Sheriff Joe
DA
A MANIAC IS RUNNING OUR FOREIGN POLICY! (IT'S NOT TRUMP)
February 8, 2017
AD FEEDBACK
If only we were able to deport citizens, we could use Trump's new policy of excluding those who are "hostile" toward our country to get rid of Judge James Robart.
Judge Robart's veto of Trump's travel ban notwithstanding, there is not the slightest question but that the president, in his sole discretion, can choose to admit or exclude any foreigners he likes, based on "the interests of the United States.”
The Clinton administration used the executive branch's broad power over immigration to send a 6-year-old boy back to a communist dictatorship. The courts were completely powerless to stop him.
As explained by the federal appellate court that ruled on Elian Gonzalez's asylum application: "It is the duty of the Congress and of the executive branch to exercise political will," and "in no context is the executive branch entitled to more deference than in the context of foreign affairs," which includes immigration.
The court acknowledged that Elian might well be subjected to "re-education," "communist indoctrination" and "political manipulation." (Then again, so would enrolling him at Sidwell Friends.) It didn't matter! Sending little boys back to communist dictatorships was the policy of the Clinton administration.
The Obama administration's immigration policy was to ensure that millions of poverty-stricken foreigners would come here and help turn our country into a Mexican version of Pakistan.
When Arizona merely tried to enforce the federal immigration laws being ignored by the Obama administration, the entire media erupted in rage at this incursion into the majestic power of the president over immigration. They said it was like living in Nazi Germany!
The most reviled section of the act, melodramatically called the "Papers Please" law, was upheld by the Supreme Court. But the other parts, allowing state officials to enforce federal immigration laws, were ruled unconstitutional. A president's policy choice to ignore immigration laws supersedes a state's right to enforce them.
http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2017-02-08.html#read_more
February 8, 2017
AD FEEDBACK
If only we were able to deport citizens, we could use Trump's new policy of excluding those who are "hostile" toward our country to get rid of Judge James Robart.
Judge Robart's veto of Trump's travel ban notwithstanding, there is not the slightest question but that the president, in his sole discretion, can choose to admit or exclude any foreigners he likes, based on "the interests of the United States.”
The Clinton administration used the executive branch's broad power over immigration to send a 6-year-old boy back to a communist dictatorship. The courts were completely powerless to stop him.
As explained by the federal appellate court that ruled on Elian Gonzalez's asylum application: "It is the duty of the Congress and of the executive branch to exercise political will," and "in no context is the executive branch entitled to more deference than in the context of foreign affairs," which includes immigration.
The court acknowledged that Elian might well be subjected to "re-education," "communist indoctrination" and "political manipulation." (Then again, so would enrolling him at Sidwell Friends.) It didn't matter! Sending little boys back to communist dictatorships was the policy of the Clinton administration.
The Obama administration's immigration policy was to ensure that millions of poverty-stricken foreigners would come here and help turn our country into a Mexican version of Pakistan.
When Arizona merely tried to enforce the federal immigration laws being ignored by the Obama administration, the entire media erupted in rage at this incursion into the majestic power of the president over immigration. They said it was like living in Nazi Germany!
The most reviled section of the act, melodramatically called the "Papers Please" law, was upheld by the Supreme Court. But the other parts, allowing state officials to enforce federal immigration laws, were ruled unconstitutional. A president's policy choice to ignore immigration laws supersedes a state's right to enforce them.
http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2017-02-08.html#read_more
