Supreme Court questions Biden attempt to ignore immigration law

 Conservative Brief:

The Biden administration was questioned Tuesday over its assumed authority to prioritize which people in the country illegally to deport first during a hearing in a case brought by a pair of Republican attorneys general who argued that the Department of Homeland Security is violating federal immigration laws.

According to Republic Brief, the nation’s highest court is considering a trio of issues distinct to the case, though, after oral arguments, it was not clear which way the justices might swing. Texas and Louisiana brought the case.

“At the heart of the dispute is a September 2021 memo from Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas that laid out priorities for the arrest, detention, and deportation of certain non-citizens, reversing efforts by former President Donald Trump to increase deportations,” CNN reported, which added:

Several of the conservative justices on Tuesday seemed ready to rule in favor of the states on a major threshold issue: whether Texas and Louisiana had the legal right to bring the challenge in the first place.

In addressing whether the DHS guidelines were in conflict with two provisions of federal law, Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justices Samuel Alito and Brett Kavanaugh pointed out time and again that the law notes some immigrants “shall” be taken into custody or removed from the country, which appeared to suggest they were skeptical of the department’s assumed discretion.

“Shall means shall,” Roberts said. “Shouldn’t we just say what we think the law is,” he added while suggesting it ought to be left to other branches to “sort that out.”

...

Biden seems to think he can amend laws by ignoring them.  That is particularly true when it comes to immigration. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Should Republicans go ahead and add Supreme Court Justices to head off Democrats

Washington Post: Some Democrats eye adding more justices to the Supreme Court to change its ideological bent The once-remote idea has gained the attention of liberals angered by the GOP push to remake the federal courts. Probably the easy way to defeat this court-packing scheme is for Trump to propose doing the same thing now.  It would lead to Democrat denunciations and claims that it would be wrong, thereby blowing up any attempt by them in the unfortunate event of Democrats winning a presidential election.
Read more

29 % of companies say they are unlikely to keep insurance after Obamacare

Conn Carroll: A new survey of 368 midsize to large companies found that 29% of them are considering terminating their active employee health care plans when Obamacare is full implemented in 2014. Only 71% of employers surveyed said they did not expect to drop their health coverage, while 20% said they did not know and 9% said they were planning to exit. The latest survey, conducted by Towers Watson, echoes an ealier survey by McKinsey & Co. finding that 30% of private-sector employers were planning to drop their employee health insurance coverage by 2014. When the Congressional Budget Office crunched Obamacare's spending numbers, they estimated that only 7% of employees currently covered by employer-sponsored plans would lose their plans. ... This means the cost of the health care fiasco will be hundreds of billions more than estimated by the CBO and Congressional Democrat. It is also clear that Obama's pledge that you could keep your health care plan if you wanted t
Read more