SCOTUS, Suspends the Constitution

[Valletta]

This is why Trump and the republicans are fighting Biden's request for more funding for the Border Patrol. As usual, it's all about money.

Biden uses more money to process more illegals into the country. It is totally about the misuse of money by Joe Biden and Mayorkas.

 

[ralliann]

Biden uses more money to process more illegals into the country. It is totally about the misuse of money by Joe Biden and Mayorkas.

It is about creating a process to legally vote. That is the end goal. We all know the border has been opened by Biden, yet he claims he cannot do anything. There is a goal in mind is all.

 

[Arcangl86]

Biden uses more money to process more illegals into the country. It is totally about the misuse of money by Joe Biden and Mayorkas.

What else is he supposed to do? Those hearings are required by US law.

 

[The Barbarian]

This is why Trump and the republicans are fighting Biden's request for more funding for the Border Patrol. As usual, it's all about money.

Biden uses more money to process more illegals into the country.

He's complying with existing law in that regard. But Biden is asking for more money to add people to the border patrol to keep others from coming in illegally. And that's what Donald Trump objects to; now that the economy is booming, all he has left is the border as an issue, and if Biden gets the resources to add border patrol and adjudicate asylum requests more rapidly ( to remove those illegally applying) he has no issues left.

 

[The Barbarian]

What else is he supposed to do? Those hearings are required by US law.

Trump promises that he won't be restrained by the law if he's elected. Believe it or not some Americans actually think it's a good thing. Trump's boss certainly does....

 

[th1bill]

While I know conservatives love referring to what is happening at the border as an invasion, that's not what the Constitution means by that. This paper does a pretty good job of laying out what it does mean. Now I will admit it focuses on a different clause then the one you are, but I think it's probably safe to assume the founders didn't have different meanings in mind. https://www.texaspolicy.com/wp-cont...R-SST-CompactClause-JoshuaTrevino-paper5-.pdf

I cannot find where you are from but it must not be that you are from the Southwest, New York or DC. Those two cities found the Invasion as distasteful as we do in the Southwest.

 

[th1bill]

Trump promises that he won't be restrained by the law if he's elected. Believe it or not some Americans actually think it's a good thing. Trump's boss certainly does....

Barbarian, implication without supporting fact is, almost, always not true.

 

[Arcangl86]

I cannot find where you are from but it must not be that you are from the Southwest, New York or DC. Those two cities found the Invasion as distasteful as we do in the Southwest.

Actually I am from New York. Even if I wasn't though, that wouldn't magically change the Constitutional meaning of "invasion" which is what my post had to do with.

 

[th1bill]

Actually I am from New York. Even if I wasn't though, that wouldn't magically change the Constitutional meaning of "invasion" which is what my post had to do with.

Still being vague and that leaves me to think well north of NYC, maybe south of Watertown and out of touch with loosing jobs and revenue to the Invasion of Illegals ranging from Jose Mexican to Omar Terrorist and Chinese Who Can Guess. I am sorry but you are out of touch with reality.

 

[rocknanchor]

While I know conservatives love referring to what is happening at the border as an invasion, that's not what the Constitution means by that. This paper does a pretty good job of laying out what it does mean. Now I will admit it focuses on a different clause then the one you are, but I think it's probably safe to assume the founders didn't have different meanings in mind. https://www.texaspolicy.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/2022-11-RR-SST-CompactClause-JoshuaTrevino-paper5-.pdf

The author of that archived definition has presented a much more concise explanation,

Make no mistake, Texas is faithfully executing the law — both its own, and the Constitution’s, which provides in Article I, Section 10, for a state to defend itself against invasion. - Joshua s. Trevino​

​

The Definition of a Foreign 'Invasion'​

 

[rocknanchor]

I don't think that the republicans object to legal immigration. Their reluctance to fund border security is based on contributions they get to look the other way on illegal immigration.

Would love to see some credible source to that attack on legal immigration.

 

[The Barbarian]

Would love to see some credible source to that attack on legal immigration.

Other than Donald Trump, I'm not aware of any republican leader who has objected to legal immigration.

 

[The Barbarian]

Barbarian, implication without supporting fact is, almost, always not true.

Trump sided with Putin against our own intelligence agencies. Would you like to see that? Or would you like to see Trump's statement that he'd be a dictator ("for a day") if re-elected?

Or would you like to see both of those?

 

[Arcangl86]

Still being vague and that leaves me to think well north of NYC, maybe south of Watertown and out of touch with loosing jobs and revenue to the Invasion of Illegals ranging from Jose Mexican to Omar Terrorist and Chinese Who Can Guess. I am sorry but you are out of touch with reality.

Are you actually going to address the content of my post or just continue with this bizarre personal attack?

 

[Richard T]

To me the arrival of the immigrants is a symptom, and the cure goes much further than trying to stop immigrants. The cure is to address the invasion of globalist ideology that wants to unite the world. It has been taught in schools with many universities and companies pushing the agenda, some for profits, others for their quest for a New World order. International Economics often suggests that after free trade areas, free labor mobility is the next step in integrating nations. Ideas were floated to allow more legal immigration politically but when that stalled the USA is left with is de facto, labor mobility between U.S. and Mexico because there is no will to stop it by some people in power. So now we have the worst of both worlds, labor mobility of the most needy, with no regulation. You want to stop the invasion, you have to change attitudes and quit supporting globalization schemes that consolidate power and wealth flows to the top. Better to embrace more legal immigration than continue this nonsense.

 

[The Barbarian]

So now we have the worst of both worlds, labor mobility of the most needy, with no regulation.

It's the way the founders of America set things up. We had no immigration restrictions until the end of the 19th century. Turns out, prosperity tends to track with immigration.

The fear of racists that "legacy Americans" will lose their place in America is just foolish. The immigration of German, Irish, Italian, Jewish and Hispanic peoples did change America, but left our institutions and values intact. After all, they came here attracted by those institutions and values.

 

[rocknanchor]

EVERYONE who loathes lawful immigration and joyfully conducts operations that undermine that process, including those who think they are doing the Lord a service, isn't.

“Therefore, submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake” (1 Peter 2:13)

"I was a stranger, and you took Me in." (Matthew 25:35)​

​

It doesn't matter who the privately lawless promoters of "Christian love" among us are. So I'll just scatter one out there for them to deal with; Which of these two verses did God the Holy Spirit intend on us implementing? Wrong, if you think 'Christian love' grants suspension of vs13. Didn't you hear the Master?

“Enter by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many who go in by it. Because narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it. (Matthew 7:13,14)​

​

God's will to 'love enemies' suggest NO CONFUSION to suspend laws.

 

[th1bill]

Trump sided with Putin against our own intelligence agencies. Would you like to see that? Or would you like to see Trump's statement that he'd be a dictator ("for a day") if re-elected?

Or would you like to see both of those?

You have shown me this trash before but, in context, Trump is not guilty of this.

 

[th1bill]

Are you actually going to address the content of my post or just continue with this bizarre personal attack?

This is not any form of attack, I'll respond when you post fact and not allusion to Pasuado Fact.

 

[Arcangl86]

This is not any form of attack, I'll respond when you post fact and not allusion to Pasuado Fact.

Seriously? You are calling me out of touch with reality and you think that isn't a personal attack?