jonny5
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2012
- Messages
- 27,581
- Reaction score
- 4,664
- Location
- Republic of Florida
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian
Replace Ginsburg and Breyer with conservative justicesGiven Trumps offer to not try to rescind DACA for three years if the Dems agree to border control funding, it leads me to an interesting question about the status of DACA. How do we get rid of such that the court wont object?
Lets assume DHS actually did have the authority to defer deportation of hundreds of thousands of illegals (via DHS memo, not Executive Order). And that DHS recision 5 years later was arbitrary and thus a violation of the Administrative Procedure Act as the court claimed.
Ok, so the court wont let it die, and the SC wont hear the appeal. The congress wont pass any laws legalizing the "Dreamers". How do we then get rid of the policy such that it is not done in an arbitrary way? Propose to rescind it on valid grounds, have hearings for 6 months, and then do it? Would the 9th circus allow that? What if we just stop taking new applicants and allow the existing to continue staying here? Would the courts allow no new deferments?
Replace Ginsburg and Breyer with conservative justices
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Replace Ginsburg and Breyer with conservative justices
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
I can agree with the dubious way in which it came about, but my question would be why we want to get rid of it?
Many of the Dreamers have pretty much spent their entire lives here...this is essentially the only country they’ve ever known.
Why would you want to send them back to a country they don’t know and have never really experienced?
(I know that doesn’t fit all the Dreamers...they can talked about in a future discussion).
I can agree with the dubious way in which it came about, but my question would be why we want to get rid of it?
Many of the Dreamers have pretty much spent their entire lives here...this is essentially the only country they’ve ever known.
Why would you want to send them back to a country they don’t know and have never really experienced?
(I know that doesn’t fit all the Dreamers...they can talked about in a future discussion).
If I found out someone was living in my house rent free for decades, I’d still kick them out. It has nothing to do with them, or what they know, or what’s comfortable for them. Screw them. It’s about the people they are and have been victimizing. Just because some might be OK with being victimized doesn’t mean the rest of us have to be OK with it.
A new scotus may decide to hear the caseDoesnt help if the Supreme Court wont even hear the appeal. Or that lower courts will keep ruling against the unmaking of regulations.
https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/is-daca-stuck-in-limbo-at-the-supreme-court
How old is he?Might want to add Roberts in that fix.
Who have DACA recipients been victimizing?
Replace Ginsburg and Breyer with conservative justices
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Trump should ignore the courts. They have no jurisdiction to rule on the matter. Maybe SCOTUS, but I would question their authority to compel the executive to continue a previous executive ‘policy’.
If I found out someone was living in my house rent free for decades, I’d still kick them out. It has nothing to do with them, or what they know, or what’s comfortable for them. Screw them. It’s about the people they are and have been victimizing. Just because some might be OK with being victimized doesn’t mean the rest of us have to be OK with it.
Lets assume DHS actually did have the authority to defer deportation
You should look up "Adverse Possession." There is a reason why for centuries courts have sided with squatters in long term situations. You may think you are entitled to do as you please to anyone who happens to step foot on your legal property, but the reality is that their human rights far outweigh your property rights. And that's how it should be.
Adverse possession is about knowing abandonment of property rights by the owner, not a placement of "human rights" above property rights.
Given Trumps offer to not try to rescind DACA for three years if the Dems agree to border control funding, it leads me to an interesting question about the status of DACA. How do we get rid of such that the court wont object?
Lets assume DHS actually did have the authority to defer deportation of hundreds of thousands of illegals (via DHS memo, not Executive Order). And that DHS recision 5 years later was arbitrary and thus a violation of the Administrative Procedure Act as the court claimed.
Ok, so the court wont let it die, and the SC wont hear the appeal. The congress wont pass any laws legalizing the "Dreamers". How do we then get rid of the policy such that it is not done in an arbitrary way? Propose to rescind it on valid grounds, have hearings for 6 months, and then do it? Would the 9th circus allow that? What if we just stop taking new applicants and allow the existing to continue staying here? Would the courts allow no new deferments?
Not necessarily. A property need not have been knowingly abandoned. All that's required is that the squatter have lived there uninterrupted without permission for the minimum statutory time. And the reason why that law exists is because it is assumed in those cases that the squatter has through constant care made the property more of a home to herself than the legal owner has to himself.
I'm not suggesting the law applies to Dreamer cases, but the reason for it does.
If I found out someone was living in my house rent free for decades, I’d still kick them out. It has nothing to do with them, or what they know, or what’s comfortable for them. Screw them. It’s about the people they are and have been victimizing. Just because some might be OK with being victimized doesn’t mean the rest of us have to be OK with it.
Every American Citizen and legal resident.
I can agree with the dubious way in which it came about, but my question would be why we want to get rid of it?
Many of the Dreamers have pretty much spent their entire lives here...this is essentially the only country they’ve ever known.
Why would you want to send them back to a country they don’t know and have never really experienced?
(I know that doesn’t fit all the Dreamers...they can talked about in a future discussion).
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?