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.

 

Rep. King says travel ban ruling gives Trump the authority to halt immigration from south

page: 1
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 27 2018 @ 03:08 PM
link   
I read this late last night and I'm surprised that no one has brought it to ATS yet.

In an op-ed, Rep. Steve King of Iowa argues that yesterdays SC decision upholding travel ban has "laid the foundation for the border wall." Moreover, he argues that the power of the president to suspend or curtail immigration, which the SC reaffirmed in yesterday's ruling, could be used to stop all immigration from Mexico and the Central American countries currently flooding the southern border with would-be immigrants until we sort things out. He says:




So, it is settled law. President Trump can deny foreign nationals entry to the country. He should immediately issue a Presidential Proclamation suspending the entry of foreign nationals from Mexico, Caribbean, Central and South American countries until such time as he finds the detrimental effects of illegal immigration from these regions have been curtailed and our border is secure. These areas are home to the violent and dysfunctional countries that export the vast majority of illegal immigrants to America.

In supporting its ruling, the Supreme Court cited two historical examples. The first of these, Sale v. Haitian Centers Council, Inc. is a 1993 ruling cited by the Trump v. Hawaii court as standing for the proposition that the “President could establish a naval blockade to prevent illegal migrants from entering the United States.” The second citation was to a valid Presidential Proclamation issued in 1986 by President Reagan “to suspend entry ‘as immigrants’ by almost all Cuban nationals, to apply pressure on the Cuban government.”

Put these two historical actions together and what do you get? A proclamation that not only restricts the movement of illegal aliens into the United States, but also serves as a means of convincing a foreign government to take measures to deal with a policy matter that is detrimentally affecting our country.


Source

What are ATS's thoughts on this? Could he do this? Should he do this? Would it be helpful or unhelpful?




posted on Jun, 27 2018 @ 03:10 PM
link   
thank god

wtf do we have laws or not?

respect our damn laws!!!

when I break laws I go to jail what's the difference why do people from other countries get different treatment?



posted on Jun, 27 2018 @ 03:12 PM
link   
So first it was about Islamic terrorism but now it's ALSO about illegal immigration, even though the ones he "could" ban are the ones actually entering legally? Doesn't make a whole lot of sense.



posted on Jun, 27 2018 @ 03:13 PM
link   
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

no one on the planet is talking about anyone who comes here legally when has that even been on the table?



posted on Jun, 27 2018 @ 03:16 PM
link   
a reply to: toysforadults

The op-ed in the OP is the one that suggested it. Read the article maybe?



posted on Jun, 27 2018 @ 03:17 PM
link   
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

it's nonsensical to think they are talking about legal immigration from those countries because it's never been an issue that's an assumption



posted on Jun, 27 2018 @ 03:17 PM
link   
If you break it...

We all bought it.

The process of applying us codes on an international level while removing due process will indeed break the justice system.

It is impossible to ban a country.

You can "dam" the immigration but at the same time you have to allow for due process to those effected by such.

This will create a back log of criminal cases that will cripple our justice system.

This is not left right political hyperbole. It is the reality of having a constitution.




posted on Jun, 27 2018 @ 03:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: toysforadults
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

no one on the planet is talking about anyone who comes here legally when has that even been on the table?


We can not turn our backs to migration and asylum lest we perish together.

Would you rather bring in the best and brightest who can and will turn the tables on us or would you rather bring in some hard workin laborers who seek to work and then return home in most cases.



posted on Jun, 27 2018 @ 03:21 PM
link   
Steve King is the most paranoid person in all of Congress. He let a few rough intel briefings ruffle is frail, wussified little feathers, and the only way he can feel like a man is by talking big on TV.

You may have notice I bear little love for him.

I can promise you that Trump will never issue such an order.


edit on 27 6 18 by projectvxn because: Edited from PETER King to Steve King. Both men are equally repulsive and for the same reasons. I get them confused.



posted on Jun, 27 2018 @ 03:22 PM
link   
If one wonders how the system would collapse then take a look at the stability of our patent processes.

China has flooded the system with fake ass claims that lawfully have to individually be judged.

Hangin on by a thread.



posted on Jun, 27 2018 @ 03:23 PM
link   
a reply to: riiver

I think that he's an idiot. Officially banning immigration from a country only affects LEGAL immigration--the illegal immigration would continue and possibly increase without a legal avenue to get in.



posted on Jun, 27 2018 @ 03:29 PM
link   
His statement is asinine in my opinion.

The President already had authority over immigration by law. Anyone with any common sense and a basic understanding of US law knew these ridiculous challenges from leftist judges was just more democrats trying to undermine Trump as part of their never ending temper tantrum.

Additionally, the "foundation" for the border wall was laid years ago, the funding for it had just been misappropriated.



posted on Jun, 27 2018 @ 03:31 PM
link   
a reply to: howtonhawky




lest we perish together.


C'mon man..Really?

A bit dramatic wouldn't you say? Perish?

I have never felt threatened by Trump and I am an immigrant. For as much as the media and the left bloviates about the existential threat Donald J. Trump represents, I am still not seeing it.




Would you rather bring in the best and brightest who can and will turn the tables on us or would you rather bring in some hard workin laborers who seek to work and then return home in most cases.



I'm sorry, I don't understand what the highlighted part is supposed to mean. Are smart people who are good at things bad now?
edit on 27 6 18 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 27 2018 @ 03:36 PM
link   
a reply to: howtonhawky

Do you know how many people qualify as in danger for asylum? I would estimate it's in the billions. Laws help get those that are most in need or in more danger than those that flood our borders based upon a loop hole.



posted on Jun, 27 2018 @ 03:42 PM
link   
What always amazes me, people fret and fret over letting folks from central and south America in no matter what, yet nobody seems to mind that certain countries are banned from travel to the US under any circumstances.

I have an acquaintance in Germany she is a German citizen, but her birth certificate says she was born in the Ukraine and last time she tried to take a vacation to the states she was told as someone born from the Ukraine she could not enter the US.

Why... I have no idea, but if one country is banned, I imagine more are also banned.



posted on Jun, 27 2018 @ 03:50 PM
link   
a reply to: watchitburn

Maybe I misunderstood the op-ed, but I read it more as suggesting that the president use his control over immigration as a sort of lever; that he say to the countries who are the most problematic when it comes to illegal immigration, "Until you get a handle on your people and keep them from flooding our border, we're going to put a freeze on EVERYTHING. No more legal immigration. No more visas. No more coming here temporarily to work then going home when the season is over. No more entry, period, till you get a grip and squeeze off the flow of illegals." Like I said, maybe I read it wrong or interpreted it wrong.



posted on Jun, 27 2018 @ 03:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: howtonhawky




lest we perish together.


C'mon man..Really?

A bit dramatic wouldn't you say? Perish?

I have never felt threatened by Trump and I am an immigrant. For as much as the media and the left bloviates about the existential threat Donald J. Trump represents, I am still not seeing it.




Would you rather bring in the best and brightest who can and will turn the tables on us or would you rather bring in some hard workin laborers who seek to work and then return home in most cases.



I'm sorry, I don't understand what the highlighted part is supposed to mean. Are smart people who are good at things bad now?


You will never get the point if you focus on just three words of a sentence.

The highlighted part could be understood if you put it in other context.

Take a typical household.

How many alpha males can live in a traditional house together without problem?

How long before the roles are undermined?

Answer from a command pov.

Do we at this point need workers or bosses?

Conservatives say more bosses are the answer while dems say workers are the answer.

Look at what is happening with twitter currently.many very bright talented individuals are currently using that company to wage a silent war.

If we collapse the justice system with cases of immigration then we will collapse the whole system

This is what is currently happening. The largest back log in history is being created as we speak. By charging immigrants as criminals and not hiring judges we are denying them due process. This will effect all aspects of the justice system very soon since we are now including all cases on the southern border and the other 6 countries in the travel ban.



posted on Jun, 27 2018 @ 03:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Irishhaf

I think that's BS.

I know more than a few people here in the US from Ukraine.



posted on Jun, 27 2018 @ 03:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: Saiker
a reply to: howtonhawky

Do you know how many people qualify as in danger for asylum? I would estimate it's in the billions. Laws help get those that are most in need or in more danger than those that flood our borders based upon a loop hole.


This is the reason why we make them cross the border to apply.

It cuts down on the less significant claims.

Also keep in mind we are near record lows for such.

Why break something that is working?




edit on 27-6-2018 by howtonhawky because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 27 2018 @ 03:55 PM
link   
a reply to: riiver

I get what you're saying. But illegal immigration is already illegal.

I'm in favor of having a pause on all immigration until we get our affairs in order and figure out the status of everyone already in the process. But I don't see that happening.

So unless there is a complete halt on all immigration from everywhere, I see no purpose in halting legal immigration from central and south America.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join