• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Federal judge blocks Biden administration from releasing migrants from Border Patrol custody without court order

ClaraD said:
yep, there are hundreds of these on Tik tok....construction sites at a standstill, restaurants void of kitchen staff, offices going uncleaned, hotels missing their cleaning staff.
Click to expand...
This is what I want though. I really want the right to win sp they catch the car. The left has gotten lazy not understanding how bad these people are
 
ClaraD said:
except a lot of them already have. He may lose on that as well...because the law that Congress passed does not permit us to require that...
Click to expand...
He might but the executive has broad powers with the border.. see how it shakes out but to say he has no plan is a lie
 
Athanasius68 said:
Last I checked, Biden does not have absolute power to issue rules and change laws by decree.
Click to expand...
That's neat. This is what chevron is about..and...you didn't actually address what I said so...who cares
 
Plasmaball said:
That's neat. This is what chevron is about..and...you didn't actually address what I said so...who cares
Click to expand...

I did address what you said. You made some claims about Biden taking unilateral action with respect to immigration law.

Which explains the point of the thread.
 
Athanasius68 said:
I did address what you said. You made some claims about Biden taking unilateral action with respect to immigration law.

Which explains the point of the thread.
Click to expand...
You made the claim about they can't let them go. I haven't seen anything in the law stating this.

For decades they have let them go with a court date.

@WorldWatcher maybe you can help clear this up since i actually trust your research over this guy
 
Plasmaball said:
You made the claim about they can't let them go. I haven't seen anything in the law stating this.

For decades they have let them go with a court date.

@WorldWatcher maybe you can help clear this up since i actually trust your research over this guy
Click to expand...

I said the law says that such migrants "shall be" detained until their claims of persecution are resolved.

But you are correct that often the law is ignored.
 
eman623 said:
Biden is sad today. He won't be able to just wave people into the country. He'll actually have to go through the motions of giving them a court ordered notice to appear that the illegal can throw away.

Even worse, he'll have to keep kids in cages while said court orders are processed. That's the only part that really bothers him. Bad optics.

www.washingtonexaminer.com

Federal judge blocks Biden administration from releasing migrants from Border Patrol custody without court order

A federal judge issued a temporary restraining order on allowing the Biden administration to release immigrants from Border Patrol custody without a court
www.washingtonexaminer.com www.washingtonexaminer.com
Click to expand...

Yes, a GQP terrorist from Flor-I-duh made a ruling. What a shock.

His career will soon end because of it.
 
Plasmaball said:
You made the claim about they can't let them go. I haven't seen anything in the law stating this.

For decades they have let them go with a court date.

@WorldWatcher maybe you can help clear this up since i actually trust your research over this guy
Click to expand...
The law doesn't state that. It says they have to be detained until CREDIBLE FEAR is established. The poster is unable to distinguish what the steps are in the process.

A person turns themselves in and requests protection from deportation due to a fear of return to their country
The initial interview happens and they are processed in the next 48 hours (often takes longer) at that point they are registered for a credible fear interview tih an asylum officer. If they are granted credible fear at the point they are interviewed by the asylum officer then they are released either via a bond, personal recognisance, or via electronic monitoring and reporting. They are given a NTA (Notice to Appear) which has a court date on it and released until their court date. The law at no time requires someone who has passed the credible fear interview to be detained. If they are denied by the asylum officer then they have the right to appeal that to an Immigration Judge who will hear their case and they do have to be detained until that court date....if the judge grants it they also grant a release on the prior conditions I mentioned.
 
ClaraD said:
The law doesn't state that. It says they have to be detained until CREDIBLE FEAR is established. The poster is unable to distinguish what the steps are in the process.

A person turns themselves in and requests protection from deportation due to a fear of return to their country
The initial interview happens and they are processed in the next 48 hours (often takes longer) at that point they are registered for a credible fear interview tih an asylum officer. If they are granted credible fear at the point they are interviewed by the asylum officer then they are released either via a bond, personal recognisance, or via electronic monitoring and reporting. They are given a NTA (Notice to Appear) which has a court date on it and released until their court date. The law at no time requires someone who has passed the credible fear interview to be detained. If they are denied by the asylum officer then they have the right to appeal that to an Immigration Judge who will hear their case and they do have to be detained until that court date....if the judge grants it they also grant a release on the prior conditions I mentioned.
Click to expand...


What is being described is what is happening.

But what the law says it's that the person claiming asylum is detained until a final determination is made.
Even if in the initial interview the officer agrees there exists credible fear.

That is why the judge in this OP ruled in that manner.
 
Athanasius68 said:
What is being described is what is happening.

But what the law says it's that the person claiming asylum is detained until a final determination is made.
Even if in the initial interview the officer agrees there exists credible fear.

That is why the judge in this OP ruled in that manner.
Click to expand...
that is not what the law says...and that isn't how the judge ruled. The judge said until a court date is issued....that is a Notice to Appear. It is a paper with the court date on it...and believe me that court date for the master hearing isn't 2 weeks down the road...it is years down the road.
 
Athanasius68 said:
I said the law says that such migrants "shall be" detained until their claims of persecution are resolved.

But you are correct that often the law is ignored.
Click to expand...
That isn't what the judge said....either you didn't read past the sensationalist headline or you are ignoring what it is or you are ignorant of immigration law in reference to asylum and the process involved. I suspect all of the above is true. No where does that ruling say that the final asylum decision has to be made.

allowing the Biden administration to release immigrants from Border Patrol custody without a court date.
 
MTAtech said:
If the Masters Hearing is administrative Biden can fast track the process.
Click to expand...
I just realized what you are saying...no the Master hearing is before an immigration judge it isn't simply administrative. It is a processs required under our constitution and law....due process cannot be interrupted here. The asylum officer isn't given the authority under law to grant or deny asylum...they only can grant or deny credible fear and refer it to the immigration judge.
 
ClaraD said:
That doesn't say without a court order....Not surprised that you or the Examiner would twist it to say what it does not say...all that says is they have to be given an NTA (Notice to Appear) it is paperwork with a FUTURE court date in which they have to present themselves to the IJ for a master hearing....a master hearing is the first step after credible fear has been granted...and it usually takes more than a year for that to occur.....
Click to expand...
The point remains that Bidne just wanted to release people into the country without a court date and now he cannot. And that is a good thing.
 
Fletch said:
The point remains that Bidne just wanted to release people into the country without a court date and now he cannot. And that is a good thing.
Click to expand...
Biden didn't implement any such thing...it is Border Patrol that was releasing them on a case by case with CONDITIONAL parole due to overcrowding.
 
ClaraD said:
Biden didn't implement any such thing...it is Border Patrol that was releasing them on a case by case with CONDITIONAL parole due to overcrowding.
Click to expand...
The Border Patrol acting on orders from whom?
 
Plasmaball said:
Because of trump they are getting dates till like 2027. He really ****ed up the system
Click to expand...
There is not lie you libs wont tell is there. Year 3 of the Biden administration and you are blaming Trump for the disaster at the border. No, the disaster at the border is by design. By design of the woke Marxists pulling Bidens puppet strings. This is what they want but like good leftists pretend that they dont. Why? Because the left is not honest about any issue.
 
ClaraD said:
They have broad discretion on who they release with parole. It is a policy decision made by the officer in charge of the district.
Click to expand...
This ruling keeps them from mass release which is what the Biden administration wanted to do.
 
Fletch said:
This ruling keeps them from mass release which is what the Biden administration wanted to do.
Click to expand...
Not really. All they have to hand them is a NTA with the court date...and that court date can be 20 years in the future. It just requires that they follow the process..which i am not opposed to.
 
ClaraD said:
Not really. All they have to hand them is a NTA with the court date...and that court date can be 20 years in the future. It just requires that they follow the process..which i am not opposed to.
Click to expand...
Then why is the White House so upset at the ruling?
 
Fletch said:
news.yahoo.com

‘Political stunts’: White House pushes back after Florida judge blocks federal immigration policy

White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre on Friday said the Biden administration will fight a Florida federal judge’s ruling that at least temporarily blocked a new immigration policy.
news.yahoo.com news.yahoo.com
Click to expand...
This doesn't seem to be the same thing. This article says that they are fighting a ruling that blocks immigrants from being released on parole....parole is actually a legal process accepted under immigration law. Did you not know that?
He also implemented new requirements that would require they have to apply for asylum in a country they go through before trying in the US....(also would have been blocked according to your link) and there were certain paroles implemented for family members of people who have legal status here and are from certain countries under family reunification. So, a spouse of a US citizen would qualify for parole under certain conditions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom