Ousted Attorney General Jeff Sessions was fully in line with the immigration policies of Stephen Miller and Donald Trump during his tenure with the Trump administration.

Together, the three of them devised the 'zero tolerance policy' which resulted in asylum-seekers who had entered at unauthorized border points being prosecuted instead of sent to detention centers to await immigration hearings.

It's also the policy that made separating such adult asylum-seekers from their children at the border the rule instead of the exception (it was the exception under previous administrations, applied only when the adult was deemed a threat to the child).

The zero tolerance policy was effectively terminated because DHS did not have the capacity to adhere to the 1997 and 2015 Flores rulings which prohibit children from being held in detention for more than 20 days.

(continued)

Today, another Trump administration immigration policy promoted by Sessions was ordered to be halted by a federal DC Circuit Judge.  

The judge blocked several Trump administration policies that made it more difficult for victims of gang and domestic violence to seek asylum in the United States.

In a 107-page opinion, U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan wrote that the policies were “arbitrary and capricious and contrary to law” and ordered the government to cease their implementation.

The ruling came in a lawsuit brought by the ACLU and Center for Gender & Refugee Studies, representing 12 adults and children who had sought asylum in the United States because they said they were sexually abused, beat and kidnapped in their home countries.

Each was denied asylum — even though asylum officers felt their accounts were sincere, according to the ruling — based on the new policies restricting who qualifies. Some already had been removed, though Sullivan decreed they should be brought back to the United States and allowed to make their case again.

Sullivan is the same judge who declined to sentence former National Security Adviser Mike Flynn to a sentence of no-time-to-be-served yesterday; the same no-nonsense judge who was appointed by two Republican and one Democrat President and praised by FOX New's Jeanine Pirro.

Ref:  https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/nat...06f68ab26e

Ahahahahahaha! MAGA!

It kind of feels like we're at the breaking point. Judges more and more deciding to defy the Trump administration, Republican politicians and pundits posting negative thoughts about Trump himself. The school yard bully isn't scaring people as much anymore and they're finally fighting back.

Welp, the prez has now lost that freak of nature Ann Coulter. In a tweet she called him a gutless president because he folded on the wall. He unfollowed her.

That has been Anne Coulter'S sticking point. He'd do well to follow through on this commitment rather than back down.

(12-19-2018, 09:07 PM)Duchess Wrote: Welp, the prez has now lost that freak of nature Ann Coulter. In a tweet she called him a gutless president because he folded on the wall. He unfollowed her.

She's got an essay up on her site really ripping into Trump. And she even admits that she willingly and happily voted for someone she calls a sociopath because of illegals and his promise of a wall.

http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2018-1...#read_more

(12-20-2018, 12:47 AM)Rootilda Wrote: She's got an essay up on her site really ripping into Trump.  And she even admits that she willingly and happily voted for someone she calls a sociopath because of illegals and his promise of a wall.  

http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2018-1...#read_more

I enjoy seeing those wretched people eat their own. I enjoy the hell out of it.

I read the comments after every illegal immigration story, 98% of the respondents want better immigration or some kind of security or wall to stop this invasion, If you look at some leftist news sites they do not allow for comment. A one way street. Sure many people here came over and became citizens between 1850 and 1930 but the big difference is they did not receive handouts or welfare. 

A wall and points of entry only make sense unless of course if anyone that believes in open borders are willing to start sponsoring families or  any of the larger proportion of men between the ages of 19 and 30 yrs old that represent 80% of the ones trying to cross the border. Leave it up to the noodle spines to raise taxes to pay for all this though just to get that empty feeling of accomplishment.

There is no argument to be had about better immigration, everyone wants it.

Congressman Will Hurd (republican) represents 820 miles of the nearly 2000 mile American/Mexican border, he opposes the wall and was just reelected in a very difficult race by running on that position.

...and who talks about wanting open borders? I would like to read what they say about that. Where are you reading that?

When a judge strikes down the law that requires immigrants to come through a port of entry it's only legitimizing entry through anywhere along the border.

 Trump, however, has it exactly backwards: The solution to America’s immigration problems is open borders, under which the United States imposes no immigration restrictions at all. If the U.S. adopts this policy, the benefits will far outweigh the costs.

link

Duchess Wrote:There is no argument to be had about better immigration, everyone wants it.

Congressman Will Hurd (republican) represents 820 miles of the nearly 2000 mile American/Mexican border, he opposes the wall and was just reelected in a very difficult race by running on that position.

...and who talks about wanting open borders? I would like to read what they say about that. Where are you reading that?

They've been tunneling under the current wall since it was erected. A new wall won't do shit. Anyone within a 100 miles of the border knows this already.

(01-07-2019, 08:59 AM)Blindgreed1 Wrote:

Duchess Wrote:There is no argument to be had about better immigration, everyone wants it.

Congressman Will Hurd (republican) represents 820 miles of the nearly 2000 mile American/Mexican border, he opposes the wall and was just reelected in a very difficult race by running on that position.

...and who talks about wanting open borders? I would like to read what they say about that. Where are you reading that?

They've been tunneling under the current wall since it was erected. A new wall won't do shit. Anyone within a 100 miles of the border knows this already.

The "Wall" only will be  a deterrent for some. Those that are determined to get past it, will!

A simple silly thing like a ladder 3 feet taller than the wall, with a long rope tied to the top rung for repelling once over, is all that is needed!
(Simple enough to do in the dead of night)

Carsman Wrote:

Blindgreed1 Wrote:

Duchess Wrote:There is no argument to be had about better immigration, everyone wants it.

Congressman Will Hurd (republican) represents 820 miles of the nearly 2000 mile American/Mexican border, he opposes the wall and was just reelected in a very difficult race by running on that position.

...and who talks about wanting open borders? I would like to read what they say about that. Where are you reading that?

They've been tunneling under the current wall since it was erected. A new wall won't do shit. Anyone within a 100 miles of the border knows this already.

The "Wall" only will be  a deterrent for some. Those that are determined to get past it, will!

A simple silly thing like a ladder 3 feet taller than the wall, with a long rope tied to the top rung for repelling once over, is all that is needed!
(Simple enough to do in the dead of night)

We do have video surveillance as well so a ladder and rope probably wouldn't fly.

Maybe just send them all to sanctuary cities. good luck getting funding though. or just skim off medicaid and social security. ............oops that's already being done.

Yes it is best to have no deterrence and leave the border completely open for everyone to come through because deterences wont stop everyone.

Did i win the argument? The logic seems retarded enough to win. Do i get extra points if i say Orange Man Bad?

I know..........I know! just give them a court date and they will come back later to fill out some paperwork.

You both sound irrational & disengaged from reality. *backs away*

Right....? So reality may in fact be Orange Man not so bad and deterences to illegal immigration, such as a wall, even if not 100% is better than no deterence?

Hell stake a claim at least.

No, wall bad. Orange man bad. YOU BAD!