President Trump's Rumored Potential Border Wall Deal Sounds Like Disastrous 1986 Immigration Comprom

[edpc]

Here's something constructive.  Stop releasing illegals waiting for hearings.

He hasn't been obligated to do that since last February, when SCOTUS said illegals could be detained indefinitely in the Jennings v Rodriguez case.

Anytime catch and release has been reinstated, that's been purely an executive decision.

[Right_in_Virginia]

Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong.  He does not need Congress on this.  HE is the Chief Executive.  HE is in control of the Executive branch of government.  HE is the one ultimately responsible for releasing amnesty applicants.  HE is the one ultimately responsible for prosecuting repeat invaders.  And HE ultimately is reponsible for handing out free shit.  Congress only passes the laws.  They don't get to decide whether they are enforced.

Yeah, like this hasn't been tried and blocked by the judiciary. 

Get real.  One court is all it takes to stop any attempt the President will make to change immigration law by executive order.  Hell, one court won't even allow him to change an executive order by executive order.

Like it or not, agree with it or not, the needle on immigration reform is stuck on Capitol Hill @Hoodat   

[Emjay]

It's amazing how people on this forum openly lie about what other posters want.

I don't really appreciate your insinuating that I'm a liar.

You cannot deny that a lot of people, many of them semi-Trump supporters, seem to be demanding that Trump magically make the things happen that they want to happen.

Unless America turns into an entirely different system of government, Trump has to get things done through Congress.

So, what's a lie about what I said?

[Chosen Daughter]

It's amazing how people on this forum openly lie about what other posters want.

You don't have to be a dictator.  Any lawyer can tell you politicians take an oath to uphold the laws.  It is the law to protect our borders.

[Hoodat]

Yeah, like this hasn't been tried and blocked by the judiciary.

Uh, no.  Not been tried.  Not been blocked.  The Constitution is quite clear on who runs the Executive Branch.  You ought to read it some time.

Get real.  One court is all it takes to stop any attempt the President will make to change immigration law by executive order.

Who said anything about immigration law?  The law is clear in that anyone caught in this country illegally can be detained.  That is the law that the Executive Branch has the right to enforce.  And no court can stop that.

Hell, one court won't even allow him to change an executive order by executive order.

Who said anything about Executive Orders?

Like it or not, agree with it or not, the needle on immigration reform is stuck on Capitol Hill @Hoodat

Immigration reform?  Did I bring up immigration reform?  All I said was for the President to:

1.  Order anyone seeking asylum to remain in detention until their case is resolved.
2.  Prosecute, sentence, and incarcerate anyone caught illegally in this country who had been deported before.
3.  Stop giving out free shit to illegals (e.g. food stamps, health care, education, housing, WIC, etc.

All three of these are currently within his powers to do.  And is pathetic to hear you make excuses for why he can't.

[InHeavenThereIsNoBeer]

Here's something constructive.  Stop releasing illegals waiting for hearings.  Start handing out prison sentences to repeat offenders.  And above all else, STOP GIVING OUT FREE SHIT TO ILLEGALS!

Trump is in a position to do all three.

I'd amend that to stop giving out free stuff.  Americans are a charitable lot, we don't need government to handle that for us. 

I'd also add start fining and potentially jailing employers.  Around here, everyone in landscaping and construction looks rather similar.  If I had to guess, a lot of them are illegal or otherwise not eligible to work, to the point where I doubt any employer could compete without hiring illegals.  Slap heavy enough fines, along with a reasonable chance of getting caught, and hiring citizens becomes the cheaper route.

[Hoodat]

I don't really appreciate your insinuating that I'm a liar.

I don't appreciate you insinuating that I want Trump to be a dictator.

You cannot deny that a lot of people, many of them semi-Trump supporters, seem to be demanding that Trump magically make the things happen that they want to happen.

The only ones I see doing that are his most vocal sycophants.

Unless America turns into an entirely different system of government, Trump has to get things done through Congress.

You clearly are ignorant of how our government is set up.  Congress is the Legislative branch.  The President heads the Executive Branch.  The Legislative Branch is in charge of creating the laws.  The Executive Branch is in charge of enforcing the laws.

Congress passes a law setting rules in place for entering this country.  Congress passes another law saying that if you get caught breaking the first law, then you forfeit the chance of becoming a legal resident.  Congress also passes a law allowing for the detention of anyone claiming asylum until their case is resolved.  And finally, Congress passes a law handing out free shit to legal residents.

The Executive branch enforces those laws.  It detains (by law) anyone seeking asylum.  It prosecutes (by law) anyone caught inside the country who had previously been deported.  And it orders that no free shit be given to anyone who is not a legal resident (by law).

See how that works?  Trump doesn't have to be the bleep you make him out to be.  Trump can enforce the laws as written and put a huge dent in removing the incentive for illegals to come here and place a drain on the taxpayer.

[Hoodat]

I'd amend that to stop giving out free stuff.  Americans are a charitable lot, we don't need government to handle that for us. 

I'd also add start fining and potentially jailing employers.  Around here, everyone in landscaping and construction looks rather similar.  If I had to guess, a lot of them are illegal or otherwise not eligible to work, to the point where I doubt any employer could compete without hiring illegals.  Slap heavy enough fines, along with a reasonable chance of getting caught, and hiring citizens becomes the cheaper route.

Works for me.

[roamer_1]

It was an interesting essay on morality and contained a lot of truth but no practical solutions and it was something we all already knew.

To the contrary, it positively identified the only practical solution, Better read it again.

[txradioguy]

Only using the most hysterical definition of the word.  There is no path to citizenship involved, just some temporary deportation stays (for those that comply with the regulations).

You're not really that naive are you?

[txradioguy]

Many of these did so specifically because Trump supported amnesty during the campaign.  But then you knew that already.


Not sure who here voted Dem in the last Congressional election.  Personally, I watched my district switch from R to D because the incumbent Republican was too arrogant to campaign.  It isn't our fault that the GOP lost the House.  It is THEIR fault for not delivering on what they campaigned to do.


Just curious, did you happen to smoke some very potent cannabis about 20 min before posting this?  Because you are straight up delusional if you think us Conservatives put the Dems in control.  On the contrary, it's because House Republicans chose to surrender their Conservative ideals in their quest to become Democrat-lite that the House was lost.

@Hoodat it's amazing how far some people have sunk into their delusions of why we are where we are at now.

[txradioguy]

I don't appreciate you insinuating that I want Trump to be a dictator.


The only ones I see doing that are his most vocal sycophants.


You clearly are ignorant of how our government is set up.  Congress is the Legislative branch.  The President heads the Executive Branch.  The Legislative Branch is in charge of creating the laws.  The Executive Branch is in charge of enforcing the laws.

Congress passes a law setting rules in place for entering this country.  Congress passes another law saying that if you get caught breaking the first law, then you forfeit the chance of becoming a legal resident.  Congress also passes a law allowing for the detention of anyone claiming asylum until their case is resolved.  And finally, Congress passes a law handing out free shit to legal residents.

The Executive branch enforces those laws.  It detains (by law) anyone seeking asylum.  It prosecutes (by law) anyone caught inside the country who had previously been deported.  And it orders that no free shit be given to anyone who is not a legal resident (by law).

See how that works?  Trump doesn't have to be the bleep you make him out to be.  Trump can enforce the laws as written and put a huge dent in removing the incentive for illegals to come here and place a drain on the taxpayer.

@Hoodat

QFT

[Emjay]

You don't have to be a dictator.  Any lawyer can tell you politicians take an oath to uphold the laws.  It is the law to protect our borders.

@Chosen Daughter   I'm sure the President would love for you to explain to him exactly how he can do that without Congress.

[txradioguy]

@Chosen Daughter   I'm sure the President would love for you to explain to him exactly how he can do that without Congress.

It's quite simple really.  Much simpler than blaming Congress like happens here all the time.

The Executive Branch is charged with enforcing the immigration laws passed by Congress. The doctrine is based on the concept that immigration is a question of national sovereignty, relating to a nation's right to define its own borders. Courts generally refrain from interfering in immigration matters.

Congress has already passed the laws.  Trump simply has to enforce them.  It's called Plenary power.

But it's too easy to pass the buck back to Congress and act like the President is helpless to do anything without them.

[Emjay]

You're not really that naive are you?

My morning dose of NPR cleared it up for me.  They explained that Trump is offering some temporary gains for the things democrats want and still demanding a permanent wall.

I had been so confused before.  NPR also explained that the democrats want border security just as much as Trump does but without a wall.

See, the wall is both real and symbolic.  It would be a political victory for Trump and that is a no no.

[libertybele]

Federal policy on immigration has been founded on the “plenary power doctrine,” which holds that the political branches — the legislative and the executive — have sole power to regulate all aspects of immigration as a basic attribute of sovereignty

[Emjay]

It's quite simple really.  Much simpler than blaming Congress like happens here all the time.

Congress has already passed the laws.  Trump simply has to enforce them.  It's called Plenary power.

But it's too easy to pass the buck back to Congress and act like the President is helpless to do anything without them.

I think you may be a tiny bit naive to believe Trump can do these things without Congress.  He certainly can't pass laws or bills without congressional support.

Do you actually think that Trump does not know about Plenary Power? 

[libertybele]

I think you may be a tiny bit naive to believe Trump can do these things without Congress.  He certainly can't pass laws or bills without congressional support.

Do you actually think that Trump does not know about Plenary Power?

Just like he can't command the military to protect our borders.  Got it.

[Emjay]

Federal policy on immigration has been founded on the “plenary power doctrine,” which holds that the political branches — the legislative and the executive — have sole power to regulate all aspects of immigration as a basic attribute of sovereignty

So, since you mentioned the legislative AND the executive, do you believe the President can do this without legislative support?

[Emjay]

Just like he can't command the military to protect our borders.  Got it.

Well, actually you don't 'got it.'  Trump cannot use the military for domestic problems.

And it's a good thing because it is horrific to think what a democrat/socialist president would do with that power if he had it.

[Right_in_Virginia]

Just like he can't command the military to protect our borders.  Got it.

The President has done this.  He has also called up more troops and has extended the mission date through September.  And he's done this the right way via a request to the DoD.

[txradioguy]

I think you may be a tiny bit naive to believe Trump can do these things without Congress.  He certainly can't pass laws or bills without congressional support.

That's such a pathetic dodge.  Congress has already passed the immigration laws...the border protection act of 2006 to be specific.

The President just has to enforce what Congress has already done.  But those of you that will never fault him for anything...find it much easier to give him a pass on what he can do and blame congress for blocking him.

It doesn't require any thought or effort to do that. 

Do you actually think that Trump does not know about Plenary Power?

Like you...he doesn't seem to be aware of it.

[Right_in_Virginia]

It's quite simple really.  Much simpler than blaming Congress like happens here all the time.

Congress has already passed the laws.  Trump simply has to enforce them.  It's called Plenary power.

But it's too easy to pass the buck back to Congress and act like the President is helpless to do anything without them.

What would you like the President to do --- specifically --- that he is not doing?

[Emjay]

Here's a quote from Wikipedia about Plenary Power.  It's not quite as simple as @txradioguy @libertybele want it to be and it depends a lot on the judiciary.

"In regard to immigration law, Congress, under the Plenary Power Doctrine, has the power to make immigration policy subject to judicial oversight. The Executive Branch is charged with enforcing the immigration laws passed by Congress. The doctrine is based on the concept that immigration is a question of national sovereignty, relating to a nation's right to define its own borders. Courts generally refrain from interfering in immigration matters.[4] Historically, the U.S. Supreme Court has taken a hands-off approach when asked to review the political branches' immigration decisions and policy-making. The Center for Immigration Studies, an organization with a slant toward isolationism, suggests there is a movement to "erode" political-branch control over immigration in favor of a judge-administered system and that the results have created national security concerns.[4] The U.S. Supreme Court case Zadvydas v. Davis is cited as an example of the U.S. Supreme Court not following plenary power precedent.[4][5]"

[Right_in_Virginia]

Here's a quote from Wikipedia about Plenary Power.  It's not quite as simple as @txradioguy @libertybele want it to be and it depends a lot on the judiciary.

"In regard to immigration law, Congress, under the Plenary Power Doctrine, has the power to make immigration policy subject to judicial oversight.

Could have come to a full stop at "judicial oversight".  Plenary power rests with the courts and not with either the Congress or the Executive.

How's that working for us?