Seattle Federal Judge Rules that Asylum Seekers Can NOT Be Detained.

a reply to: Phoenix

No because you have to go through a port of entry to request asylum.

This is not about people sneaking across the desert borders to get here.

Get with the program.... This is people being held illegally at the border and not being properly cared for. Sick, hungry, filthy. Go trump....
The crime is what is being done TO them not by them.

a reply to: DBCowboy

When trump is afraid to deliver the bad news himself.

but not to worry.... he still has twitter.

a reply to: visitedbythem

Fine them for what? You have to break a law to get fined dont you? In Virginia the USA you have to. No one just gets fined for nothing.

a reply to: Sillyolme

The process has always been release them into the country to await their hearings. ALWAYS....

so that is simply a lie....
not surprising tho
water is wet...the sky is blue....

www.amnestyusa.org...

REAPING THE HARVEST OF FEAR: THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION DEPORTS ASYLUM SEEKERS

Its not me calling you a liar
It is amnesty international

quit with the easily proven lies

a reply to: Lumenari

So you haven't unraveled what the "illegal" part of illegal immigrant means...

No trump hasnt. These people are NOT ILLEGALS....
but they have brown skin so theres that.

a reply to: Metallicus

Sounds like we need to expand the facilities at GITMO. We also need to get rid of these activist judges.

Hmmm... sounds like both ideas could go hand in hand...

Eventually the Supreme Court will have to rule on these frivolous political decisions. Probably after Ruth Bader-Ginsberg retires and we get yet another Constitutionalist Justice. Chief Justice Roberts seems obsessed with trying to paint the courts as non-political... so he would probably go along with rules to prevent this from happening again.

TheRedneck

a reply to: carewemust

Let's fly them to Seattle then. Let that retard deal with this problem. And any that are found trying to leave Seattle can be deported back to Seattle.

a reply to: Metallicus

Yep. Judges aren't supposed to be biased. When these same people believed in a wall and deportation and illegals being a problem 4 years ago, and not now, it's a tell-tale sign they're being biased and we can't have that.

a reply to: thedigirati

Folks forget that the asylum laws are international laws not Amrican laws. these laws are through treaties that the USA has signed.

Actually, the asylum laws have been codified into 8 USC § 1158:

Any alien who is physically present in the United States or who arrives in the United States (whether or not at a designated port of arrival and including an alien who is brought to the United States after having been interdicted in international or United States waters), irrespective of such alien’s status, may apply for asylum in accordance with this section or, where applicable, section 1225(b) of this title.

TheRedneck

a reply to: Sillyolme

Do you just say the dumbest thing you can think of because you can't find a real argument and want to be involved in conversations? Besides you and other left wingers, who cares if they have brown skin? One day you'll realize that identity politics are costing your party elections. Until then, I'm enjoying the misery you're all putting yourselves through. Can't wait for 2020.

a reply to: Sillyolme

These people are NOT ILLEGALS....

This is getting boring. The laws have not changed since the last time you made that silly statement.

8 USC § 1325 (a):

Any alien who (1) enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or place other than as designated by immigration officers, or (2) eludes examination or inspection by immigration officers, or (3) attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the willful concealment of a material fact, shall, for the first commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both, and, for a subsequent commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18, or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.

It is illegal to enter the US anywhere except a Port of Entry (a place designated by immigration officials) and violation carries both a fine and jail time. First offense is a misdemeanor, subsequent offenses are felonies.

Asylum is a defense, not a rescission of the law.

TheRedneck

a reply to: abe froman

We need a very clear law that if you enter this country illegally you can not file for asylum.

Yep. If it's that bad, so bad that you have to flee your home to become a stranger in a strange land, seems to me, the best way to do that would be to cross over at a legal crossing point--where there are people who will, supposedly, help you. I say supposedly, because it is govt. workers...

But yes, good idea. Being such, unlikely to ever happen.

I am not certain but I believe the international asylum laws do state the "next safe country", so they should be going to Canada. the USA is not safe, just ask a liberal, especially if you have "brown skin" right sillyolme?

Why are they stopping in "the most racist country in the world"?

Seems rather stupid huh?

Why not Mexico or Canada?? In Mexico they already know the culture and language, in Canada, it's less crime.


What could possibly attract them to the USA??

Maybe a Democrat can tell us??

I mean America is not even that great, it's just "OK"

All youse ATS'ers who claim that existing immigrant entry laws apply to the present day are in need of a wake-up-call...

the lib Judge is running the batton to the next Judge...who also adopted the idea that All those previous "White Privilege" immigration laws do not apply---> and that a Plea for Asylum is 100% 'Get-in-Free-Card" regardless of the claims' veracity

It's not about established Laws.... its all about 'feelings'

say Asylum and POOF the locked door opens, just like in the secret phrase of Open Sez-A-Me

All youse ATS'ers

pardon me... the posting protocols are screwy

dbl posted

a reply to: seagull

Even better, let asylum seekers apply at our embassies. Why limit asylum to the Americas? They could be given temporary shelter while their story is checked out, and if they qualify, given a military escort to the US. That's the safest way to handle them. No 3000 mile trek through wilderness, either.

I've been saying this for quite some time, and it seems Trump just recently proposed the same thing. Maybe he reads ATS? Maybe the Democrats should?

Actually, given the political climate, maybe Trump should just tweet out that letting asylum seekers apply at embassies is a terrible idea, then every Democrat would vote for it.

TheRedneck

July 6, 2019

Update from the White House - In summary, the liberal Seattle Federal Judge (Marsha Pechman) who says DHS can no longer hold migrants awaiting their court date, is an AZZHOLE. Her order is further stressing the system, and increasing border-related crimes.

WHITE HOUSE – Yesterday, a single, unelected district judge in Seattle issued an injunction that prevents the government from ensuring the detention of those aliens who cross the border unlawfully until the completion of their immigration court proceedings.

The decision ignores an express statutory prohibition on granting class-wide injunctive relief against enforcement of the immigration laws and also holds unconstitutional a statute passed by bipartisan majorities in Congress during the Clinton administration that specifically prohibits the release of certain immigrants on bond.

The district court’s injunction is at war with the rule of law. The decision only incentivizes smugglers and traffickers, which will lead to the further overwhelming of our immigration system by illegal aliens.

No single district judge has legitimate authority to impose his or her open borders views on the country. We must restore our democracy and ensure Americans have the voice to which they are entitled under our Constitution.

The previously scheduled mass roundups and deportations of migrants who have broken federal law, begins within the next 48 hours.

SOURCE: theconservativetreehouse.com...

originally posted by: Metallicus

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: Metallicus

originally posted by: JustJohnny
a reply to: carewemust

Probably the same thing we have done for the rest of America’s history..

Give themselves a court date and if they don’t show up issue a warrant. From that point any interaction they have with authorities gets them arrested, and likely deported.. since they skipped their court date.

I really think people are oblivious to the actual logistics and cost involved in jailing people..it cost 40k per person, per year on average to jail an American..


I bet a child is twice that..

The problem with your idea is liberal states and cities won’t arrest them because they don’t follow the Constitution nor do they cooperate with the Federal Government so nothing you said would ever happen or matter.

I don't think liberal states help anyone. Illinois just raised several taxes and fees yesterday (incl 19 cents @ gallon for gas), but the new governor and liberal legislature can't say how the huge $$$ windfall will be invested back into the state.

They have to take from the citizens of Illinois to pay for all their new pet illegals. They don’t give a crap about actual citizens of the state.

As a citizen of Illinois - I can say you are absolutely 100% correct. What's it gonna take to stop those crazies in Chicago? Some looney going postal? They should think about what they're doing before it leads to that.