world

Judge blocks Trump's asylum policy but delays enforcement

39 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2019 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

39 Comments
Login to comment

Gosh, all these injunctions. It's almost like Trump doesn't actually know how to implement policies that are actually legal.

0 ( +7 / -7 )

And now you know why, McConnell is trying to reshape the 9th circuit. Makes sense to me, either balance it out or stack it with conservative judges.

-7 ( +5 / -12 )

Not surprising -- weasel judge was appointed by Obama. When are Americans going to wake up and stop allowing UNELECTED officials tell an ELECTED official what he can constitutionally do...

-7 ( +5 / -12 )

Not surprising - hyper-partisans think everyone is as morally decrepit as they are, and only does things due to hyper-partisanship.

Morons. Every last one of them.

3 ( +10 / -7 )

Not surprising -- weasel judge was appointed by Obama. When are Americans going to wake up and stop allowing UNELECTED officials tell an ELECTED official what he can constitutionally do

Bingo! McConnell is doing his best to rectify that wrong.

-9 ( +3 / -12 )

of course it’s an Obama appointee. Who else would be considering all these “rights” that people have when they get caught illegally crossing our border.

-8 ( +4 / -12 )

When are Americans going to wake up and stop allowing UNELECTED officials tell an ELECTED official what he can constitutionally do...

A separation and balance of powers is included in the US Constitution. Many Americans are 'awake' and well aware Trump and his fellow elite are trying to allow the executive powers the Constitution limits.

3 ( +7 / -4 )

A separation and balance of powers is included in the US Constitution. Many Americans are 'awake' and well aware Trump and his fellow elite are trying to allow the executive powers the Constitution limits

If the Washington Democrats think that way, they will continue to loss and loss big.

-9 ( +3 / -12 )

 loss and loss big.

Many loss, such loss, no losing.

When are Americans going to wake up and stop allowing UNELECTED officials tell an ELECTED official what he can constitutionally do...

Dunno, Trump is trying to fire every "unelected" Obama appointee with an "unelected" Trump appointee. So its only a mystery why you're supporting him...

4 ( +7 / -3 )

Trump is confused. He wasn't elected King. Perhaps he didn't think that oath to

faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

When there are laws, he has to follow them. It isn't optional. If he doesn't like a law, then he needs to work with both parts of Congress to get it changed. Failing that, then there isn't much he should/can do except make the voters aware of those difficulties and ask for them to pressure their representatives.

Or he can have his Attorney General bring a lawsuit and get some activist Judge to change the law from the bench.

OTOH, Executive decrees have been used more than they should, not just by Trump.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

theFu, that's what I've been reading too: Trump makes demands which are clearly illegal, has a tantrum when he encounters pushback, and fires people.

Apparently, after After Trump's visit to Boarder Patrol in El Paso, agents sought advice from their leaders, who advised them against following Trump's orders as, if they did, they would take on personal liability. Follow the law, they were told.

I suppose Trump's disdain for the law springs from his narcissism, but whatever: He's growing increasingly dangerous.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

Apparently, after After Trump's visit to Boarder Patrol in El Paso, agents sought advice from their leaders, who advised them against following Trump's orders as, if they did, they would take on personal liability. Follow the law, they were told.

Its madness. Trump thinks he is above the law...and he thinks government employees are his dogs. Wrong!

4 ( +5 / -1 )

of course it’s an Obama appointee. Who else would be considering all these “rights” that people have when they get caught illegally crossing our border.

A judge. Which is to say, someone who considers the law and the rights that people have under the US Constitution.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

When are Americans going to wake up and stop allowing UNELECTED officials tell an ELECTED official what he can constitutionally do..

thats what the the constitution allows , the legal establishment to check what politicians do is legal or not under the constitution. If US politicians aren't held accountable to US law then its hardly a democracy anymore is it.

same as POTUS being elected without the popular support of Americans, while its hardly follows the democratic principles of one person one vote, its still allowed under the US constitution.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

@wtfjapan: I guess you missed that day in high school where you were taught the reason the founding fathers established the Electoral College... Do yourself a favor and look it up.

Oh, and by the way, you probably also missed all the hullabaloo when New York Governor Andrew Cuomo signed into law new legislation that allows abortions up to birth and after Virginia Governor Ralph Northam backed infanticide during a radio interview...

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

Again a Californian based court or judge interferes with processes that are actually good for the country

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

Oh, and by the way, you probably also missed all the hullabaloo when New York Governor Andrew Cuomo signed into law new legislation that allows abortions up to birth and after Virginia Governor Ralph Northam backed infanticide during a radio interview...

People will miss things that didn't happen, yeah. Cuomo signed a law that codifies Roe vs. Wade into NY State law, wherein abortions after 24 weeks can only be performed in the event that the life of the mother is in danger or the fetus isn't viable. Virginia's bill also wouldn't alter any time limits on abortion in Virginia, and certainly no-one has advocated infanticide.

Wild, irresponsible comments like these are shameful.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Why do progressives love criminals so much?

-7 ( +1 / -8 )

Actually judge assisting Trump to make a strong law by Trump administration's policy of returning asylum seekers to Mexico. Ha ha ha

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Its madness. Trump thinks he is above the law...and he thinks government employees are his dogs. Wrong!

The Democrats think they’re above the law. They want to pack the SC because they can’t get their way, they want to lower the voting age to 16 to allow kids that don’t even know Proper hygiene, but they can make informed voting decisions, they want felons to vote, people that murdered others, they want to abolish ICE, limit arresting powers of CBP, they want to abolish the EC (will never happen) in other words if we can’t beat the GOP on the issues, (they want to weaponize the IRS...again to use them to get Trump’s taxes, won’t happen, they used and weaponized the FBI to find dirt on the President. Another dud. )We need to change the system. These are the real people that believe they are above the law.

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

This idiot Judge Richard Seeborg should personally pay all expenses for keeping these asylum seekers in the U.S., including 24 hour police watch over them.

-8 ( +0 / -8 )

Yet another legal setback for Trump. Maybe he should stop trying to implement so many illegal policies.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

According the Diane Feinstein:

“DHS is now without a secretary, deputy secretary, ICE director, FEMA director, Secret Service director, inspector general, undersecretary for policy, undersecretary for science and technology, chief financial officer and chief privacy officer,” she said.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Liberals always find the judge appointed by their side and then claim “the constitution” says something. Nope a partisan activist judge said something.

Dead quiet when all these are overturned at the Supreme Court. It’s just temporary obstruction not an actual finding based on the law.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

Yay for the rule of law smacking down this criminal president again!

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Dead quiet when all these are overturned at the Supreme Court. 

We don't really buy into the made up "radical judges" thing. It's just something the GOP says every single time they lose a case.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

California. What do you expect?

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Who else would be considering all these “rights” that people have when they get caught illegally crossing our border.

You vote Democrat- you get “rights”. Your citizenship is irrelevant.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Thank God McConnell is trying to fix all of this.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

You vote Democrat- you get “rights”. Your citizenship is irrelevant.

This is a stunning display of ignorance regarding constitutional jurisprudence. I'll help you with the first few steps.

Read the 14th Amemdment to the Constitution. The pertinent part is:

*nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.*

See how it uses "person" here and not "citizen"? This means the drafters of and people that ratified the 14th Amendment wanted people in the US to have rights.

This means you are completely incorrect trying to blame the democrats.

Thank God McConnell is trying to fix all of this.

Yeah! How dare the judiciary act as a check on the president.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Yeah! How dare the judiciary act as a check on the president.

Tell that to Lois Lerner.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

they want felons to vote,

Correction. Ex-felons. People who have served their time. Floridians on both sides of the political spectrum voted for this. Republicans want to reverse this with a poll tax on ex-felons because Republicans want to disenfranchise black people.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

*Correction. Ex-felons. *

Just as bad.

People who have served their time.

Maybe if they were in some way wronged or pardoned, it would be ok, otherwise, they shouldn’t.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

People who have served their time should be allowed to vote.

More, people in prison should be allowed to vote.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

People who have served their time should be allowed to vote. 

I disagree.

More, people in prison should be allowed to vote.

with the exception of convicted felons.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

I disagree.

Why? Why are you in favor of eternal punishment?

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites