The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday allowed Texas to enforce a law that allows local police to arrest migrants suspected of crossing the border illegally.
The ruling comes a day after the court extended a block on the state law at the request of the Biden administration, which sued to strike down the measure. The Biden administration argued that the law, known as Senate Bill 4, would usurp core federal authority on immigration.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has said the state’s law mirrored federal law and was put in place to compensate for the Biden administration’s inadequate response at the southern border.
5
To remove first post, remove entire topic.
The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday allowed Texas to enforce a law that allows local police to arrest migrants suspected of crossing the border illegally.
The ruling comes a day after the court extended a block on the state law at the request of the Biden administration, which sued to strike down the measure. The Biden administration argued that the law, known as Senate Bill 4, would usurp core federal authority on immigration.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has said the state’s law mirrored federal law and was put in place to compensate for the Biden administration’s inadequate response at the southern border.
The ultra conservative SCOTUS plays states rights casino games again, this time states rights good, on GOP impact events states rights bad. This group of justices are so slanted and partisan it is an embarrassment.
5
Shock..
The ultra conservative SCOTUS plays states rights casino games again, this time states rights good, on GOP impact events states rights bad. This group of justices are so slanted and partisan it is an embarrassment.
Bing bang boom boys and girls, whats crackin in the cesspool forum these days!? I apologize to my haters for the hiatus but a couple weeks of vaca were welcomed and back to work has been swamped this time of the year so sadly no time for hanging with my imaginary internet buddies. That time has now come to and end, let's get this party started....
Lots to catch up on around here but let's start with Wally's "ultra conservative SCOTUS partisan casino game".
@wallstreetcappers
I'll have to go back and find our Colorado discussion thread but quick recap off the top of my head....
9-0 unanimous decision from our ultra conservative SCOTUS, including Miss Jackson Kentaji herself opining..... how does such a divided SCOTUS come up with a 9-0 ruling on a subject so partisan ?? How? Why? Simple. It was such an obvious abuse of interpretation of the law that even Miss Jackson couldn't back it (although she did opine with prejudice).
Remember boys and girls, we live in a banana republic. Nothing is what it seems.... reality to what is happening around us is blanketed by the circus distraction that makes up our politicians and the broken system they represent.
America First
1
Bing bang boom boys and girls, whats crackin in the cesspool forum these days!? I apologize to my haters for the hiatus but a couple weeks of vaca were welcomed and back to work has been swamped this time of the year so sadly no time for hanging with my imaginary internet buddies. That time has now come to and end, let's get this party started....
Lots to catch up on around here but let's start with Wally's "ultra conservative SCOTUS partisan casino game".
@wallstreetcappers
I'll have to go back and find our Colorado discussion thread but quick recap off the top of my head....
9-0 unanimous decision from our ultra conservative SCOTUS, including Miss Jackson Kentaji herself opining..... how does such a divided SCOTUS come up with a 9-0 ruling on a subject so partisan ?? How? Why? Simple. It was such an obvious abuse of interpretation of the law that even Miss Jackson couldn't back it (although she did opine with prejudice).
Remember boys and girls, we live in a banana republic. Nothing is what it seems.... reality to what is happening around us is blanketed by the circus distraction that makes up our politicians and the broken system they represent.
Shock.. The ultra conservative SCOTUS plays states rights casino games again, this time states rights good, on GOP impact events states rights bad. This group of justices are so slanted and partisan it is an embarrassment.
If the Biden admin. is so incompetent/crooked that they won't protect our border then I'm glad our scotus is "slanted".
The Biden admin. is an embarrassment.
1
Quote Originally Posted by wallstreetcappers:
Shock.. The ultra conservative SCOTUS plays states rights casino games again, this time states rights good, on GOP impact events states rights bad. This group of justices are so slanted and partisan it is an embarrassment.
If the Biden admin. is so incompetent/crooked that they won't protect our border then I'm glad our scotus is "slanted".
I am just saying they are partisan and it is obvious. Ive never seen in the history of my life that the SCOTUS has blatantly been so partisan and used states rights as a rationale and then flip the other way when it does not suit the conservative agenda, as stated above the Colorado situation. So be consistent and either go states rights even when it does not serve the narrative or knock it off (SCOTUS).
Thomas should have been kicked off the court so long ago he is the worst slimy conservative taker of the bunch, how do we allow these guys to take bribes without recourse?
To the point of the issue, I think there is merit that the state should have say on a federal border concern when it is out of control but Texas is going way too far in their barbaric approach, which kinda shows that states are not really clean hands enough to be trusted with much of anything (abortion fits here too) but the federal government is not handling the situation properly either here. I just hate the hypocrisy that this partisan SCOTUS group plays.
2
@THEMUGG
I am just saying they are partisan and it is obvious. Ive never seen in the history of my life that the SCOTUS has blatantly been so partisan and used states rights as a rationale and then flip the other way when it does not suit the conservative agenda, as stated above the Colorado situation. So be consistent and either go states rights even when it does not serve the narrative or knock it off (SCOTUS).
Thomas should have been kicked off the court so long ago he is the worst slimy conservative taker of the bunch, how do we allow these guys to take bribes without recourse?
To the point of the issue, I think there is merit that the state should have say on a federal border concern when it is out of control but Texas is going way too far in their barbaric approach, which kinda shows that states are not really clean hands enough to be trusted with much of anything (abortion fits here too) but the federal government is not handling the situation properly either here. I just hate the hypocrisy that this partisan SCOTUS group plays.
It's not an apples/apples comparison. In CO, their gov't. was effectively trying to sway a national election by making an unfounded, partisan judgement against someone they don't like. For Texas, they are trying to do the job of the federal gov't. because the current admin. isn't doing their sworn duty to protect our borders, plain & simple.
The abortion issue is a whole other can of worms. I'm pro-choice, which I guess only makes me a "right leaner". The hypocrisy of it is how dems have no problem terminating a fetus, but don't you dare execute a convicted murderer. That is considered cruel. Isn't capital punishment a "states rights" law, just like abortion?
1
@wallstreetcappers
It's not an apples/apples comparison. In CO, their gov't. was effectively trying to sway a national election by making an unfounded, partisan judgement against someone they don't like. For Texas, they are trying to do the job of the federal gov't. because the current admin. isn't doing their sworn duty to protect our borders, plain & simple.
The abortion issue is a whole other can of worms. I'm pro-choice, which I guess only makes me a "right leaner". The hypocrisy of it is how dems have no problem terminating a fetus, but don't you dare execute a convicted murderer. That is considered cruel. Isn't capital punishment a "states rights" law, just like abortion?
Of course it is not apples to apples because your agenda suits that approach, to me it is 100% apples to apples. Colorado as a state decided to remove Trump from the ballot based on EXISTING language, it was not made up just because..it was legitimate language regarding this exact scenario. BUT as you are saying it is not the same and that is because you were against Colorado having states rights, and you are in support of states rights for abortion and for this border issue..it should not be a flip flop cause which they are using to serve their ultra conservative agenda. I do not care for the states rights approach because the federal government only gets involved when the states screw it up so anything on the books from a federal perspective is almost completely always because states were doing a lousy job and the issue moved up the chain to the SCOTUS in the past. So to undo what was put in place likely due to states being lousy at providing equal and fair rights to everyone it is a horrible thing IMO. If you are riding the states rights horse then you have to accept when it is not to your best interest also.
Texas is one wacky state, they almost more than any other state should be on training wheels when it comes to usurping federal mandates, fairness and respect for everyone is not a mantra they seem to ever follow.
2
@THEMUGG
Of course it is not apples to apples because your agenda suits that approach, to me it is 100% apples to apples. Colorado as a state decided to remove Trump from the ballot based on EXISTING language, it was not made up just because..it was legitimate language regarding this exact scenario. BUT as you are saying it is not the same and that is because you were against Colorado having states rights, and you are in support of states rights for abortion and for this border issue..it should not be a flip flop cause which they are using to serve their ultra conservative agenda. I do not care for the states rights approach because the federal government only gets involved when the states screw it up so anything on the books from a federal perspective is almost completely always because states were doing a lousy job and the issue moved up the chain to the SCOTUS in the past. So to undo what was put in place likely due to states being lousy at providing equal and fair rights to everyone it is a horrible thing IMO. If you are riding the states rights horse then you have to accept when it is not to your best interest also.
Texas is one wacky state, they almost more than any other state should be on training wheels when it comes to usurping federal mandates, fairness and respect for everyone is not a mantra they seem to ever follow.
If you have something related to a topic or the conversation then of course you are always welcome to be part of the conversation but any personal attacks and jabs I wont put up with, so if you want to play passive aggressive then do it in the box not in the mains.
2
@kcblitzkrieg
If you have something related to a topic or the conversation then of course you are always welcome to be part of the conversation but any personal attacks and jabs I wont put up with, so if you want to play passive aggressive then do it in the box not in the mains.
What "language" allows CO to remove someone from a ballot for a federal election, & how does it fit this exact scenario?
As far as Texas goes, they are part of the front line of the invasion....wtf are they supposed to do when the feds don't do their job? Are you suggesting that just because Biden is allowing all this to happen that it's OK? C'mon man, you're better than this.
1
@wallstreetcappers
What "language" allows CO to remove someone from a ballot for a federal election, & how does it fit this exact scenario?
As far as Texas goes, they are part of the front line of the invasion....wtf are they supposed to do when the feds don't do their job? Are you suggesting that just because Biden is allowing all this to happen that it's OK? C'mon man, you're better than this.
Supreme court ruling is not final on Texas controversial immigration law. Temporary pause is allowed to expire so that legal challenges can go forward in lower courts. This case could return to the supreme court in the future. Historically, courts have ruled that federal laws preempt state laws on immigration for good reason. Problem is that Texas law risk burdening untrained police and creating chaos with two different immigration systems. Non-white Texans can be subjected to unfair racial profiling by police. In 2012, Arizona tried to implement a similar law. But after mass protests and lawsuits, supreme court eventually ruled Arizona law illegal. Latest congress bipartisan border security bill would have been a better remedy instead of states operating their own immigration systems.
2
Supreme court ruling is not final on Texas controversial immigration law. Temporary pause is allowed to expire so that legal challenges can go forward in lower courts. This case could return to the supreme court in the future. Historically, courts have ruled that federal laws preempt state laws on immigration for good reason. Problem is that Texas law risk burdening untrained police and creating chaos with two different immigration systems. Non-white Texans can be subjected to unfair racial profiling by police. In 2012, Arizona tried to implement a similar law. But after mass protests and lawsuits, supreme court eventually ruled Arizona law illegal. Latest congress bipartisan border security bill would have been a better remedy instead of states operating their own immigration systems.
Above I mentioned that Texas has a right to be concerned since the feds are not doing enough, so I agree with that aspect but I also think Texas goes too far and are not at all "mature" enough to not have oversight and I would highly imagine that part of the reason why the FEDS are involved is possibly due to the way Texas handles things in the past. As I mentioned it is almost always that the FEDS those nasty FEDS get involved because of abuses or lack of state effectiveness with issues.
The Colorado situation is about insurrection, that is what they based it on and it for sure fits this scenario..and if you are following the states rights mantra then Trump would be off the ballot because Colorado felt he met the guidelines to take him off, that is how it goes Mugg...you cant play states rights for disregarding a womans right to an abortion and then call foul in that scenario, it goes both ways. I think the abortion reversal is one of the worst I have ever seen, if little else there should be a federal guideline that all states follow so women in any place in this country knows what their rights are and there is no way a conservative or ultra liberal state can change what has been determined to be the term and length allowed. That messup kind of imploded any level of equity and respect for women and is extremely embarrassing.
2
@THEMUGG
Above I mentioned that Texas has a right to be concerned since the feds are not doing enough, so I agree with that aspect but I also think Texas goes too far and are not at all "mature" enough to not have oversight and I would highly imagine that part of the reason why the FEDS are involved is possibly due to the way Texas handles things in the past. As I mentioned it is almost always that the FEDS those nasty FEDS get involved because of abuses or lack of state effectiveness with issues.
The Colorado situation is about insurrection, that is what they based it on and it for sure fits this scenario..and if you are following the states rights mantra then Trump would be off the ballot because Colorado felt he met the guidelines to take him off, that is how it goes Mugg...you cant play states rights for disregarding a womans right to an abortion and then call foul in that scenario, it goes both ways. I think the abortion reversal is one of the worst I have ever seen, if little else there should be a federal guideline that all states follow so women in any place in this country knows what their rights are and there is no way a conservative or ultra liberal state can change what has been determined to be the term and length allowed. That messup kind of imploded any level of equity and respect for women and is extremely embarrassing.
Under those guidelines, I guess states could try to remove Biden from their ballots for his malfeasance, too. Yes, you could say that ignoring laws & allowing people to flood into the country at record rates could be construed as "an act of insurrection". Never mind that neither have been convicted of such acts, but the mere appearance of impropriety is enough, yes? If a state "felt" that his actions met that criteria, then that's all they need, right?
I've no reason to defend Texas. Yes, I've been there a couple times but have no attachment to it whatsoever. But they've been forced to act because they're getting no help from DC for a problem that those in DC exacerbated. The so-called "sanctuary cities" are having to put their money where their mouths are now. Rumor has it that they're not all that happy either.
1
@wallstreetcappers
Under those guidelines, I guess states could try to remove Biden from their ballots for his malfeasance, too. Yes, you could say that ignoring laws & allowing people to flood into the country at record rates could be construed as "an act of insurrection". Never mind that neither have been convicted of such acts, but the mere appearance of impropriety is enough, yes? If a state "felt" that his actions met that criteria, then that's all they need, right?
I've no reason to defend Texas. Yes, I've been there a couple times but have no attachment to it whatsoever. But they've been forced to act because they're getting no help from DC for a problem that those in DC exacerbated. The so-called "sanctuary cities" are having to put their money where their mouths are now. Rumor has it that they're not all that happy either.
@wallstreetcappers Under those guidelines, I guess states could try to remove Biden from their ballots for his malfeasance, too. Yes, you could say that ignoring laws & allowing people to flood into the country at record rates could be construed as "an act of insurrection".
House GOP don't even have real evidence of high crime to impeach Biden. Courts have ruled that immigration is not an invasion. Migrants didn't enter US to overthrow government. No fault of Biden administration if US immigration system is under funded and badly outdated. In contrast, Trump was impeached and democrat House provided enough evidence for justice department to indict him. His lawyers couldn't persuade courts to dismiss cases. Unlike the frivolous lawsuits alleging voting fraud non-sense.
0
Quote Originally Posted by THEMUGG:
@wallstreetcappers Under those guidelines, I guess states could try to remove Biden from their ballots for his malfeasance, too. Yes, you could say that ignoring laws & allowing people to flood into the country at record rates could be construed as "an act of insurrection".
House GOP don't even have real evidence of high crime to impeach Biden. Courts have ruled that immigration is not an invasion. Migrants didn't enter US to overthrow government. No fault of Biden administration if US immigration system is under funded and badly outdated. In contrast, Trump was impeached and democrat House provided enough evidence for justice department to indict him. His lawyers couldn't persuade courts to dismiss cases. Unlike the frivolous lawsuits alleging voting fraud non-sense.
The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday allowed Texas to enforce a law that allows local police to arrest migrants suspected of crossing the border illegally. The ruling comes a day after the court extended a block on the state law at the request of the Biden administration, which sued to strike down the measure. The Biden administration argued that the law, known as Senate Bill 4, would usurp core federal authority on immigration. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has said the state’s law mirrored federal law and was put in place to compensate for the Biden administration’s inadequate response at the southern border.
Cannot imagine what this will do to the States that Biden is shipping all the illegal migrants to. They will get voter registrations near future and gain seats with the increased population.
The Biden migrant crime wave will be massive and many and of the local municipalities will have to increase policing and security. This will bankrupt many cities and towns.
Say good-bye to the USA and hello to a banana republic. No more middle class and single party rule.
0
Quote Originally Posted by THEMUGG:
The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday allowed Texas to enforce a law that allows local police to arrest migrants suspected of crossing the border illegally. The ruling comes a day after the court extended a block on the state law at the request of the Biden administration, which sued to strike down the measure. The Biden administration argued that the law, known as Senate Bill 4, would usurp core federal authority on immigration. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has said the state’s law mirrored federal law and was put in place to compensate for the Biden administration’s inadequate response at the southern border.
Cannot imagine what this will do to the States that Biden is shipping all the illegal migrants to. They will get voter registrations near future and gain seats with the increased population.
The Biden migrant crime wave will be massive and many and of the local municipalities will have to increase policing and security. This will bankrupt many cities and towns.
Say good-bye to the USA and hello to a banana republic. No more middle class and single party rule.
You know that several other countries have been dealing with migrants at a MUCH MUCH higher rate than the US? The UK has a very strong migrant influx and has for decades, they battle with the extremist aspect of that but extremists and violence are not migrants only, that is a very partisan and lazy viewpoint that the US cannot function with an influx of migrants. You cant seriously believe this stuff can you? There are as many violent law breaking YANKS as there are migrants, there are many if not most migrants who are not drug dealing religious extremists and you need to shut off the tv and conservative online media and get some sense of reality to counter the trash you are watching and believing.
0
@witswits
Sounds like a pamphlet from a Trump rally..
You know that several other countries have been dealing with migrants at a MUCH MUCH higher rate than the US? The UK has a very strong migrant influx and has for decades, they battle with the extremist aspect of that but extremists and violence are not migrants only, that is a very partisan and lazy viewpoint that the US cannot function with an influx of migrants. You cant seriously believe this stuff can you? There are as many violent law breaking YANKS as there are migrants, there are many if not most migrants who are not drug dealing religious extremists and you need to shut off the tv and conservative online media and get some sense of reality to counter the trash you are watching and believing.
@witswits Sounds like a pamphlet from a Trump rally.. You know that several other countries have been dealing with migrants at a MUCH MUCH higher rate than the US? The UK has a very strong migrant influx and has for decades, they battle with the extremist aspect of that but extremists and violence are not migrants only, that is a very partisan and lazy viewpoint that the US cannot function with an influx of migrants. You cant seriously believe this stuff can you? There are as many violent law breaking YANKS as there are migrants, there are many if not most migrants who are not drug dealing religious extremists and you need to shut off the tv and conservative online media and get some sense of reality to counter the trash you are watching and believing.
Many of the illegal migrants that are coming were released from max security prisons and some of the worst people you can imagine. The gangs, drugs and crime they will bring and form is going to costs the US billions and many lives. Trump's words may be harsh to some but many of the woke and weak will beg for a person of strength in the near future. We will have not choice as the US is the weakest it has been and getting weaker by the day.
Biden destroyed the US as we know and it is a matter of time till we will have to have the adults back in to fix the horror show. If not we will not have a Nation any longer.
1
Quote Originally Posted by wallstreetcappers:
@witswits Sounds like a pamphlet from a Trump rally.. You know that several other countries have been dealing with migrants at a MUCH MUCH higher rate than the US? The UK has a very strong migrant influx and has for decades, they battle with the extremist aspect of that but extremists and violence are not migrants only, that is a very partisan and lazy viewpoint that the US cannot function with an influx of migrants. You cant seriously believe this stuff can you? There are as many violent law breaking YANKS as there are migrants, there are many if not most migrants who are not drug dealing religious extremists and you need to shut off the tv and conservative online media and get some sense of reality to counter the trash you are watching and believing.
Many of the illegal migrants that are coming were released from max security prisons and some of the worst people you can imagine. The gangs, drugs and crime they will bring and form is going to costs the US billions and many lives. Trump's words may be harsh to some but many of the woke and weak will beg for a person of strength in the near future. We will have not choice as the US is the weakest it has been and getting weaker by the day.
Biden destroyed the US as we know and it is a matter of time till we will have to have the adults back in to fix the horror show. If not we will not have a Nation any longer.
If you have something related to a topic or the conversation then of course you are always welcome to be part of the conversation but any personal attacks and jabs I wont put up with, so if you want to play passive aggressive then do it in the box not in the mains.
I have no idea what this means in relation to my comments on the machination process of "kicking off a SCOTUS judge". I seriously did not know IF or HOW that could happen. Guess what? I went and found out, it is only through impeachment process. JFC why are you so sensitive and defensive. I said nothing about any individual username here. Personal attack?? What are you talking about?? Where?? This is a charmin soft comment/warning for absolutely NO reason.
America First
1
@wallstreetcappers
If you have something related to a topic or the conversation then of course you are always welcome to be part of the conversation but any personal attacks and jabs I wont put up with, so if you want to play passive aggressive then do it in the box not in the mains.
I have no idea what this means in relation to my comments on the machination process of "kicking off a SCOTUS judge". I seriously did not know IF or HOW that could happen. Guess what? I went and found out, it is only through impeachment process. JFC why are you so sensitive and defensive. I said nothing about any individual username here. Personal attack?? What are you talking about?? Where?? This is a charmin soft comment/warning for absolutely NO reason.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.
Hot Forum Topics
