Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Wednesday July 04 2018, @03:43PM   Printer-friendly
from the let-me-out-of-here! dept.

In a legal setback for the Trump administration's immigration policies, a federal judge in Washington, D.C., has ruled that the government may not arbitrarily detain people seeking asylum.

The ruling comes in a case challenging the administration's policy of detaining people even after they have passed a credible fear interview and await a hearing on their asylum claim.

The lead plaintiff in the case is a teacher from Haiti, Ansly Damus, who has been confined in Ohio for more than a year-and-a-half. He fled his homeland fearing violence and political persecution and asked for asylum in the United States. An immigration judge granted him asylum not just once, but twice. But Damus remains locked up indefinitely as the government appeals those decisions.

U.S. District Judge James Boasberg, in his 38-page opinion, said that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement violated its own procedures by not granting Damus release under what's known as humanitarian parole.

"This Opinion does no more than hold the Government accountable to its own policy, which recently has been honored more in the breach than the observance. Having extended the safeguards of the Parole Directive to asylum seekers, ICE must now ensure that such protections are realized," Judge Boasberg wrote.

https://www.npr.org/2018/07/02/625504723/federal-judge-orders-administration-to-end-arbitrary-detention-of-asylum-seekers


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1, Insightful) by frojack on Wednesday July 04 2018, @03:54PM (70 children)

    by frojack (1554) on Wednesday July 04 2018, @03:54PM (#702584) Journal

    Not likely to withstand review. The administration has a pretty good record in the supreme Court once they get past all the activist judges in the lower courts.

    --
    No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   0  
       Troll=3, Redundant=1, Insightful=3, Informative=1, Total=8
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   1  
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @03:58PM (35 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @03:58PM (#702586)

    Ah yes those "activist" judges trying to uphold human rights. What is wrong with you?

    • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @04:12PM (20 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @04:12PM (#702592)

      This is America. If you want Human rights, why don't you move to Humania. What's wrong, such a country does not exist? I wonder why...

      • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @04:25PM (18 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @04:25PM (#702595)

        Not sure what America you grew up in, but where I come from America does[1] stand for human rights, starting with the Declaration of Independence -- conveniently today is the anniversary of the publication of that document, which has empowered people around the world. Worth (re)reading in case you don't remember it.

        [1] if I was feeling sarcastic I would replace "does" with "did, until recently".

        • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @04:38PM (12 children)

          by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @04:38PM (#702604)

          I am sitting out the 4th today, because it has *NEVER* meant that. And all the rosy words and political action in support of that stance has ignoring the glaring and unremedied flaws in America due to both legal and cultural norms which still exist today. Without a far more radical shift in mentality/personal and social growth than America and Americans have shown themselves capable of, that sort of idealized society will never exist until a new nation takes form where on the ashes of America or somewhere in a better position for a cultural and political revolution. The current world atmosphere does not seem to be engendering a successful enaction of that revolution, however.

          • (Score: 4, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday July 04 2018, @04:48PM (11 children)

            by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Wednesday July 04 2018, @04:48PM (#702610) Homepage Journal

            You're making the classic mistake of allowing perfect to be the enemy of good. Would you like your character held to such a standard?

            --
            My rights don't end where your fear begins.
            • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Snow on Wednesday July 04 2018, @04:53PM (5 children)

              by Snow (1601) on Wednesday July 04 2018, @04:53PM (#702613) Journal

              The 4th of July is a holiday for you Americans to show pride in your country.

              Some Americans are not proud of their country.

              • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @05:32PM (4 children)

                by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @05:32PM (#702640)

                The 4th of July is a holiday for you Americans to show pride in your country.

                Some Americans are not proud of their country.

                Correction, some Americans are not proud of our government. There is a difference.

                • (Score: 5, Insightful) by TheGratefulNet on Wednesday July 04 2018, @05:48PM (3 children)

                  by TheGratefulNet (659) on Wednesday July 04 2018, @05:48PM (#702648)

                  actually, given what the US has done over the past few decades, and been allowed to do, I'm not so sure I love my fellow americans so much.

                  we have cheered on the cheeto and we have not, as a nation, admitted our mistake, yet.

                  the concept of america is good; but our implementation leaves a lot to be desired.

                  --
                  "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
                  • (Score: -1, Troll) by Ethanol-fueled on Wednesday July 04 2018, @07:35PM (1 child)

                    by Ethanol-fueled (2792) on Wednesday July 04 2018, @07:35PM (#702701) Homepage

                    Whenever I see migrants locked up in cages, I cry tears...

                    Tears of JOY! HahahahahaHAHAHAHAHHAAAAAAA!

                    America, FUCK YEAH!

                    • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @08:50PM

                      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @08:50PM (#702732)

                      "locked up in cages" is what the SJW news tells you. What's really funny here is that Obama did the same thing with 10X more "Asylum-Seekers", but nobody cried Social Justice about it until Trump took office. SJW's should be deported to some shit stained country.

                  • (Score: 2) by bitstream on Wednesday July 04 2018, @09:40PM

                    by bitstream (6144) on Wednesday July 04 2018, @09:40PM (#702745) Journal

                    Voters will perform not better than they are (dis)informed..

            • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @05:26PM (3 children)

              by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @05:26PM (#702637)

              A country whose government conducts mass surveillance on the populace is not "good". A country whose government is engaged in 7+ interventions overseas - many of which were not declared by Congress - fighting enemies that didn't attack us is not "good". A country that has a drug war and does not respect people's fundamental right to control their own bodies is not "good". I could go on and on, but the US is not merely 'not perfect'; it is much worse than that. And no amount of 'But the US isn't as bad as X!' fallacies will change that.

              • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @05:44PM (2 children)

                by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @05:44PM (#702646)

                I wish I could peak into an alternate reality where a Democrat POTUS bowed to arab oil barons, said the Russians poop rainbows and Putin is the best thing since Trump, and buddied up to North Korea.

                I would REALLY like to see the reactions of the RWNJs around here, they'd be losing their collective shit SO HARD! Hatred is a powerful and scary thing, and that is all that fuels these people into blind faith in a broken system.

                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @10:33PM (1 child)

                  by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @10:33PM (#702756)

                  Democrats are just as pro-establishment, even while they hate it, as the Republicans are. I've been arguing constantly with my family over this for the past 2+ years (former 8 was mostly with republican family members hating on obama every excuse they got.) This time around the arguements are both right and left and both call you an apologist for the other when you say something they don't agree with.

                  I have been feeling quietly ashamed of american for almost two decades now, and it is starting to less quiet even as I grow more ashamed. Hopefully my opportunity to emigrate will happen soon and a better future found in the wider world. Because it isn't happening here, and at the rate it is going, there are going to be fewer places to escape to, while the going is still good.

                  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @11:22PM

                    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @11:22PM (#702768)

                    Fair enough, but my post wasnt meant as pro democrat just calling out the RWNJs round here.

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @05:47PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @05:47PM (#702647)

              Your head is so far up your butt you think shit smells like flowers. The US is an amazing place, but if you really can't comprehend the insanely huge number of negatives we engage in then I dunno, lobotomy time?

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @04:56PM (2 children)

          by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @04:56PM (#702617)

          If it's empowered people around the world, why do they still want to go to the U.S.?

          Also, the Declaration of Independence actually has no legal force. It's a political document telling Great Britain, and King George III, to go pound sand. But the current U.S. government is based on the Constitution, not the Declaration.

          • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @05:22PM (1 child)

            by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @05:22PM (#702634)

            the current U.S. government is based on the Constitution

            *blink*

            *blink*

            BWAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 05 2018, @03:14AM

              by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 05 2018, @03:14AM (#702814)

              They said it was based on the Constitution, not that the government is actually following it.

        • (Score: 4, Informative) by Mykl on Wednesday July 04 2018, @11:50PM (1 child)

          by Mykl (1112) on Wednesday July 04 2018, @11:50PM (#702773)

          Sooo, that Declaration of Independence that said "All men are created equal"...

          - Not counting the slaves at the time
          - Not counting women (admittedly, it does say "All men")

          America is actually closer to actually standing for human rights today than it ever was in the past, and that's a scary thought.

          • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Thexalon on Thursday July 05 2018, @12:00PM

            by Thexalon (636) on Thursday July 05 2018, @12:00PM (#702931)

            Also not counting poor white men.

            --
            The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
      • (Score: 2) by Mykl on Wednesday July 04 2018, @11:44PM

        by Mykl (1112) on Wednesday July 04 2018, @11:44PM (#702772)

        This is America. If you want Human rights, why don't you move to Humania. What's wrong, such a country does not exist? I wonder why...

        This needs a FunnyInsightful mod

    • (Score: 5, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday July 04 2018, @04:47PM (13 children)

      by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Wednesday July 04 2018, @04:47PM (#702609) Homepage Journal

      Judges aren't supposed to decide right and wrong. They're supposed to decide legal and illegal.

      --
      My rights don't end where your fear begins.
      • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @06:03PM (12 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @06:03PM (#702653)

        Oh boy there is no hope for you. Judges do indeed make morality calls, they are often referred to as "extenuating circumstances". This isn't a SCOTUS issue but they are one really clear example where judges make rulings based on morality and legal precedent.

        I mean really now, how stupid are you? Not to mention the article makes it quite clear

        "This Opinion does no more than hold the Government accountable to its own policy, which recently has been honored more in the breach than the observance. Having extended the safeguards of the Parole Directive to asylum seekers, ICE must now ensure that such protections are realized."

        I ask again, what is WRONG with you people?

        • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday July 04 2018, @06:53PM (11 children)

          by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Wednesday July 04 2018, @06:53PM (#702676) Homepage Journal

          You're absolutely correct. Judges do indeed render decisions based on their feelz. And they're overturned when they do because that is not their fucking job. It is in fact expressly forbidden them except in very narrowly defined areas like sentencing.

          "This Opinion does no more than hold the Government accountable to its own policy...

          Policy is not law. Judges deal with laws. This was not a job for a judge. QED

          --
          My rights don't end where your fear begins.
          • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @07:01PM (5 children)

            by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @07:01PM (#702681)

            Hey jackass, you're wrong. AGAIN!

            https://www.cigaraficionado.com/article/d-c-judge-rules-for-fda-on-cigar-lawsuit-appeal-possible [cigaraficionado.com]

            You can make all the claims you want about judges only ruling on Laws, but don't you think some lawyers would take issue if the judge was not legally allowed to do so? Uneducated fool, you should stop spouting opinions when you have zero actual knowledge on the subject.

            • (Score: 5, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday July 04 2018, @07:07PM

              by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Wednesday July 04 2018, @07:07PM (#702689) Homepage Journal

              And it's going to be overturned unless he backed his shit up with something in the law. Watch and see.

              --
              My rights don't end where your fear begins.
            • (Score: 2, Touché) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday July 04 2018, @07:09PM (3 children)

              by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Wednesday July 04 2018, @07:09PM (#702691) Homepage Journal

              Oh fuck dude, you didn't even read the fucking article you linked. I did after I posted and the judge fucking followed the law even though he didn't like that he had to. What a colossal dipshit you are.

              --
              My rights don't end where your fear begins.
              • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @07:31PM (2 children)

                by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @07:31PM (#702699)

                You did throw me off for a second, but as usual your brain is not up to the task of critical thinking and debate.

                1. So judges can only rule on laws, but in this case he followed the law even though he didn't like it? I thought this was regulation / policy, only Congress can pass laws right? Jackass make up your mind, you can't just swap things in/out to suit your personal agenda. "The groups had sought preliminary relief from such impending FDA rules"

                2. "ruled in favor of the Final Deeming Rule’s health warning requirements on cigar boxes and advertisements—finding they are not a violation of the First Amendment—as well as cigar industry user fees." So the judge was unable to find the law in violation of the Constitution so he did his job even though he didn't like it. He was totally able to make a ruling and the outcome has no bearing on my point.

                3. You are the dipshit too ignorant of reality to make comments, but as is common the least able are often the loudest.

                You are similar to Trump, trying to redefine reality to suit your own purposes and then shouting people down when they make valid points you don't like. Get a grip.

                • (Score: 2) by RS3 on Thursday July 05 2018, @01:21AM (1 child)

                  by RS3 (6367) on Thursday July 05 2018, @01:21AM (#702785)

                  I really don't want in on this, but to clarify- judges are supposed to apply the laws that Congress has made.

                  Unfortunately sometimes judges have to interpret, and sometimes they interpret too much, or they're just plain wrong, and it gets overturned in a higher court.

                  SCOTUS can overturn a law if all of these conditions are met (and probably more that I don't feel like trying to come up with right tired now): 1) it's unconstitutional, 2) someone has giant money, 3) SCOTUS is willing to hear the case, 4) good lawyer arguments happen, that money can't necessarily buy.

                  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 05 2018, @01:48AM

                    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 05 2018, @01:48AM (#702791)

                    They rule on a lot more than Congressional laws, your statement is not wrong just not fully correct.

          • (Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @07:44PM (4 children)

            by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @07:44PM (#702707)

            And they're overturned when they do because that is not their fucking job.

            No, they are not always overturned. We have obscenity laws, the TSA, the NSA's mass surveillance, and so on. In the past, we had Japanese internment camps, and that was accepted by the courts despite being totally and obviously unconstitutional. The sad thing is that I don't even think we learned our lesson regarding Japanese internment camps; I could easily see something similar happening again if a tragedy occurs and the 'safety at the expense of freedom' crowd becomes more vocal. The typical judge is profoundly authoritarian and will make rulings based on what they would like to see happen rather than what is actually legal or Constitutional. Our system of checks and balances is broken and our government does not abide by the Constitution.

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @10:37PM (1 child)

              by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @10:37PM (#702757)

              Do your research. We already have effective concentration camps for both domestic and foreign nationals who we need out of sight and out of mind. And without enough people bringing attention to this, it will continue happening until they find the need to cover it up more permanently.

              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 05 2018, @01:44PM

                by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 05 2018, @01:44PM (#702967)

                But you don't understand. We had Japanese concentration camps, and that makes our new ICE concentration camps ok!

                Butbutbut you still don't understand! Lincoln locked up journalists, and that makes it ok if Trump starts locking up journalists!

                Butbutbutbutbut you still don't understand! The USA engaged in genocide from shining sea to shining sea, and that makes any current genocide the USA engages in ok!

            • (Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 05 2018, @03:23AM (1 child)

              by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 05 2018, @03:23AM (#702817)

              Yes, we had Japanese internment camps. A good deal of the reason why is explained by the Niihau incident https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niihau_incident [wikipedia.org] where a Japanese pilot who was a part of the Pearl Harbor attacks landed his damaged plane on a small Hawaiian island -- and some of the Hawaiian locals of Japanese descent living there helped the pilot try to escape.

              They never tell you about that event, do they? Given the evidence that some Japanese-descended people living in the U.S. would assist the Japanese, damn straight they were interned. If they hadn't been, it's likely that many of them would have been killed by U.S. citizens.

              Yes, it sucks when you're locked up for nothing you did. Beats being dead, though, and you have bitching rights the rest of your life.

              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 05 2018, @09:23PM

                by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 05 2018, @09:23PM (#703253)

                This tripe gets modded insightful? Here's a hint: Regardless of the circumstances, the government sending people of a certain descent to camps without due process is blatantly unconstitutional. This is due to the 5th amendment, at the very least. It doesn't matter if some members of the group happened to be bad guys. It doesn't matter if some US citizens would have killed some members of the group if they weren't locked up in camps 'for their own protection'. None of that matters. It was blatantly unconstitutional. Full stop. There's not even a valid argument to be had here. You're just wrong.

                For trying (and failing) to justify this, you are an authoritarian scumbag of the highest order. You do not care one bit about the Constitution, which is the highest law of the land. In 'the land of the free and the home of the brave', freedom is more important than safety, so we should never sacrifice freedom even if we can attain more safety by doing so.

  • (Score: 5, Informative) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday July 04 2018, @04:20PM (23 children)

    by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday July 04 2018, @04:20PM (#702594) Journal

    Yup.

    People have a hard time understanding that there are three branches of government. The executive is not the lapdog of the judicial. Nor is the legislative the lapdog of the executive. And, the judicial isn't supposed to be lapdog to either of the others. They each hold some powers, independently of the others.

    Some dipshit activist judge tells the Chief Executive that he can't do something, it's just so much chickenshit nonsense. If/when the Supremes come down with a decision, then it means something.

    Congress held all power to immigration issues, until they voted to vest all of that power in the executive. Today, according to congressional decree, Trump holds ALL POWER when it comes to immigration. That's the way it is. To actually do something that is "unconstitutional", he would have to go to extreme lengths to find some angle to violate.

    No local, state, or federal judge has the authority to override the executive, except those 9 Supremes. Enjoy these three Supremes - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXWEAR0B17I [youtube.com]

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @04:28PM (17 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @04:28PM (#702598)

      dipshit professionals doing their job upholding laws regarding human rights.

      You're only disparaging them because they decide against how you would *like* the world to be.

      You complete and utter hypocrite.

      • (Score: 3, Touché) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday July 04 2018, @04:50PM

        by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Wednesday July 04 2018, @04:50PM (#702611) Homepage Journal

        I know we don't like to RTFA around here but you didn't even RTFSummary. It's a policy not a law.

        --
        My rights don't end where your fear begins.
      • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday July 04 2018, @04:59PM (15 children)

        by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday July 04 2018, @04:59PM (#702618) Journal

        You brainless Cretin - it is not a "human right" to become an American citizen. Becoming a US citizen is a PRIVILEGE - one that we can bestow on whomever we choose. Choose being the key word there. We didn't choose you, because you're such an imbecile. Now, you need to go about the business of sheep herding over there on your home island of Crete. And, please, stop sexually abusing those poor beasts!

        • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @05:50PM (14 children)

          by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @05:50PM (#702649)

          Wow, moron alert!

          No one said anything about open borders and letting all immigrants get citizenship, we ARE talking about humane treatment of people. No need to lock them up, no need to separate families. You are conflating issues and applying the most extreme positions just so you can get your rage boner on.

          Fuck you Runaway and the rest of you fucks around here that tacitly endorse such inhumane abuses. Go immigrate to North Korea, you'll enjoy their heavy handed approach.

          • (Score: 4, Insightful) by jmorris on Wednesday July 04 2018, @06:44PM (12 children)

            by jmorris (4844) on Wednesday July 04 2018, @06:44PM (#702672)

            Someone invades our country, we lock them up until we can deport them. What could anyone possibly find objectionable in that? Yet people do. Curious. When pressed most assure everyone they don't support open borders... yet there are zero concrete examples where they would support deportation, each case gets an argument why it would be wrong to not instantly hand them citizenship papers, an EBT card and a voter ID.

            • (Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @07:03PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @07:03PM (#702683)

              You should get a horse or a cow, might help with all that straw you're having so much trouble with.

            • (Score: 4, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @07:17PM (3 children)

              by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @07:17PM (#702692)

              Someone invades our country, we lock them up until we can deport them.

              Unless they're a Slovenian porn model. Then we make them Queen.

              • (Score: 3, Interesting) by jmorris on Wednesday July 04 2018, @07:36PM (1 child)

                by jmorris (4844) on Wednesday July 04 2018, @07:36PM (#702702)

                She didn't invade, she asked for permission to enter and bagged herself a billionaire while she was here to work. You go girl!

                While I support an almost total shutdown of all immigration for at least a generation to allow an attempt to assimilate the millions of people who lack even a semblance of loyalty to America and the ideas the country is based upon, I think I could support an exception for as many hot supermodels as want to come here looking for an anchor husband. :) If ya under thirty and a 9 or better, come on in and help improve our gene pool. What better way to truly Make America Great Again? Can I get an Amen?

              • (Score: 2, Troll) by Ethanol-fueled on Wednesday July 04 2018, @07:37PM

                by Ethanol-fueled (2792) on Wednesday July 04 2018, @07:37PM (#702704) Homepage

                Somebody's salty that he doesn't have enough money to attract a pretty Russian or Eastern-European gold-digger to wear like arm-candy.

            • (Score: 1, Troll) by Ethanol-fueled on Wednesday July 04 2018, @07:42PM (3 children)

              by Ethanol-fueled (2792) on Wednesday July 04 2018, @07:42PM (#702706) Homepage

              Yeah, Even Europe, the shining example of open-borders experiments, is going to go full-14/88 in deporting their troublesome migrants, scuttling the NGOs' ships, and putting those migrants in camps in North Africa.

              Makes me wonder if the experiment was an inoculation the whole time -- an injection that makes you sick up-front, but conditions your body to reject the pathogens in the future. We have tried to let the savages join civilization and integrate in exchange for safety and comfort, and they have failed spectacularly. Back to the depths of the Underworld to which the vermin belong!

              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @07:44PM

                by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @07:44PM (#702708)

                How's the weather down there?

              • (Score: 1, Flamebait) by jmorris on Wednesday July 04 2018, @07:51PM (1 child)

                by jmorris (4844) on Wednesday July 04 2018, @07:51PM (#702711)

                Nah, the Globalists really thought they could just ram this policy onto us and we would be overwhelmed and past the point where we could stop it before enough people woke up to the danger enough to be willing to be called a racist for objecting. Thankfully their pets were just a little too violent for people to stay asleep that long. They should have left out the Muslims and stuck to Sub-Saharan Africa, Asia, India, etc. for aliens to 'enrich' Europe with. Looks like Europe is going to wake up in time to save itself. America's fate is still more doubtful because we already have such a large percentage of invaders already.

                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @08:07PM

                  by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @08:07PM (#702722)

                  "this policy"? You mean the policy that was already in place saying they should release the asylum seeker after a review finding in his favor? Oh yeah, that globalist conspiracy is super scary!! Seems that straw man arguments are all you can fight against, apropos.

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @08:25PM (1 child)

              by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @08:25PM (#702727)

              Someone invades our country, we lock them up until we can deport them.

              Someone sells out your country to a foreign adversary, and you grant them bail. Someone shoots up a school or a church or a mall or a nightclub, and you grant them bail. As long as they are American. A foreigner? They are a danger to everything in America and you can barely raise your gun, and wave your flag, fast enough. But an American? They can kill as many as they want and your kind doesn't make a peep or lift a finger in protest.

              To you a patriot is anyone who lets America be undermined or killed from within. But someone whose skin isn't as light as yours? Ban them, condemn their religion (until you find out its Christianity) and send them away (no matter where they were born) ... that is if your police don't kill them first.

              The people who were here before you were darker than you. The people who are going to replace you are darker than you. You should flee while you can. Don't think your "alt right" will stop them. They come from countries where guerrillas and militias recruit members when they are children.

              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 05 2018, @06:47PM

                by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 05 2018, @06:47PM (#703155)

                Most of those types of people you mentioned don't get bail, as they are classified as dangerous or flight risks.

            • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Arik on Thursday July 05 2018, @02:43AM

              by Arik (4543) on Thursday July 05 2018, @02:43AM (#702801) Journal
              When someone invades our country we shoot them.

              The last time that happened was 1812.

              FFS lay off on the hyperbole.
              --
              If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
          • (Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Thursday July 05 2018, @06:07PM

            by DeathMonkey (1380) on Thursday July 05 2018, @06:07PM (#703118) Journal

            No one said anything about open borders and letting all immigrants get citizenship,

            Well, other than the Libertarians that most of our Conservative posters pretend to be...

            A truly free market requires the free movement of people, not just products and ideas. [lp.org]

    • (Score: 3, Interesting) by jmorris on Wednesday July 04 2018, @06:13PM (1 child)

      by jmorris (4844) on Wednesday July 04 2018, @06:13PM (#702658)

      Not even the 9 Supremes. The SCOTUS only gets to write laws when enough of the other two branches quietly agree with what they are doing but are afraid of the political backlash of saying so in public. Anything SCOTUS does can either be overruled with a law signed by POTUS, cured for good with removal of the overreaching Justices or simply ignored as a "silly thing." They have no power to enforce their edicts other than an accumulated reserve of good will and popular respect.

      It is far past time to force them to expend as much of those reserves as possible with each lawless ruling. Which is probably why almost every important ruling at SCOTUS has went Trump's way and will continue doing so. They know just how precarious their position is, just how far out over their skis they have leaned these past lawless decades. Vulnerable. They know that if they piss off Trump he would start abusing THEM at his rallies and quickly drive their public approval ratings down toward CNN levels with his ability to explain Washington in ways normies understand. At which point he really could simply call one of their more zany rulings a "silly thing" and when he gets away with ignoring it their power would be broken for generations. It isn't the best solution, it would do great violence to the stability of our government; but had they refused to see reason and moderate it would have been the least bad option. Hopefully enough Justices retire that a more permanent solution can be implemented.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 05 2018, @06:46PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 05 2018, @06:46PM (#703154)

        You really see the executive branch ignoring the constitution and the power of the judicial as a good thing?

        This is why Trump supporters scare the crap out of the rest of us. You seem to want to kowtow to the feet of the emperor so badly you can't see why that is not the way to live.

    • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Arik on Wednesday July 04 2018, @07:07PM (1 child)

      by Arik (4543) on Wednesday July 04 2018, @07:07PM (#702690) Journal
      Is seeing all his enemies scrambling to try and limit the powers of the office - after a full century of doing nothing but the opposite.
      --
      If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
      • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @07:35PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @07:35PM (#702700)

        At least something good might come out of that clown factory.

    • (Score: 2) by krishnoid on Wednesday July 04 2018, @11:59PM

      by krishnoid (1156) on Wednesday July 04 2018, @11:59PM (#702775)

      The executive is not the lapdog of the judicial. Nor is the legislative the lapdog of the executive. And, the judicial isn't supposed to be lapdog to either of the others.

      Good thing, too. I'd have a tough time visualizing all three of those being the case.

  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday July 04 2018, @04:46PM (8 children)

    by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Wednesday July 04 2018, @04:46PM (#702608) Homepage Journal

    I'm inclined to agree. Primarily because a policy is not a law and they're not legally bound to follow it.

    --
    My rights don't end where your fear begins.
    • (Score: 5, Informative) by Thexalon on Wednesday July 04 2018, @05:08PM (7 children)

      by Thexalon (636) on Wednesday July 04 2018, @05:08PM (#702623)

      You plainly have no idea how federal government regulations actually work.

      As a bit of an exercise, I tried following every single passed law, executive order, and regulatory change for a few months. Some of what you are very obviously unaware of:
      1. A bureaucrat following regulations cannot be professionally penalized for doing so. A bureaucrat who fails to follow regulations can be penalized and even sometimes fired, and any actions they took against regulations will be undone to the degree possible if they're caught.
      2. Regulations have to be posted to the Federal Register for public comment, or alternately (if they have reason to think the change won't be controversial) posted with the caveat that if somebody comments to oppose it they have to undo what they did until they address whatever the commenter complained about.
      3. The only thing that gives any agency the right to make regulations is a law saying so.
      4. Congress can undo any regulatory change they want to by passing a joint resolution. Joint resolutions do not require the president's approval.
      5. A court case can undo any regulatory change if the change is found to be illegal or unconstitutional.
      (The executive's influence on regulations is obvious: The regulations come from agencies that ultimately answer to the president.)

      So, if the Trump administration wants to (legally) continue doing what they're doing with Mr Damus, they'll have to change the rules, and survive public comment, court challenges, and any congressional vote. I'm not saying they won't be able to do that, but they do need to follow that process unless and until Congress passes a law changing the rules on how to make rules.

      --
      The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
      • (Score: 2, Redundant) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday July 04 2018, @06:07PM (4 children)

        by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Wednesday July 04 2018, @06:07PM (#702655) Homepage Journal

        That was the worst argument I have heard in a long, long time. Regulations are not policies and policies are not laws. They do not and can not carry the force of law. Thus a judge has no business even hearing a case based on violating them.

        --
        My rights don't end where your fear begins.
        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @06:38PM (3 children)

          by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @06:38PM (#702669)

          You are too ignorant for this discussion, please see yourself out.

          • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday July 04 2018, @06:56PM (2 children)

            by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Wednesday July 04 2018, @06:56PM (#702679) Homepage Journal

            Already did as soon as you declared your inability to understand the difference between external regulations, internal policies, and laws.

            --
            My rights don't end where your fear begins.
            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @08:14PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @08:14PM (#702725)

              Obviously not or you would not have posted a reply.

              Can't even keep your own reality consistent. Ya jackass!

            • (Score: 2) by deimtee on Thursday July 05 2018, @12:22PM

              by deimtee (3272) on Thursday July 05 2018, @12:22PM (#702935) Journal

              My understanding, based on similarities here in Oz, is that most of the actual laws (Acts of Parliament in our case, Congressional Bills in yours I think) state a desired goal of some sort, and empower some department to make the actual detailed regulations to achieve/enforce. The regulations made under that law carry the force of that law. You can legally challenge a regulation on the grounds that it is outside the scope of the enabling law, but that is rarely done because the regs are usually written by lawyers who know not to exceed the scope of the Act.
              The difference between Laws and Regulations is subtle and irrelevant to most people in most situations. Break a regulation, and you have broken the law that enabled it.

              Policy, in a govt department, controls how the people who work there behave, and what they will/will not do. It has no force of law, and it's only effect on those outside the govt is the secondary one of controlling the govt side of any interaction. (Admittedly, this can be a pretty significant effect.)

              --
              If you cough while drinking cheap red wine it really cleans out your sinuses.
      • (Score: 2) by jmorris on Wednesday July 04 2018, @06:31PM (1 child)

        by jmorris (4844) on Wednesday July 04 2018, @06:31PM (#702665)

        You are describing the NORMAL process where unelected minions wield delegated Executive authority under rules designed to constrain them. All Executive power derives from the singular person of the POTUS, in Constitutional Theory, and can be wielded directly by him/her without the slightest concern for all of those rules. It is the reality that no one person has the "bandwidth" to do 1% of the things the bloated government now does that all those levels of minions and rules to regulate them were created; but in an important issue POTUS can directly act. And while Congress can pass a Resolution of disapproval for a regulatory action, it can be vetoed like any other Bill. Refer back to the debates about overthrowing the FCC's reversal of "Network Neutrality" if you want to see the gory details of that process hashed out here on Soylent News.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @07:07PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 04 2018, @07:07PM (#702688)

          You trolls keep trying to institute a dictatorship but its not gonna work. No amount of bullshit is going to make the country fell otherwise. You should be tried as a traitor for the sheer amount of bullshit you've tried to push on this site. Oh wait, we can't do that because you have the freedom of speech! Guess we'll have to tolerate your seditious opinions.

  • (Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Wednesday July 04 2018, @07:49PM

    by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Wednesday July 04 2018, @07:49PM (#702710) Journal

    Tell Gorsuch hi for me when you meet him in Hell...i'm sure you two will get along just great.

    --
    I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...