It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Second Federal Judge Rules That DACA Dreamers Can Stay in the U.S.A..

page: 3
6
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 13 2018 @ 11:19 PM
link   
a reply to: watchitburn

Funny how these judges think differently. I think I'll go with the folks who are paid to know these things and not the thoughts of an anonymous internet poster.




posted on Feb, 13 2018 @ 11:21 PM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

Obama was loved by the nation. Not a lie.
And now we have..... And nobody loves him.



posted on Feb, 13 2018 @ 11:22 PM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

You cannot be serious.



posted on Feb, 13 2018 @ 11:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: carewemust

Obama was loved by the nation. Not a lie.

Wow.

I didn't love him btw.



posted on Feb, 13 2018 @ 11:28 PM
link   
a reply to: Vector99

I will second that. Voted for him (first term), never regretted anything more (in politics).



posted on Feb, 13 2018 @ 11:32 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

No court has even weighed in on the constitutionality of the order.



posted on Feb, 13 2018 @ 11:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: carewemust

Obama was loved by the nation. Not a lie.


I disagree. He was loved by a lie, but not by the nation.



posted on Feb, 13 2018 @ 11:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: randomtangentsrme
a reply to: Vector99

I will second that. Voted for him (first term), never regretted anything more (in politics).


I voted for Obama in 2008 too. I put my pro-life principles on the back-burner for the sake of ethnic pride. Now I'm going to see the first Black President charged with crimes. Not a good feeling.



posted on Feb, 14 2018 @ 12:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
February 13, 2018

On January 13th a Federal Judge ruled that DACA can NOT end on March 5th, as the MSM and politicians keep declaring it will do. That all DACA-related lawsuits against the Administration must be settled, before the program can be terminated.

Today, a second Federal Judge ruled similarly.

For the second time in as many months, a federal judge has barred the Trump administration from ending the Obama-era DACA program next month.

U.S. District Judge Nicholas Garaufis in New York ruled Tuesday that Attorney General Jeff Sessions had "erred in concluding that DACA is unconstitutional" and granted a preliminary injunction sought by state attorneys general and immigrants who had sued the administration.
Source: www.foxnews.com...

What do you think ATS? Is it fair that "Dreamers" brought here as children, should be granted citizenship? What does the Federal judges rulings mean for the DACA Dreamers?

-CareWeMust




While I think upholding the law is the right thing to do, those already here should be grandfathered in.



posted on Feb, 14 2018 @ 12:16 AM
link   
a reply to: bender151


I agree. They were brought here as children. What about their parents, though?



posted on Feb, 14 2018 @ 12:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: introvert

No court has even weighed in on the constitutionality of the order.


That is correct. No court has ever ruled on that aspect.



posted on Feb, 14 2018 @ 01:09 AM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

Doesn't this create an interesting problem 25 states sued claiming Obama didn't have the right to stop deportation for his Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA). An appeals court upheld the ruling, and in 2016 the Supreme Court ruled 4-4 on the case, leaving in place the lower court's ruling.

So if it goes to court on DACA again they will decide the president doesn't have the ability to istitute it. So then what ? Is the court going to hold congress in contempt for not changing the law?



posted on Feb, 14 2018 @ 04:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: watchitburn
This is really simple.

DACA is an EO, a judge can not stop the President from rescinding an EO. Especially when it pertains to a portion of federal law that explicitly is under the purview of the President.


Judges are wasting their time/energy/resources deliberating over this for months at a time?


Well, they have to take some kind of action when these motions and appeals are sent to them. Then just look at these specific courts history and tendencies and you will see why these motions were filed with these courts. Regardless of the impotence of their rulings, their actions are not surprising.



posted on Feb, 14 2018 @ 06:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: MteWamp



To which protections are you referring to, specifically?


5th and 14th amendments would apply, I believe.



And the fact that you believe that it's "empty platitudes" doesn't negate the fact that it's the truth.


No, it's not the truth. If it was, you would have proof and this is not it.

What you mean is that is what you believe.


Dude, seriously. You are seriously gonna make a run at me with a game of "I Know You are, but what am I"?
Seriously? How old are you, 12?

Jesus H. Christ.



posted on Feb, 14 2018 @ 06:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: MteWamp

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: MteWamp



To which protections are you referring to, specifically?


5th and 14th amendments would apply, I believe.



And the fact that you believe that it's "empty platitudes" doesn't negate the fact that it's the truth.


No, it's not the truth. If it was, you would have proof and this is not it.

What you mean is that is what you believe.


Dude, seriously. You are seriously gonna make a run at me with a game of "I Know You are, but what am I"?
Seriously? How old are you, 12?

Jesus H. Christ.



I suppose I should ask the same question. Are you 12?

How can you read that and come up with "I Know You are, but what am I"?

Pretty simple concept. Provide proof it is true or stop pulling things out of your ass by trying to pass off your personal beliefs as fact.
edit on 14-2-2018 by introvert because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 14 2018 @ 07:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: MteWamp

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: MteWamp



To which protections are you referring to, specifically?


5th and 14th amendments would apply, I believe.



And the fact that you believe that it's "empty platitudes" doesn't negate the fact that it's the truth.


No, it's not the truth. If it was, you would have proof and this is not it.

What you mean is that is what you believe.


Dude, seriously. You are seriously gonna make a run at me with a game of "I Know You are, but what am I"?
Seriously? How old are you, 12?

Jesus H. Christ.



I suppose I should ask the same question. Are you 12?

How can you read that and come up with "I Know You are, but what am I"?

Pretty simple concept. Provide proof it is true or stop pulling things out of your ass by trying to pass off your personal beliefs as fact.


Read what you just wrote, you just can't help it, can you?

I always forget that you are one of those "Gotta have the last word." kids.

The prosecution rests, your honor.



posted on Feb, 14 2018 @ 07:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: MteWamp

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: MteWamp

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: MteWamp



To which protections are you referring to, specifically?


5th and 14th amendments would apply, I believe.



And the fact that you believe that it's "empty platitudes" doesn't negate the fact that it's the truth.


No, it's not the truth. If it was, you would have proof and this is not it.

What you mean is that is what you believe.


Dude, seriously. You are seriously gonna make a run at me with a game of "I Know You are, but what am I"?
Seriously? How old are you, 12?

Jesus H. Christ.



I suppose I should ask the same question. Are you 12?

How can you read that and come up with "I Know You are, but what am I"?

Pretty simple concept. Provide proof it is true or stop pulling things out of your ass by trying to pass off your personal beliefs as fact.


Read what you just wrote, you just can't help it, can you?

I always forget that you are one of those "Gotta have the last word." kids.

The prosecution rests, your honor.


So no proof, huh?

That's a crappy case you just presented, Mr. Prosecutor.



posted on Feb, 14 2018 @ 10:25 AM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

Uh, he is a real president and leader. You need to keep up. He's been one for over a year now with over 50% approval-higher than O was at this point. So, you hate Trump. I don't like him or his politics or.....but O was pure embarrassment, too. Just a different kind.



posted on Feb, 14 2018 @ 11:04 AM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

Actually, there was DAPA after DACA which was for parents and it was voted on 4-4 just after Scalia passed. Same type of order and that is what Sessions used to argue DACA as well as the heads of DHS.

DACA will be voted upon by the Supreme Court this summer.
edit on Febam28amf0000002018-02-14T11:04:59-06:001159 by matafuchs because: (no reason given)

edit on Febam28amf0000002018-02-14T11:05:15-06:001115 by matafuchs because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 14 2018 @ 01:40 PM
link   
Another corrupt federal Judge making decisions on things they have no say in. DACA in itself is an illegal order by the past administrations useless P.O.S. they called a leader. .a reply to: carewemust



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join