- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Sue and settle fricks US immigration policy for 8 years
Posted on 12/10/23 at 3:16 pm to SlowFlowPro
Posted on 12/10/23 at 3:16 pm to SlowFlowPro
Are there stats on the percentage of cases that are approved/denied? And what happens when they are denied 5 years later, and the person has kids in school, has a job, etc?
1
Posted on 12/10/23 at 3:17 pm to Bjorn Cyborg
quote:
Are there stats on the percentage of cases that are approved/denied?
I posted a graph on the last page.
quote:
And what happens when they are denied 5 years later, and the person has kids in school, has a job, etc?
Deported.
Posted on 12/10/23 at 4:04 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
The courts can only handle so many cases at any given time.
Dude.
Judge: "Are you from Honduras? "
"Si."
:youhavetogoback:
This post was edited on 12/10/23 at 4:05 pm
Posted on 12/10/23 at 4:14 pm to Turbeauxdog
quote:
Judge: "Are you from Honduras? "
"Si."
:youhavetogoback:
Is your argument that a person from Honduras can't make a valid argument for asylum? That's pretty mental.
Posted on 12/10/23 at 4:18 pm to Deplorableinohio
quote:
No. Asylum law requires oppressed to stay in first country they come where they are not persecuted. That means Mexico for the most part.
The Mexican government and the Mexican cartels are in partnership, facilitating the movement of millions of illegals to the US southern border......and then there's the partnership between the Mexican cartels and the CCP to deliver fentanyl/poison to the USA.
Posted on 12/10/23 at 4:19 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Fantasy land without the rule of law.
You keep using the phrase "rule of law", but I'm not sure what law you are talking about in this instance.
Biden signing a settlement with the ACLU doesn't change any law. Changing a law requires the legislative branch.
So on what basis would a judge issue a court order directing a future administration to abide by the settlement?
Posted on 12/10/23 at 4:34 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Is your argument that a person from Honduras can't make a valid argument for asylum?
A individual person has virtually no argument for asylum given it's designed for persecuted groups.
What's going on in Honduras that would qualify?
Corrupt economically unviable shithole doesn't coun't.
Posted on 12/10/23 at 4:41 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Fantasy land without the rule of law.
What retarded alternate universe do you live in?
Mass lawlessness has been the norm in a country shared with democrats since 2016
Posted on 12/10/23 at 4:45 pm to Turbeauxdog
quote:
What's going on in Honduras that would qualify?
As I stated earlier, a shite ton of sectarian violence from criminal organizations. That's where it gets grey-ish, at least initially.
Posted on 12/10/23 at 4:47 pm to M. A. Ryland
quote:
Biden signing a settlement with the ACLU doesn't change any law.
It creates a binding order on the government, via legal process.
This order is based on the authority of existing statutes, if that's what you were fishing for...
quote:
Changing a law requires the legislative branch
...which you were.
quote:
So on what basis would a judge issue a court order directing a future administration to abide by the settlement?
The consent of the parties via statutory authority.
Posted on 12/10/23 at 4:47 pm to SlowFlowPro
Yeah. But the US doesn’t border Honduras.
We are importing straight trash.
We are importing straight trash.
Posted on 12/10/23 at 5:00 pm to roadGator
quote:
But the US doesn’t border Honduras.
That's irrelevant unless we can make another agreement with Mexico
Posted on 12/10/23 at 5:00 pm to SlowFlowPro
It isn't grey.
That doesn't warrant asylum unless every person in every corrupt shithole can be granted asylum.
That's just what trash lawyers and judges have made the norm.
It's not the law.
That doesn't warrant asylum unless every person in every corrupt shithole can be granted asylum.
That's just what trash lawyers and judges have made the norm.
It's not the law.
Posted on 12/10/23 at 5:01 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
That's irrelevant unless we can make another agreement with Mexico
It was until a trash lawyer argued it to a trash judge and everyone just went along.
This post was edited on 12/10/23 at 5:02 pm
Posted on 12/10/23 at 5:07 pm to SlowFlowPro
It’s not. We can tell them hell fricking no and send them back.
This post was edited on 12/10/23 at 5:15 pm
Posted on 12/10/23 at 5:28 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Or we could just invest in Central America and Gain exponentially more benefits without the risk of economic migration being so alluring. Better them than China.
Unless it involves sending a personalized check to each individual in a central or South American country, immigrants are willing to risk their lives to come here to live on or dole.
Spending money in some of these countries to establish businesses or fund government is like setting your money on fire or handing it to a warlord because it will never get to those that actually need it.
Posted on 12/11/23 at 8:07 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
the authority of existing statutes,
quote:
via statutory authority
So you assert that there is an existing law that grants the current administration the authority to make irrevocable policy decisions for all future administrations?
That would seem to be a very broad, inherently abusable power. It would also seem to touch on significant constitutional issues. What are the limiting principals and checks on this power?
I don't suppose you could point me to this particular statute?
Page 3 of 3
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News