world

Trump signs order limiting migrant asylum at U.S.-Mexico border

12 Comments

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

© (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2018.

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

12 Comments
Login to comment

The flaming clown car that is this administration continues to slam into dumpsters as it lurched down the alley.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Hands off! Our borders, our choice.

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

Our borders, our choice.

Then why are you ignoring the fact that your people don’t want the wall? The numbers are very clear on it.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

@cla68 Hands off! Our borders, our choice.

That sounds like an Internet Research Agency / Bannon-Breitbart / infowars meme. 6 words total, no more than 7. Easy to remember, easy to repeat. Right up there with 'Build a wall' and 'Lock her up'.

Would you care to clarify who the 'our' you're referring to might be, which specific group you claim to be speaking for. IF you're an American, you should know you cannot speak for the whole. Not for me, at least.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

People can come in but they have to come in through the points of entry.

And what's wrong with that? A country has the right to control its own borders and its points of entry. Except the liberals and other countries believe U.S. is exempt from that right.

"We also have an obligation under international law not to return people to a country where they fear persecution," he said.

The United Nations refugee agency UNHCR said on Friday the United States must make sure anyone seeking refugee protection and in need of humanitarian assistance can get both promptly and"without obstruction."

Why must it always be the U.S. "obligations"? Other countries don't honour that obligation. Why didn't Nicaragua, El Salvador and Guatemala, offer the Honduran caravan asylum and humanitarian assistance?

The U.S. has an obligation to take care of its own citizens, not the world. If the Honduran government were taking care of its own people like they are obligated to do, there wouldn't be a mass caravan trying to get out. Why isn't the UN investigating the Honduran government and correcting the problem?

Oh I see....it's not the UN's responsibility, it's the U.S.' responsibility.

ACLU

Also known as the "American Criminal Lobby Union". Always there to protect the lawbreakers, especially the immigrants who are in the U.S. illegally. They believe lawbreakers have more "rights" than the ones who obeys laws.

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

And what's wrong with that? A country has the right to control its own borders and its points of entry.

Agreed.

Except the liberals and other countries believe U.S. is exempt from that right.

This statement has no basis in reality. It's a prime example of conservatibes injecting falsehoods into a conversation to prevent it from moving forward.

Why must it always be the U.S. "obligations"? Other countries don't honour that obligation.

The US is meant to be the leader of the free world. Was that enough of a hint?

The U.S. has an obligation to take care of its own citizens, not the world. If the Honduran government were taking care of its own people like they are obligated to do, there wouldn't be a mass caravan trying to get out

Does the US have any obligation to Honduras for the chaos the US created in Honduras?

Also known as the "American Criminal Lobby Union". Always there to protect the lawbreakers, especially the immigrants who are in the U.S. illegally. They believe lawbreakers have more "rights" than the ones who obeys laws

The ACLU is one of the foremost defenders of the Constitution. Why do you hate the Constitution ?

2 ( +3 / -1 )

That reminds me. Need to send in the annual contribution to the ACLU. I don't agree with everything they stand for, but they do try to get due process following the law.

Funny thing about "laws" in the USA. They apply to everyone (in theory). Sorry if that bothers some people, but either the USA is a nation of laws or it isn't.

A President can't just executive order to override a US law. Anyone asked to enforce it should refuse, as it is an unlawful order. Then let the courts decide, since Trump likes to attempt illegal things rather than get a ruling before hand. I think that is scummy.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

And what's wrong with that? A country has the right to control its own borders and its points of entry. Except the liberals and other countries believe U.S. is exempt from that right.

Makes perfect sense. If you can’t control your borders, you have no country.

The US is meant to be the leader of the free world.

We are, all the more reason to make sure our borders are sealed.

Does the US have any obligation to Honduras for the chaos the US created in Honduras?

No, not in the sense of mass illegal migration. We bear zero responsibility, but if they want to follow the steps of “legal” immigration, they would be always welcomed.

The ACLU is one of the foremost defenders of the Constitution. Why do you hate the Constitution ?

Thats a bunch of garbage. The ACLU are a bunch of activist progressive lawyers.

The ACLU is a private organization and, as such, it can of course pick and choose the people it decides to represent in court. It has no legal obligation to represent anyone. But the unvarnished truth is that the organization cannot any longer pretend to be “the guardian of liberty.” It is very, very selective in the liberties it is willing to guard.

It hails itself as a defender of the right of “everyone” to free speech, but if you want to exercise that right while lawfully carrying a gun, don’t rely on the ACLU. It claims to defend religious freedom, but if you’re a baker whose religion does not allow you to bake a cake for a same-sex marriage celebration, you will find the ACLU on the other side of the courtroomrepresenting the same-sex couple suing you. And the organization insists that it violates free speech to punish a businessperson for boycotting Israel, but it doesn’t violate free speech to punish a businessperson for boycotting people of a particular race, religion or ethnicity.

https://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/civil-rights/347375-aclu-proves-yet-again-its-a-guardian-of-left-wing-movement

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

I don't have a problem with this. If you want to apply for asylum, then use the ports of entry.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Why not just get a visa.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Anyway, the first judge who sees this Steven Miller schtik will knock it down.

On the basis of the law, the constitution and powers vested in the president, you hope, right? Otherwise, you really don't want hacks with political predispositions disguised in robes.

These decisions are often reversed in the Supreme Court. The West Coast's liberal 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has 79% of its decisions reversed on review by the Supreme Court.

What about the time and money of American taxpayers poured down the drain? There should be more censures, civil penalties and personal liabilities for such irresponsible judges, if not summary dismissal.

Thank the President for appointing more judges who follow the law and constitution, and not what the judge wants the law to say.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

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