MASSIVE expansion of executive power at the expense of the legislature, the courts and the states. I still can’t figure out how so many people who think of themselves as small government advocates have been deluded into supporting this movement. I don’t think it’s a stretch at all to say that Democrats are more conservative than 2025’s version of MAGA.
Click to expand...
a government of 1 person is pretty small.
 
ChapelHillSooner said:
I have been saying this all along. It is an administrative nightmare and might be an impossibility.
Click to expand...
Good thing it is plainly illegal. I would expect it to be enjoined before the end of the week (temporary) and it will never become un-enjoined.

Interesting question about district court nationwide injunctions is presented. Everyone has been critical of the district court injunctions coming out of Texas, and the Supreme Court is even hearing a case about whether district courts have the power to enter nationwide injunctions. Most of the time, the nationwide injunction is an abuse.

But how does a court *not* issue a nationwide injunction in a case like this? How can the plaintiff states receive relief? The administration has to issue birth certificates to anyone born in New York but not Texas? There is an obvious need for uniformity in this area of law, and thus this would seem to be a quintessential case where nationwide injunctions are called for.

It's really hard to have nice things in a country when one half of it takes every nice thing and treats it like a bottle in a bar fight.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top