Trump unveils hard-line immigration policy that limits asylum

originally posted by: underwerks
a reply to: xuenchen

Things moving fast now that former Attorney General Sessions is out.

It’s looking more and more like Jeff Sessions was the moderate one when compared to Trump.

Yeah! Right!

That is why he is headed to GITMO to help with the Military Tribunals.

Rational thinking goes a long way.

P

a reply to: xuenchen

It is about time that rule of law was put in place.

I have said it before, If you are willing to break in to a country, if you are willing to throw rocks at border guards, then the US does not want you.

There must be long term repercussions for trying to cross illegally and saying you can never come back legally is a great first step.

P

a reply to: pheonix358

Now, if it is enforced ...

originally posted by: burntheships

originally posted by: underwerks
a reply to: xuenchen

Things moving fast now that former Attorney General Sessions is out.

It’s looking more and more like Jeff Sessions was the moderate one when compared to Trump.

Boy you guy's just cant stop flipping poor sessions. He's been flipped
more times than a pancake at IHOP.

Good Jeff, Bad Jeff. Bad Jeff Good Jeff.

Thank You..
President Trump complains about sessions=bad Jeff
President Trump is happy about sessions=good Jeff

For Christ sake people..think for yourselves..What happened to ATS, who are you People

a reply to: underwerks

Moderate? Hell he may as well have been a ghost.

originally posted by: walkinghomer

Thank You..
President Trump complains about sessions=bad Jeff
President Trump is happy about sessions=good Jeff

For Christ sake people..think for yourselves..What happened to ATS, who are you People

Did anyone really like Sessions, many of us have been asking for his removal about 30 seconds after he recused himself... With those on the the left the thing that I'm not sure what I find the most distasteful is either your constant labeling of everyone who doesn't agree with you using your 5 or 6 token insults or like what you have above in suggesting people constantly swing 180 degrees on everything or we are mindless trumpeters just because we are conservatives and support the President for being the President.

There is not a single conservative here that would say or have said that everything Trump has done they agree with, so maybe you all the left can at least frop that one narrative hack...OK?

www.businessinsider.com... tm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer-insider-main&fbclid=IwAR2idSLhP-3hdh93jYlXlpqS3q5ut-gO4iSmx2fHkQSoxA47Tdhv14leiGM we will have to see if this recent ruling effects any of this or if it is appealed to SCOTUS

(Reuters) — A US appeals court in California ruled on Thursday that President Donald Trump's administration must continue a program begun under former President Barack Obama that protects hundreds of thousands of immigrants who were brought into the country illegally as children. The decision by the San Francisco-based 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals preserves the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program introduced in 2012 that has shielded from deportation a group of immigrants dubbed "Dreamers" and given them work permits, though not a path to citizenship. The ruling represented another legal defeat for Trump over DACA, although he has won court victories on other parts of his hardline immigration policies. On Monday, his administration asked the US Supreme Court to review a federal judge's January decision to block Trump from ending the program even before the 9th Circuit had weighed in, an unusually aggressive move in terms of procedure. Trump said on Wednesday that he saw potential to work with Democrats, who won control of the House of Representatives this week, but he would have to see how the Supreme Court rules on the issue.

so was challenged even before a ruling guess we see how well team R's scotus picks will be to the presidents agenda on this issue ,and could be viewed as an example of how they may rule on the new ag rules on immigration

a reply to: RalagaNarHallas

9th circuit, say no more.

Here! Here!

“Asylum” seekers (yeah right) should be doing so from a country that borders their own; the first country they enter when escaping their own...not travel 2500 miles for the ‘best one’.

That’s not the spirit of asylum, which is why this enforcement is all the more important.

Asylees should also fear for their safety or families safety...not have a cousin in TX that has a roofing job which you’d also like do.

Trump makes sense once again!! The guy is on fire!

originally posted by: RalagaNarHallas
www.businessinsider.com... tm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer-insider-main&fbclid=IwAR2idSLhP-3hdh93jYlXlpqS3q5ut-gO4iSmx2fHkQSoxA47Tdhv14leiGM we will have to see if this recent ruling effects any of this or if it is appealed to SCOTUS

(Reuters) — A US appeals court in California ruled on Thursday that President Donald Trump's administration must continue a program begun under former President Barack Obama that protects hundreds of thousands of immigrants who were brought into the country illegally as children. The decision by the San Francisco-based 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals preserves the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program introduced in 2012 that has shielded from deportation a group of immigrants dubbed "Dreamers" and given them work permits, though not a path to citizenship. The ruling represented another legal defeat for Trump over DACA, although he has won court victories on other parts of his hardline immigration policies. On Monday, his administration asked the US Supreme Court to review a federal judge's January decision to block Trump from ending the program even before the 9th Circuit had weighed in, an unusually aggressive move in terms of procedure. Trump said on Wednesday that he saw potential to work with Democrats, who won control of the House of Representatives this week, but he would have to see how the Supreme Court rules on the issue.

so was challenged even before a ruling guess we see how well team R's scotus picks will be to the presidents agenda on this issue ,and could be viewed as an example of how they may rule on the new ag rules on immigration

Damn
And rgb in the hospital....

a reply to: xuenchen

Bravo Mr. President

a reply to: OccamsRazor04
Spare your time, it was a hit an run, as always. Trolls are going to be trolling...

He has signed the "Proclamation" ...


Trump signs proclamation blocking asylum seekers caught at the U.S.-Mexico border

President Donald Trump signed a presidential proclamation Friday morning that will block migrants who cross the U.S.-Mexico border illegally from seeking asylum.

The move — which will almost certainly face legal opposition — aims to funnel asylum seekers toward ports of entry.

The ban will last 90 days or until the U.S. strikes a “safe third country” asylum deal with Mexico, according to the text of the proclamation. During that time, U.S. officials will be ordered to consult with the government of Mexico to address the issue of “large groups of aliens traveling through Mexico“ en route to the U.S., the proclamation reads.

So in other words if a person declares asylum at a legitimate port of entry then it's still business as usual. I feel bad for all those customs agents that are about to be inundated with thousands of people seeking asylum.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

They could declare asylum from where they live, too. It´s basically the smartest idea, instead of leaving everything behind and use that selfmade mess to get some tears rolling because "they left everything behind to get here".

What some see as desperate is in reality a stupid decision.

Because asylum != refugee.

a reply to: verschickter

Not according to the USCIS. They state that a person must be present in the United States to request asylum.

a reply to: Xcalibur254
Okay, that´s a bit different than Europe. I understood it like that, because how are you going to claim asylum, if you are not let into the country.

Do they really have to be present IN the country or just AT the border? Do you know?

"Asylum won't be considered if you enter the U.S. Illegally"

This is the way it should always have been.

Any other way its just open if they get caught they then yell Asylum and get released.
And if they don't get caught we only find out about them when they enter the criminal court system.

If they enter legally then don't show up for court date then they can be deported without going before a judge.