How to legally deny asylum to all in the "caravan" in 1 day in federal court

[joko104]

The problem: Anyone who claims asylum must be allowed a hearing within 20 days or released on a promise to appear. There are 700,000 backlogged cases with a 7 to 10 year waiting period for a hearing. Few come back.

Solution: Summary judgments

In both criminal and civil law, if incontrovertible facts establish how a court should rule as a matter of law, there is no trial or hearing. Many cases of all kinds are concluded in this manner. Any legitimate lawyer could confirm the practice and concept of summary judgments.

The facts exist to summarily deny all in the caravan asylum on these indisputable facts:

1. An asylum seeker must accept asylum from the first country they enter that offers asylum.
2. Everyone in the caravan passed thru Mexico.
3. Mexico offered asylum. Mexico has never offered that before, so that is a NEW factor in seeking asylum.

Upon those 3 facts alone there is an absolute summary judgment basis to deny asylum to everyone and anyone in the caravan. Since that is federal law, no other facts or claims would have any relevancy whatsoever, since law does not allow anyone claiming asylum from Mexico so none could demand asylum from asylum in Mexico. Mexicans can not claim asylum. Any federal judge or their magistrates could sign such summary judgment orders. While in theory the person could appeal, no federal judge would be required to allow remaining in the USA during the appeal process. That is always at the judge's discretion.

Problem solved in a day for any asylum seeker in the caravan. NO change in law or regulations required.

 

[Grand Mal]

The problem: Anyone who claims asylum must be allowed a hearing within 20 days or released on a promise to appear. There are 700,000 backlogged cases with a 7 to 10 year waiting period for a hearing. Few come back.

Solution: Summary judgments

In both criminal and civil law, if incontrovertible facts establish how a court should rule as a matter of law, there is no trial or hearing. Many cases of all kinds are concluded in this manner. Any legitimate lawyer could confirm the practice and concept of summary judgments.

The facts exist to summarily deny all in the caravan asylum on these indisputable facts:

1. An asylum seeker must accept asylum from the first country they enter that offers asylum.
2. Everyone in the caravan passed thru Mexico.
3. Mexico offered asylum. Mexico has never offered that before, so that is a NEW factor in seeking asylum.

Upon those 3 facts alone there is an absolute summary judgment basis to deny asylum to everyone and anyone in the caravan. Since that is federal law, no other facts or claims would have any relevancy whatsoever, since law does not allow anyone claiming asylum from Mexico so none could demand asylum from asylum in Mexico. Mexicans can not claim asylum. Any federal judge or their magistrates could sign such summary judgment orders. While in theory the person could appeal, no federal judge would be required to allow remaining in the USA during the appeal process. That is always at the judge's discretion.

Problem solved in a day for any asylum seeker in the caravan. NO change in law or regulations required.

I can smell your fear from here.

 

[NeverTrump]

The problem: Anyone who claims asylum must be allowed a hearing within 20 days or released on a promise to appear. There are 700,000 backlogged cases with a 7 to 10 year waiting period for a hearing. Few come back.

Solution: Summary judgments

In both criminal and civil law, if incontrovertible facts establish how a court should rule as a matter of law, there is no trial or hearing. Many cases of all kinds are concluded in this manner. Any legitimate lawyer could confirm the practice and concept of summary judgments.

The facts exist to summarily deny all in the caravan asylum on these indisputable facts:

1. An asylum seeker must accept asylum from the first country they enter that offers asylum.
2. Everyone in the caravan passed thru Mexico.
3. Mexico offered asylum. Mexico has never offered that before, so that is a NEW factor in seeking asylum.

Upon those 3 facts alone there is an absolute summary judgment basis to deny asylum to everyone and anyone in the caravan. Since that is federal law, no other facts or claims would have any relevancy whatsoever, since law does not allow anyone claiming asylum from Mexico so none could demand asylum from asylum in Mexico. Mexicans can not claim asylum. Any federal judge or their magistrates could sign such summary judgment orders. While in theory the person could appeal, no federal judge would be required to allow remaining in the USA during the appeal process. That is always at the judge's discretion.

Problem solved in a day for any asylum seeker in the caravan. NO change in law or regulations required.

You have too much time on your hands.

 

[Nickyjo]

The problem: Anyone who claims asylum must be allowed a hearing within 20 days or released on a promise to appear. There are 700,000 backlogged cases with a 7 to 10 year waiting period for a hearing. Few come back.

Solution: Summary judgments

In both criminal and civil law, if incontrovertible facts establish how a court should rule as a matter of law, there is no trial or hearing. Many cases of all kinds are concluded in this manner. Any legitimate lawyer could confirm the practice and concept of summary judgments.

The facts exist to summarily deny all in the caravan asylum on these indisputable facts:

1. An asylum seeker must accept asylum from the first country they enter that offers asylum.
2. Everyone in the caravan passed thru Mexico.
3. Mexico offered asylum. Mexico has never offered that before, so that is a NEW factor in seeking asylum.

Upon those 3 facts alone there is an absolute summary judgment basis to deny asylum to everyone and anyone in the caravan. Since that is federal law, no other facts or claims would have any relevancy whatsoever, since law does not allow anyone claiming asylum from Mexico so none could demand asylum from asylum in Mexico. Mexicans can not claim asylum. Any federal judge or their magistrates could sign such summary judgment orders. While in theory the person could appeal, no federal judge would be required to allow remaining in the USA during the appeal process. That is always at the judge's discretion.
li
Problem solved in a day for any asylum seeker in the caravan. NO change in law or regulations required.

You still have to deal with the Convention and Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees, which prohibits forcible return of people to countries where their lives or freedom would be in danger. You also would have to address the question of whether the migrants knew that they could apply for asylum in Mexico. And of course, there is nothing in the law that says that an asylum seeker has to accept asylum from the first country that offers it. From what I remember from 20 years of work on the issue, one can bar asylum to people who are “firmly resettled” in a third country they passed through. That’s it.

Why are you caring about these people? If they are legit refugees we can accept them without breaking a sweat. If they are not, ditto. This is all part of Trump’s scapegoat search. He picks on the weakest and his supporters say great, thanks for giving us someone to hate. Hitler used gypsies, a different set of migrants. Trump, the bully-in-chief, uses Central Americans. Goebbels would be proud.

 

[joko104]

You still have to deal with the Convention and Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees, which prohibits forcible return of people to countries where their lives or freedom would be in danger. You also would have to address the question of whether the migrants knew that they could apply for asylum in Mexico. And of course, there is nothing in the law that says that an asylum seeker has to accept asylum from the first country that offers it. From what I remember from 20 years of work on the issue, one can bar asylum to people who are “firmly resettled” in a third country they passed through. That’s it.

Why are you caring about these people? If they are legit refugees we can accept them without breaking a sweat. If they are not, ditto. This is all part of Trump’s scapegoat search. He picks on the weakest and his supporters say great, thanks for giving us someone to hate. Hitler used gypsies, a different set of migrants. Trump, the bully-in-chief, uses Central Americans. Goebbels would be proud.

Drop the Hitler crap. Obama bragged of deporting people. Link to your calling Obama Hitler and Goebbels. There is NO intellectual integrity in your message, just fake partisan ranting as if you actually give a damn.

The USA is not the world's dumping ground, though I do understand that the Democratic Party wants to **** on American blue collar workers and gut social programs for Americans on behalf of mostly bum men who abandoned their children, wives, sisters and mothers - the last type of people we need here.

While a person does not have to accept asylum from any country obviously, that blows their asylum claim. It means all the claims of the motive being fear is a lie. It's economic, nothing else. Notice of Mexico offering asylum and that their home country is not deemed inherently a danger are all matters than can be handled by summary judgment.

 

[Mary Dunsmore]

The problem: Anyone who claims asylum must be allowed a hearing within 20 days or released on a promise to appear. There are 700,000 backlogged cases with a 7 to 10 year waiting period for a hearing. Few come back.

Solution: Summary judgments

In both criminal and civil law, if incontrovertible facts establish how a court should rule as a matter of law, there is no trial or hearing. Many cases of all kinds are concluded in this manner. Any legitimate lawyer could confirm the practice and concept of summary judgments.

The facts exist to summarily deny all in the caravan asylum on these indisputable facts:

1. An asylum seeker must accept asylum from the first country they enter that offers asylum.
2. Everyone in the caravan passed thru Mexico.
3. Mexico offered asylum. Mexico has never offered that before, so that is a NEW factor in seeking asylum.

Upon those 3 facts alone there is an absolute summary judgment basis to deny asylum to everyone and anyone in the caravan. Since that is federal law, no other facts or claims would have any relevancy whatsoever, since law does not allow anyone claiming asylum from Mexico so none could demand asylum from asylum in Mexico. Mexicans can not claim asylum. Any federal judge or their magistrates could sign such summary judgment orders. While in theory the person could appeal, no federal judge would be required to allow remaining in the USA during the appeal process. That is always at the judge's discretion.

Problem solved in a day for any asylum seeker in the caravan. NO change in law or regulations required.

Good thread, and a good reason for the army to use them as target practice. BANG !!

 

[PleasantValley]

Good thread, and a good reason for the army to use them as target practice. BANG !!

Q. How can you shoot women and children so easily?

A. It is easy, you don't have to lead them as much.

 

[Cisero]

Good thread, and a good reason for the army to use them as target practice. BANG !!

Wow :-(

 

[markjs]

The problem: Anyone who claims asylum must be allowed a hearing within 20 days or released on a promise to appear. There are 700,000 backlogged cases with a 7 to 10 year waiting period for a hearing. Few come back.

Solution: Summary judgments

In both criminal and civil law, if incontrovertible facts establish how a court should rule as a matter of law, there is no trial or hearing. Many cases of all kinds are concluded in this manner. Any legitimate lawyer could confirm the practice and concept of summary judgments.

The facts exist to summarily deny all in the caravan asylum on these indisputable facts:

1. An asylum seeker must accept asylum from the first country they enter that offers asylum.
2. Everyone in the caravan passed thru Mexico.
3. Mexico offered asylum. Mexico has never offered that before, so that is a NEW factor in seeking asylum.

Upon those 3 facts alone there is an absolute summary judgment basis to deny asylum to everyone and anyone in the caravan. Since that is federal law, no other facts or claims would have any relevancy whatsoever, since law does not allow anyone claiming asylum from Mexico so none could demand asylum from asylum in Mexico. Mexicans can not claim asylum. Any federal judge or their magistrates could sign such summary judgment orders. While in theory the person could appeal, no federal judge would be required to allow remaining in the USA during the appeal process. That is always at the judge's discretion.

Problem solved in a day for any asylum seeker in the caravan. NO change in law or regulations required.

Wow I bet you feel smart and all warm on the inside now huh? To deny asylum blanket over all of them in one shot. Maybe you could find a way to justify shooting them, maybe that would make you feel even better?

 

[markjs]

Wow :-(

If that surprise you you are one naive mofo!

 

[AlphaOmega]

Drop the Hitler crap. Obama bragged of deporting people. Link to your calling Obama Hitler and Goebbels. There is NO intellectual integrity in your message, just fake partisan ranting as if you actually give a damn.

The USA is not the world's dumping ground, though I do understand that the Democratic Party wants to **** on American blue collar workers and gut social programs for Americans on behalf of mostly bum men who abandoned their children, wives, sisters and mothers - the last type of people we need here.

While a person does not have to accept asylum from any country obviously, that blows their asylum claim. It means all the claims of the motive being fear is a lie. It's economic, nothing else. Notice of Mexico offering asylum and that their home country is not deemed inherently a danger are all matters than can be handled by summary judgment.

Exactly, they arent refugees if they turned down Mexicos offer. They are simply birds flocking to the leftist bird feeders at this point. Wanting a higher paying job doesnt meet the requirements of refugee status.

 

[marke]

I can smell your fear from here.

There is no need to fear the shutdown of unending leftist liberal foolishness.

 

[joko104]

Wow I bet you feel smart and all warm on the inside now huh? To deny asylum blanket over all of them in one shot. Maybe you could find a way to justify shooting them, maybe that would make you feel even better?

No, I wish no harm to anyone in the caravan, not in the slightest. I wish them each the very best. Each should accept Mexico's offer or go back to their home country. Whoever organized this should be imprisoned.

 

[Mary Dunsmore]

Q.

How can you shoot women and children so easily?

It's no harder than shooting a man actually, but I do not suggest it is easy. It depends how far you are from the target. Close up is easiest, but sometimes their head explodes. To far away and it get's tricky. I find about 30 yards to be ideal. Close enough to put a bullet between their eyes, but not to close to get splattered in blood :lol:

 

[nota bene]

I can smell your fear from here.

I can see your avoidance of a response to the idea put forth. Why is that?

 

[ludin]

Wow I bet you feel smart and all warm on the inside now huh? To deny asylum blanket over all of them in one shot. Maybe you could find a way to justify shooting them, maybe that would make you feel even better?

see folks here we have non-logical statements being made.
and the strawmen arguments.

 

[nota bene]

Refugees
Refugee status is a form of protection that may be granted to people who meet the definition of refugee and who are of special humanitarian concern to the United States. Refugees are generally people outside of their country who are unable or unwilling to return home because they fear serious harm. For a legal definition of refugee, see section 101(a)(42) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). https://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/refugees-asylum

https://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/SLB/HTML/SLB/0-0-0-1/0-0-0-29/0-0-0-101/0-0-0-195.html

 

[Nickyjo]

Drop the Hitler crap. Obama bragged of deporting people. Link to your calling Obama Hitler and Goebbels. There is NO intellectual integrity in your message, just fake partisan ranting as if you actually give a damn.

The USA is not the world's dumping ground, though I do understand that the Democratic Party wants to **** on American blue collar workers and gut social programs for Americans on behalf of mostly bum men who abandoned their children, wives, sisters and mothers - the last type of people we need here.

While a person does not have to accept asylum from any country obviously, that blows their asylum claim. It means all the claims of the motive being fear is a lie. It's economic, nothing else. Notice of Mexico offering asylum and that their home country is not deemed inherently a danger are all matters than can be handled by summary judgment.

Ok, going Hitler is always somewhat unfair, but the gypsy analogy holds. You describe the migrants as “mostly bum men” and “dumping ground” and “last type of people we need here” suggests you somehow know their motives and character and is the sort of language that was used about gypsies. And no, the law does not allow for summary judgement based on speculation.