Political Forums  

Go Back   Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Forum > Current Events

Current Events Current Events Forum - Latest political news and events


Thanks Tree36Thanks
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old January 10th, 2018, 06:02 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Michigan
Posts: 3,221
More Judicial activism!

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/ju...mtG?li=BBnb7Kz

SAN FRANCISCO ó A federal judge on Tuesday night temporarily blocked the Trump administration's decision to end a program protecting young immigrants from deportation.

U.S. District Judge William Alsup granted a request by California and other plaintiffs to prevent President Donald Trump from ending the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program while their lawsuits play out in court.

Alsup said lawyers in favor of DACA clearly demonstrated that the young immigrants "were likely to suffer serious, irreparable harm" without court action. The judge also said the lawyers have a strong chance of succeeding at trial.

DACA has protected about 800,000 people who were brought to the U.S. illegally as children or came with families who overstayed visas. The program includes hundreds of thousands of college-age students.

U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced in September that the program would be phased out, saying former President Barack Obama had exceeded his authority when he implemented it in 2012.

On Tuesday, the Department of Justice said the judge's decision doesn't change the fact that the program was an illegal circumvention of Congress, and it is within the agency's power to end it.

"The Justice Department will continue to vigorously defend this position, and looks forward to vindicating its position in further litigation," department spokesman Devin O'Malley said in a statement.

Sessions' move to phase pout DACA sparked a flurry of lawsuits nationwide.

Alsup considered five separate lawsuits filed in Northern California, including one by the California and three other states, and another by the governing board of the University of California school system.

"DACA covers a class of immigrants whose presence, seemingly all agree, pose the least, if any, threat and allows them to sign up for honest labor on the condition of continued good behavior," Alsup wrote in his decision. "This has become an important program for DACA recipients and their families, for the employers who hire them, for our tax treasuries, and for our economy."

That echoed the judge's comments from a court hearing on Dec. 20, when he grilled an attorney for the Department of Justice over the government's justification for ending DACA, saying many people had come to rely on it and faced a "real" and "palpable" hardship from its loss.

Alsup also questioned whether the administration had conducted a thorough review before ending the program.

Brad Rosenberg, a Justice Department attorney, said the administration considered the effects of ending DACA and decided to phase it out over time instead of cutting it immediately.

DACA recipients will be allowed to stay in the U.S. for the remainder of their two-year authorizations. Any recipient whose status was due to expire within six months also got a month to apply for another two-year term.

The Justice Department said in court documents that DACA was facing the possibility of an abrupt end by court order, but Alsup was critical of that argument.

People took out loans, enrolled in school and even made decisions about whether to get married and start families on the basis of DACA and now face "horrific" consequences from the loss of the program, said Jeffrey Davidson, an attorney for the University of California governing board.

"The government considered none of this at all when they decided to rescind DACA," he said at the hearing.

The University of California said in a statement after the decision that "UC's DACA students represent the very best of our country and are a key part of California and our nation's future."

The statement says the UC system will persist in legal challenges to the end of the program and will seek permanent protection for the young immigrants.

DACA recipients are commonly referred to as "dreamers," based on never-passed proposals in Congress called the DREAM Act that would have provided similar protections for young immigrants.

"Dreamers lives were thrown into chaos when the Trump administration tried to terminate the DACA program without obeying the law," California Attorney General Becerra said in a statement after Tuesday's decision. "Tonight's ruling is a huge step in the right direction."

Q. what would you do about Illegal immigration costing the American taxpayer roughly 110 billion a year?
Thanks from Jimmyb
Sensible is offline  
Old January 10th, 2018, 06:40 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
tristanrobin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: New Haven, CT
Posts: 22,654
yay! good for the judge!

these children and young adults and students should not be being punished for the actions of their parents.

we do not (supposedly) visit the sins upon the father
tristanrobin is offline  
Old January 10th, 2018, 06:46 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: USA
Posts: 642
Whether you agree or disagree with DACA, this Judge is out of line. DACA isn’t a law, it is just something Obama implemented because he couldn’t get a law passed......something he said publicly numerous times he had no authority to do.

Trump is well within his rights to overturn any action a previous President implemented in this fashion. Executive actions only carry weight until an executive says it doesn’t.
Thanks from Jimmyb, webguy4, roastpork and 2 others
Libertarian Guy is offline  
Old January 10th, 2018, 07:05 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
skews13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: nirvana
Posts: 8,789
V

Quote:
Originally Posted by Libertarian Guy View Post
Whether you agree or disagree with DACA, this Judge is out of line. DACA isnít a law, it is just something Obama implemented because he couldnít get a law passed......something he said publicly numerous times he had no authority to do.

Trump is well within his rights to overturn any action a previous President implemented in this fashion. Executive actions only carry weight until an executive says it doesnít.
Actually no heís not. Even the President canít interfere with jurisprudence by arbitrarily ending cases that are already before a court.

Those kids arenít going anywhere
skews13 is offline  
Old January 10th, 2018, 07:24 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Michigan
Posts: 3,221
Quote:
Originally Posted by tristanrobin View Post
yay! good for the judge!

these children and young adults and students should not be being punished for the actions of their parents.

we do not (supposedly) visit the sins upon the father
The parents broke the law, if they are 18 and can speak the language and support themselves I am ok with them becoming legal citizens through the same immigration plan used by everyone else, without being deported. If they are dependent on taxpayer dollars send them and the parents back, 25% are illiterate and do not speak English.

https://www.longroom.com/discussion/...-speak-english

It is a large drain on American tax dollars by people who broke the law
Thanks from webguy4 and roastpork
Sensible is offline  
Old January 10th, 2018, 07:38 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
mayeve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: The Midwest
Posts: 207
How does our neighbor Canada deal with people breaking their laws by coming into their country illegally with their children?
mayeve is offline  
Old January 10th, 2018, 08:10 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: USA
Posts: 642
Quote:
Originally Posted by skews13 View Post
Actually no heís not. Even the President canít interfere with jurisprudence by arbitrarily ending cases that are already before a court.

Those kids arenít going anywhere
The lawsuits came after the decision to end Obamaís illegal circumvention of immigration law.

Trump is well within his rights to end the policy.
Thanks from Jimgorn and TreeDoc
Libertarian Guy is offline  
Old January 10th, 2018, 08:50 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
skews13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: nirvana
Posts: 8,789
Quote:
Originally Posted by Libertarian Guy View Post
The lawsuits came after the decision to end Obamaís illegal circumvention of immigration law.

Trump is well within his rights to end the policy.
After yesterdayís meeting with Democrats it looks like itís a moot point anyway.

Like I said those kids arenít going anywhere.
skews13 is offline  
Old January 10th, 2018, 09:37 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Michigan
Posts: 3,221
Quote:
Originally Posted by skews13 View Post
After yesterdayís meeting with Democrats it looks like itís a moot point anyway.

Like I said those kids arenít going anywhere.

You are saying dems will fund the wall!
Sensible is offline  
Old January 10th, 2018, 09:38 AM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Michigan
Posts: 3,221
Quote:
Originally Posted by tristanrobin View Post
yay! good for the judge!

these children and young adults and students should not be being punished for the actions of their parents.

we do not (supposedly) visit the sins upon the father
we do it all the time I will start a thread to talk about it.
Sensible is offline  
Reply

  Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Forum > Current Events

Tags
activism, judicial



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pedophile activism Landcover Civil Rights 386 March 24th, 2017 06:15 PM
Let's talk about REAL "Judicial Activism" Nwolfe35 Gay and Lesbian Rights 62 January 14th, 2016 04:14 AM
CT Gov. denounces judicial activism on homosexual marriage garysher Gay and Lesbian Rights 166 October 18th, 2008 04:31 AM
Gay activism in schools. Wow Religion 205 August 29th, 2008 12:05 PM
Deaf Activism? Tabris Racism 13 August 24th, 2005 05:21 AM


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed



Copyright © 2005-2013 Defending The Truth. All rights reserved.