What do you think about with current News and Opinions?

MunoRN, RN · May 17, 2022

13 hours ago, Justlookingfornow said:

Perhaps he's not breaking the law (Biden) but not enforcing it?

" First, Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro N. Mayorkas established enforcement priority categories with a Sept. 30, 2021, memorandum on Guidelines for the Enforcement of Civil Immigration Law:

Threat to National Security — Migrants who have engaged in or are suspected of terrorism or espionage, or who otherwise poses a danger to national security.

Threat to Public Safety — Migrants who poses a current threat to public safety, typically because of serious criminal conduct.

Threat to Border Security — Migrants who were apprehended at the border or a port of entry while attempting to unlawfully enter the United States, or who succeeded in making an unlawful entry after November 1, 2020.

Mayorkas restricted enforcement actions to migrants in one of these priority categories, but exceptions are permitted with preapproval from senior supervisors. According to Mayorkas, the fact that an individual is removable by law should not alone be the basis for taking an actual enforcement action against him.

The result is that there is little, if any, danger that a deportable migrant in the interior of the country will be put in removal proceedings unless he is convicted of a crime that makes him a threat to national security or public safety, or ICE knows that he entered unlawfully after Nov. 1, 2020.

This encourages illegal crossers to keep trying until they succeed in evading detection — or until CBP releases them into the interior of the country.

Extension of the guidelines

On April 3, 2022, Kerry E. Doyle, the ICE Principal Legal Advisor, issued a memorandum that took the enforcement guidelines a step further. She directed ICE lawyers to remove nonpriority cases from the immigration court docket. The preferred method is a motion to dismiss without prejudice.

In other words, the Biden administration — after limiting who can be prosecuted — has decided to simply dismiss pending immigration cases, allowing people to stay in country. They expect to do this with about 700,000 existing immigration cases.

According to Doyle, “The exercise of prosecutorial discretion, where appropriate, can preserve limited government resources, achieve just and fair outcomes in individual cases, and advance DHS’s mission of administering and enforcing the immigration laws of the United States in a smart and sensible way that promotes public confidence.”

But does it faithfully execute the statutory enforcement provisions in the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA)? The U.S. Constitution has a Take Care Clause which provides that the president “shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.”

Supreme Court decisions have held that the Take Care Clause imposes a duty on the president to ensure the officials in his administration obey Congress’s commands.

In a recent lower court decision, a federal judge granted a motion from the State of Arizona for a preliminary injunction to prevent the implementation of some of the provisions in Biden’s enforcement guidelines.

The judge noted that the guidelines provide that immigration officials “should not rely on the fact of conviction or the result of a database search alone” when making an enforcement-related decision, such as whether to detain or deport a migrant who has committed a criminal offense. They must weigh the aggravating and mitigating factors against each other.

But INA section 1226(c) mandates the detention of immigrants who have “committed” certain enumerated offenses, and INA section 1227 provides that immigrants convicted of certain criminal offenses “shall” be removed.

Consequently, the judge concluded that Arizona is likely to prevail on its argument that the guidelines include unlawful provisions.

What has Doyle accomplished?

In the first six month of fiscal 2022, the immigration courts received 432,403 new cases and only completed 143,739. This means that so far in fiscal 2022, the backlog has increased by 288,664 cases. It won’t take long at that rate to replace the 700,000 cases the administration expects to withdraw from the immigration court docket.

Moreover, there may be a flood of illegal crossers next month. Biden has terminated the Title 42 order that permits CBP to expel illegal crossers without the processing ordinarily required by the provisions in the INA. The termination will be effective on May 23.

Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) said on Twitter that, “Dropping Title 42 without other changes in border policies will produce a tsunami of migrants & drugs.”

DHS officials are preparing for the possibility of as many as 18,000 border apprehensions per day when the order is lifted.

A federal judge has issued a temporary restraining order prohibiting changes to the Title 42 order, which is set to last two weeks, but it can be extended, which could prevent the administration from lifting the order on May 23.".

https://thehill.com/opinion/immigration/3470059-can-biden-get-away-with-not-enforcing-the-immigration-law/

If it's any consolation,I believe that Biden relies to heavily on his advisors and doesn't challenge them enough or assess situations himself. This is a warm environment for some to manipulate their own agenda. He in my opinion has age related condition changes whether they are "dementia" type changes or "normal" age related changes, he definitely isn't as sharp as he once was.

Disclaimer: Although there has been no public information released to support that Biden may be in cognitive decline, I rely on my personal experience and observations,however I am not in a position to provide any diagnosis. This is only my opinion.

Title 42 is part of a law that allows the suspension of processing asylum applicants, which is otherwise legally required. It is only allowed in order to prevent a serious disease from entering the US, which clearly no longer applies. Title 42 does not allow for closing the border to asylum seekers just for that purpose.

There is no doubt now a huge backlog is processing those seeking asylum and refugee status, which is largely the result of enacting Title 42, it's not something that if continued will fix the backlog problem.

MunoRN, RN · May 17, 2022

On 5/14/2022 at 11:57 PM, Beerman said:

I'm not convinced that Biden is to blame for the shortage. But, it's laughable to suggest that formula is being sent to the border in order to comply with some kind of law.

I'm not sure why it wouldn't be because of the law, but even if the law didn't exist I would hope it would be because it's pretty sadistic to detain infants and then starve them to death. How has agreeing with that become a political view?

MunoRN, RN · May 17, 2022

13 hours ago, Beerman said:

FL has a pending lawsuit, and this press release lays it out very well:

https://www.flgov.com/2022/02/02/in-case-you-missed-it-governor-desantis-and-attorney-general-moody-announce-florida-is-taking-legal-action-aginst-biden-administration-for-releasing-illegal-immigrants-into-florida/

I agree that there are important discussions to be had about all aspects of immigration, but this sort of disinformation doesn't help that happen.

The "illegal immigrants" that the suit and various republicans are referring to are not actually illegal immigrants, they are those legally seeking to apply for asylum. Under current immigration law, the federal government is required to provide an asylum application hearing to anyone who seeks one.

The problem is that when there's a backlog in the ability to process these cases, the government only has two legal options; place them in a detention facility so long as they aren't full (and there's been no apparent interest in spending more on detention facilities), or release them pending a notice to appear for their hearing.

I think there are a number of things we should change, but that's not really possible when a major political party is intentionally keeping their followers in the dark about how the process actually works and what the laws actually are.

toomuchbaloney · May 17, 2022

1 hour ago, Justlookingfornow said:

I seem you have a hatred for Trump. I do not think Biden is a good president but I don't hate him. I would like him to do good things in his Presidency but not relish in the negatives. He's the POTUS, he fails, America fails. Seems self destructive.

I can find several negative Trump articles and negative Biden ones too. The bottom line is approx half the nation voted for Trump, more voted for Biden. I wouldn't tell the nation that half of them voted for terrible president on either side. As I say, the voters take the credibility in my opinion. Not a sea of negative analysis' for either of the two. The votes are a much more credible source in my opinion.

I wouldn't say that I hate Trump but I certainly despise what he represents. His lies about the 2020 election coupled with his attempts to undermine our democratic processes to retain lost power should be troubling to every patriot.

You can argue with historians and political scientists about how Trump performed but withholding military aid in an attempt to extort the Ukrainian president and then that whole election lie/ attempted coup are big clues that the fellow was not a good president... that's not even considering his unprecedented lying. I wouldn't say that the votes say much when some of those voters believe that Q was a truth teller and that Trump was draining the swamp.

Justlookingfornow · May 17, 2022

4 hours ago, Tweety said:

I think you're probably middle of the road with right leaning. Your post "Riots are okay for some but not.all. Protests are not riots depending on your beliefs or what's being protested. It's okay to discriminate against certain groups but not others. Some groups cannot be racist and other groups are racists determin..." about hypocrisy lead me to this thought.

But you can clarify that for me if you choose do or not.

That being said, just about every conservative on this forum when confronted with the unpleasantness of the violence on January 6th deflects to "what about the violence of BLM or other riots, which is that okay and this isn't" which you seemed to do. One thing I don't like, and I've called out liberals here because they do it often, a change of subject with a "well you're upset about this, but what about........" or "liberals would be outraged if Trump was president" so as to avoid the topic.

I'm middle of the road leaning to the left. I don't mind being liberal or woke or saying so. But I also don't mind acknowledging the flaws in people I vote for, or liberal policies that I don't like or calling out liberals here in these forums. For example, I think I got some posters to stop calling Trump childish names during his Presidency like "the Orange one" or "Cheeto" Such things have no place in mature discussion.

Wait,I'm confused. It's mostly a conservative view that some protest are riots and others are not depending on the political opinion?

That being racist to some groups is okay depending on their skin color is bad? And that determining someone is racist based on their skin color is wrong? That's more of a conservative trait?

So is it liberal leaning to believe that racism is okay sometimes?

Justlookingfornow · May 17, 2022

5 hours ago, toomuchbaloney said:

What's happening at the justices homes is public and peaceful protest, that much is obvious. I'm not clear what rioting you were referencing.

I wasn't referencing any specific riot just some opinions on what is and what isn't.

Would it be acceptable for Christian pro life protesters to do the same to a Justice that presented a pro choice law? (Not a deflection to what if) I am interested.

Justlookingfornow · May 17, 2022

1 hour ago, toomuchbaloney said:

I wouldn't say that I hate Trump but I certainly despise what he represents. His lies about the 2020 election coupled with his attempts to undermine our democratic processes to retain lost power should be troubling to every patriot.

You can argue with historians and political scientists about how Trump performed but withholding military aid in an attempt to extort the Ukrainian president and then that whole election lie/ attempted coup are big clues that the fellow was not a good president... that's not even considering his unprecedented lying. I wouldn't say that the votes say much when some of those voters believe that Q was a truth teller and that Trump was draining the swamp.

Surely your not suggesting that half the country and/or the majority of Trump voters are Q radicals are you?

nursej22, MSN, RN · May 17, 2022

5 hours ago, Justlookingfornow said:

Surely your not suggesting that half the country and/or the majority of Trump voters are Q radicals are you?

Half the country did not vote for Trump. Only 66% of eligible voters voted in the last presidential election, Trump received 47% of the votes. Trump received about 30% of eligible votes.

toomuchbaloney · May 17, 2022

6 hours ago, Justlookingfornow said:

I wasn't referencing any specific riot just some opinions on what is and what isn't.

Would it be acceptable for Christian pro life protesters to do the same to a Justice that presented a pro choice law? (Not a deflection to what if) I am interested.

We have quite a bit of experience with "pro-life" protesters, they've already proven that they can be aggressive and violent.

I believe that the 1st amendment allows public protest regardless of the status of the individual that might be the focus of the protest. We should test that law that says we cannot protest again justices and their thinking.

toomuchbaloney · May 17, 2022

5 hours ago, Justlookingfornow said:

Surely your not suggesting that half the country and/or the majority of Trump voters are Q radicals are you?

Do you think that my words made that claim? The word "some" is different from the word "most", right? No half of the country Isn't crazy, but do you think that half of republican voters might be? Just consider some of the crazy things they get caught up in believing... stolen election lies, CRT nonsense, book banning, wall building donations to conmen, pizza parlor pedophiles, birther conspiracy, death panels, deep state garbage, Biden/Ukraine propaganda, red flags and FEMA camp anxieties...I could go on and on. There is a pattern of fear mongering within conservative political circles, IMV.

Tweety, BSN, RN · May 17, 2022

6 hours ago, Justlookingfornow said:

Wait,I'm confused. It's mostly a conservative view that some protest are riots and others are not depending on the political opinion?

That being racist to some groups is okay depending on their skin color is bad? And that determining someone is racist based on their skin color is wrong? That's more of a conservative trait?

So is it liberal leaning to believe that racism is okay sometimes?

I didn't say that.

I mean it's a spin that conservatives seem to like to do. For example "why are you complaining about the mostly peaceful protest on January 6th and not complaining about BLM riots?". (This one I've heard often and even though you didn't mention it specifically in your response to a known conservative here, it triggered my response that you lean conservative) "It's racist to say BLM when ALM". "You preach tolerance but are intolerant of another's opinion."......

Tweety, BSN, RN · May 17, 2022

I have heard of "Replacement Theory" before but haven't heard that's what this is what it's called, and didn't realize that the idea of becoming more entrenched in Americans. I think it's being talked about more because the shooter in Buffalo endorsed it in his manifesto.

There is no doubt that the switching of immigrants from Europe to now mostly the Southern Hemisphere, and the Latin America in particular is reshaping nearly every aspect of American culture and politics. That it's a deliberate plot, I can't buy into that.

Quote

Nearly 1 in 3 Americans say they are extremely or very concerned that “native-born Americans are losing economic, political, and cultural influence in this country because of the growing population of immigrants,” according to recent polling from the Associated Press and NORC.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/05/09/nearly-half-republicans-agree-with-great-replacement-theory/