Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Gives Congress Time to pass Immigration Reform

So No more all Free Ride for the Illegals?

Eh, now we get 6 months of whining and pleading for this not to be done.

6 months?! Good job Trump, you're giving the enemy time to continue their plot of browning America

DACA is a thing that should have never been allowed to exist. At least, not in the way it came about, not the way Obama did it.

Originally posted by Surtur
Eh, now we get 6 months of whining and pleading for this not to be done.

You say that like there was ever a chance that the Left would have STOPPED at some point?

Originally posted by Surtur
DACA is a thing that should have never been allowed to exist. At least, not in the way it came about, not the way Obama did it.

How so then?

Originally posted by Robtard
How so then?

That's for congress to figure out. Let me guess though: you feel Obama was right to do what he did, the way he did it?

So it was wrong cos Obama, but you don't know. You sound exactly like Trump.

Originally posted by Robtard
So it was wrong cos Obama, but you don't know. You sound exactly like Trump.

It was wrong because of the way he went about it, as it would have been for any president.

Are we going to pretend you didn't know I meant that?

Obama "These dreamers are Americans in their hearts, in their mind, in every single way but one, on paper."

What about all the people that are multi millionaires in their hearts, minds and in every single way but on paper.

Huh? That like makes no sense. But do you seriously think a person who's been in the US and working for years and years isn't invested in America just because they came over as a child illegally?

It makes total sense, our society is built off paperwork, you dont have the paperwork to represent what you own or owe, then you can't prove anything.

I can't just walk down to the bank and say I feel like I millionaire, give me a million bucks. Its the exact same thing.

What about people who get screwed out of their fortunes or wealth cause they didn't have the right paper work? Everything is about records. Just because someone allowed to do something illegally doesn't necessarily make it ok does it?

FFS, Obama's point is that these people who were raised here and work here are every bit as invested in America

OK I will play along.


What I went to one of liberlas favorite European countries like I dunno Denmark, or Luxembourg or Sweden etc, I go there, work there for 5 years and still can't get citizenship or whatever DACA protections would be over there.

Is it fair?

You can disagree with it and that's fine, was clarifying Obama's point.

Not sure how those countries work, but considering they're taking in refugees in need, I could see them extending citizenship for someone who came over as a child and had worked and contributed to society for years, instead of going "**** you!"

Trump isn't saying **** you. He did this today or lose the battle in the supreme Court where Obama lost DAPA.

Instead giving them 6 months longer giving time for Democrats to come to the table with 48 votes and passing a bill for them making it a legal consitutional bill.

Real legislation long term is a no brainer.

Oh, no. Trump is definitely saying "**** you" to these people who were raised here and have interest here now.

The Republicans control all factions of the government right now, including the Supreme Court since McConnell (who looks like a turtle) and friends stopped Obama from doing his constitutionally protected job in electing a JCJ

51 votes is all that's needed. All Dems have to do is bring 48 votes

Plus
Graham
McCain
Maine Senator

Done deal

My bad I think this needs 60. But still think if Dems come together it can.pass

It would be nice if Congress came together to pass something for these people who came here through no fault of their own. In this political climate, though, I'm not holding my breath.

Originally posted by BackFire
It would be nice if Congress came together to pass something for these people who came here through no fault of their own. In this political climate, though, I'm not holding my breath.

Do you believe DACA was constitutional?

Better yet, how was it unconstitutional?

Originally posted by Robtard
Better yet, how was it unconstitutional?

Lol no Rob, I asked if he thought it was constitutional. If you want to answer for him go ahead and tell my why you think it is.

Originally posted by Robtard
Better yet, how was it unconstitutional?

Because Obama said it was before he did it. And two, the SC said DAPA was unconstitutional.

Originally posted by Surtur
Do you believe DACA was constitutional?

I don't know. I've not researched the issue enough to have a valid opinion on that aspect of it.

It's 100% unconstitutional that is why no one can file an order to block his decision.

I bet you not a single federal lawsuit will be filed.

Originally posted by Sable
It's 100% unconstitutional that is why no one can file an order to block his decision.

I bet you not a single federal lawsuit will be filed.

Obama himself also said it was temporary. Now, this first came about in 2012. Here we are 5 years later. Democrats had 4 years or so to figure out an actual solution as opposed to this temporary stuff. Why didn't they?

I echo Rob's question, what exactly about it is unconstitutional?

I was under the impression that the President had full authority on things like immigration. Why does that authority not apply here?

Originally posted by Sable
My bad I think this needs 60. But still think if Dems come together it can.pass

Nah. I doubt they're getting that many Republican votes even in the current Congress which is hilariously unfriendly towards Trump.

Even then if that were to somehow happen, Trump won't sign it and then they'd need a 2/3rds majority in both houses for this to become law. Too many longshots.

Originally posted by BackFire
I echo Rob's question, what exactly about it is unconstitutional?

I was under the impression that the President had full authority on things like immigration. Why does that authority not apply here?

Bingo. That's how we look at laws and the President's powers, "is it unconstitutional".

Originally posted by Robtard
Bingo. That's how we look at laws and the President's powers, "is it unconstitutional".

So you do not think it is unconstitutional I take it. Why is that?

Originally posted by BackFire
I echo Rob's question, what exactly about it is unconstitutional?

I was under the impression that the President had full authority on things like immigration. Why does that authority not apply here?

Because the President was given statutorial authority by Congress to block incoming foreigners from entry. The Constitution nor Congress gave him power to re classify whole groups or people as legal.

Again if this was illegal for him to do. There would be a Court challenge. There won't be.

Originally posted by Robtard
Nah. I doubt they're getting that many Republican votes even in the current Congress which is hilariously unfriendly towards Trump.

Even then if that were to somehow happen, Trump won't sign it and then they'd need a 2/3rds majority in both houses for this to become law. Too many longshots.

Let's make some gentleman's bets.

I bet Dems won't come to the table at all and if they do. It won't be more then 30.

Originally posted by Sable
Because the President was given statutorial authority by Congress to block incoming foreigners from entry. The Constitution nor Congress gave him power to re classify whole groups or people as legal.

Again if this was illegal for him to do. There would be a Court challenge. There won't be.

Remind me though, which party had more control in Congress in 2012 when DACA was passed?

Dems had complete control.

Also the SC rules DAPA as unconstitutional which this program mirrors.
DAPA struck down

Originally posted by Surtur
So you do not think it is unconstitutional I take it. Why is that?

I don't know with 100% certainty. But I'm not going to run around yelling "it's not constitutional!" at everything just because it was Obama, like you people.

Originally posted by Sable
Dems had complete control.

Also the SC rules DAPA as unconstitutional which this program mirrors.
DAPA struck down

Interesting. Coming here illegally was...well, illegal lol. So was he not in effect saying "do not enforce the law on this select group of people" ?

Wait, didn't he also talk about how we are a nation of laws and how people who "cut in line" should not be rewarded?

Rob the SC ruled DAPA as unconstitutional which this program mirrors.
DAPA struck down

Originally posted by Surtur
Interesting. Coming here illegally was...well, illegal lol. So was he not in effect saying "do not enforce the law on this select group of people" ?

Wait, didn't he also talk about how we are a nation of laws and how people who "cut in line" should not be rewarded?

He did. He also said he didn't have the power and it was unconstitutional to do what he ended up doing. He was correct which is why DAPA was struck down which is the same program but only for the Parents.

Originally posted by Sable
He did. He also said he didn't have the power and it was unconstitutional to do what he ended up doing. He was correct which is why DAPA was struck down which is the same program but only for the Parents.

One could almost say that Obama was displaying weasel-like behavior then.

Originally posted by Sable
Rob the SC ruled DAPA as unconstitutional which this program mirrors.
DAPA struck down

They have different names, Sable. They're not the same.

The only differece is P stands for Parents, and C stands for Children.

So yes at the core they are exactly the same.

I am sure you thought DAPA was Constitutional.

Originally posted by Surtur
One could almost say that Obama was displaying weasel-like behavior then.

Or he was against it before he was for it.

Parents are not their children, Sable. It's entirely different. Also, think of the children.

Originally posted by Sable
Or he was against it before he was for it.

Remember though, on more than one occasion when he said he didn't have the power to do it he also lamented the fact he didn't have the power to do it.

It is so bizarre to hear him talk about how we are a nation of laws, oh please. Did you hear how the dipshit Mayor of Chicago responded? Essentially said it doesn't matter what is decided, said this would be a "Trump free zone".

I am thinking of the children Rob. Pass a law legally that doesn't unilaterally bypass Congress that stands up to SC muster.

Unlike DAPA where Obama got everyone's hopes up by doing the exact opposite and destroying everyone's lives.

I think the children should be allowed to stay legally. Not executive amnesty that can be undone easily.

Originally posted by Sable
I am thinking of the children Rob. Pass a law legally that doesn't unilaterally bypass Congress that stands up to SC muster.

Unlike DAPA where Obama got everyone's hopes up by doing the exact opposite and destroying everyone's lives.

I think the children should be allowed to stay legally. Not executive amnesty that can be undone easily.

Notice how you rarely see people place any blame on the parents who brought the kids here illegally?

I also think the people already covered under DACA will most likely not be deported. They will be allowed to stay.

However, getting rid of this now takes away incentive for people to try to come here illegally because they think at least their kids can stay. So that is good.

Originally posted by Surtur
Did you hear how the dipshit Mayor of Chicago responded? Essentially said it doesn't matter what is decided, said this would be a "Trump free zone".

I enjoy how #triggered you get whenever someone attacks your precious hero

I don't blame the people for wanting to come here. I blame the politicians for the false hope they give.

Originally posted by Surtur
Notice how you rarely see people place any blame on the parents who brought the kids here illegally?

Because parents seeking a better lives for their children is something we should shit on parents for? Lol, this guy

Originally posted by Robtard
Because parents seeking a better lives for their children is something we should shit on parents for? Lol, this guy

And how good would their lives have been if they were forced to separate?

Originally posted by Surtur
And how good would their lives have been if they were forced to separate?

Easy solution their chief, don't separate children from their caring parents. /duh

Which is exactly why real laws need to be passed not temporary fixes undone easily.

Originally posted by Robtard
Easy solution their chief, don't separate children from their caring parents. /duh

And the solution to that is to come here through legal means and it won't happen, so you are correct it is easy.

Originally posted by Sable
Because the President was given statutorial authority by Congress to block incoming foreigners from entry. The Constitution nor Congress gave him power to re classify whole groups or people as legal.

Again if this was illegal for him to do. There would be a Court challenge. There won't be.

Hold on. I never said that Trump doing this was illegal. I don't think it is. It's very clearly within his power to make decisions like this. The question was whether it was actually unconstitutional for Obama to implement DACA.

The link you provided doesn't do much to support the idea that it is. The idea that the SC ruled that DAPA was unconstitutional is incorrect, as your own link says it ended in a 4-4 tie vote, and was essentially kicked back down to the lower courts. A tie vote is not a vote that something is unconstitutional.

Furthermore, as the link you provided notes, DAPA is not DACA.

It says the following "First, the outcome in U.S. v Texas has no direct impact on the original DACA program, which was implemented in August 2012...DACA has survived several legal challenges, including one brought by a group of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers and another by Maricopa County, Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio. Both were dismissed in federal court for lack of standing. "

So to summarize, a tie vote in the SC is not a vote that DAPA is unconstitutional, and it's certainly not evidence that a seperate piece of legislation is unconstitutional.

Originally posted by Sable
Which is exactly why real laws need to be passed not temporary fixes undone easily.

And also why I want Democrats to stop whining about laws being enforced when they are so selective in when they want them enforced. Like when the illegal was awarded nearly 200 grand from San Francisco cuz they turned him over to ICE...the excuse was "well they broke the law" lol. That is how some defended it.

Where is that "but they broke the law" now?

Originally posted by Surtur
And the solution to that is to come here through legal means and it won't happen, so you are correct it is easy.

Considering you break the law everyday with your worker's comp fraud, you have no grounds to tell illegals to obey, sport

Originally posted by Robtard
Considering you break the law everyday with your worker's comp fraud, you have no grounds to tell illegals to obey, sport

And if that were true you'd be correct, champ.

It is true, you accidentally confirmed it in other sections of the board, Mr. County Care. Like the unblinking Eye of Sauron, Robtard sees all. Be mad now.

Originally posted by Robtard
It is true, you accidentally confirmed it in other sections of the board, Mr. County Care. Like the unblinking Eye of Sauron, Robtard sees all. Be mad now.

But it was never confirmed lol. Did you want a redo?

Quick, scurry to go find quotes lol.

You'd have no reason to lie to MG, sport. You two were just having a convo in another part of the forum. /bustedagain

Originally posted by Robtard
You'd have no reason to lie to MG, sport. You two were just having a convo in another part of the forum. /bustedagain

So your logic is I have no reason to lie to MG, but I do have a reason to lie to Walshy? Interesting.

Can you explain that?

The backpedaling you do after you've exposed yourself and your hypocrisy is delicious. *nom nom nom*

Originally posted by Robtard
The backpedaling you do after you've exposed yourself and your hypocrisy is delicious. *nom nom nom*

Lol but...you claim I exposed myself because I apparently said something to MG and I had no reason to lie.

You have not explained why I have reason to lie to Walshy?

Do all the flips you like, doesn't matter, we've done this before and it's well known you're a fraud.

edit: Unless you've recently become gainfully employed, but that doesn't wash away the past

Originally posted by Robtard
Do all the flips you like, doesn't matter, we've done this before and it's well known you're a fraud.

edit: Unless you've recently become gainfully employed, but that doesn't wash away the past

So you have nothing to actually back up your claims? Alrighty, moving on.

Your posts, dummy. How else would I know.

Originally posted by Robtard
Your posts, dummy. How else would I know.

Whatever you wanna tell yourself

Originally posted by BackFire
Hold on. I never said that Trump doing this was illegal. I don't think it is. It's very clearly within his power to make decisions like this. The question was whether it was actually unconstitutional for Obama to implement DACA.

The link you provided doesn't do much to support the idea that it is. The idea that the SC ruled that DAPA was unconstitutional is incorrect, as your own link says it ended in a 4-4 tie vote, and was essentially kicked back down to the lower courts. A tie vote is not a vote that something is unconstitutional.

Furthermore, as the link you provided notes, DAPA is not DACA.

It says the following "First, the outcome in U.S. v Texas has no direct impact on the original DACA program, which was implemented in August 2012...DACA has survived several legal challenges, including one brought by a group of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers and another by Maricopa County, Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio. Both were dismissed in federal court for lack of standing. "

So to summarize, a tie vote in the SC is not a vote that DAPA is unconstitutional, and it's certainly not evidence that a seperate piece of legislation is unconstitutional.

I never said you said that he was doing something illegal. We agree its in his power to undo a non binding non law done through executive fiat, through executive fiat.

It was 4-4 because there was an empty seat, DAPA surely would have been 5-4 and DACA would have end up being 5-4 had it gone to SCOTUS. And the lower court ruled it unconstitutional, so yes, its unconstitutional regardless of the semantics of SCOTUS tie vs lower court. A tie means its lower court ruling stands which is unconstitutional. Through precident of DAPA ruling, it might not even had made it that far and stayed in a lower federal court.

I never said the link was for DACA, I stated specifically numerous times it was DAPA, which is a similar program that was ruled unconstitutional.

So to summarize, DAPA was ruled unconstitutional and still is. And since the program is very similar to DACA with a 5-4 majority on the SCOTUS, if DACA had gone to SCOTUS which it was going to, which is why POTUS acted today, it surely would have been ruled unconstitutional which would have been an even bigger blow to Obama and liberals. Trump actually did dreamers and parents of dreams a favor today. Because it was headed to court.

So a DACA decision was going to the Supreme Court? I wasn't aware. Do you know when it was scheduled to be heard by them?

Still, even if DAPA was uncontitutional, that doesn't really mean DACA would have been. Very minor difference could have made all the difference. We know some SC justices can make their decisions on seemingly very small things. But I guess we'll never know now.

Either way, I hope congress acts. I do think it's wrong to punish these people. They were brought here by their parents as children, they've built relationships and lives here, and this is the only home they know.

10 states were suing over it.

I wonder if the Dems would say the reason is racism?

Originally posted by BackFire
So a DACA decision was going to the Supreme Court? I wasn't aware. Do you know when it was scheduled to be heard by them?

Still, even if DAPA was uncontitutional, that doesn't really mean DACA would have been. Very minor difference could have made all the difference. We know some SC justices can make their decisions on seemingly very small things. But I guess we'll never know now.

Either way, I hope congress acts. I do think it's wrong to punish these people. They were brought here by their parents as children, they've built relationships and lives here, and this is the only home they know.

Cute, you know what I am talking about here, I am talking about DACA

"Through precident of DAPA ruling, it might not even had made it that far and stayed in a lower federal court."

By Gods, as if we never talk about anything hypothetical here.

Originally posted by Sable
Cute, you know what I am talking about here, I am talking about DACA

"Through precident of DAPA ruling, it might not even had made it that far and stayed in a lower federal court."

By Gods, as if we never talk about anything hypothetical here.

Hm? I wasn't trying to be cute. I thought you said that DACA was heading towards the SC. If you didn't, then my bad.

It's possible that a SC DAPA ruling would affect future DACA court rulings. But since the ruling was a tie I don't believe that would be enough to really set any precedent for DACA.

Again its all hypothetical, but I have my doubts it would have made to the SC and if it did, I don't see Gorush siding with Ginsberg.

Originally posted by Sable
Again its all hypothetical, but I have my doubts it would have made to the SC and if it did, I don't see Gorush siding with Ginsberg.

I don't either. But that doesn't mean one of the more moderate conservative justices couldn't vote different than they did on DAPA. If DACA is just slightly different or worded differently, then it's possible. Stranger things have happened. Some SC justices to seem to take pride in being unpredictable at times.

I agree a bit, but the 4-4 kinda says it all. Is not hard to imagine that being a 5-4 majority decision considering it was 4-4 and seeing the way Roberts voted kinda says it all. If Scalia had been there it would have been 5-4 and we both know it. Gorsuch would be a heart beat away from the same decision as Scalia.

I feel like DACA was like Obama giving someone a stolen car. And Tump is the sheriff who's saying pull over, let's take this back to the dealer and do it the right way.

Trump tweeted a bit ago that if congress fails to act that he will revisit the issue.

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/349351-trump-says-he-will-revisit-daca-decision-if-lawmakers-dont-act

Crowder seems to have it spot on ....as usual.

QzXuhCJWOx0

Does anyone know why dreamers cannot come from the US?

I still want an answer from a leftist who supports DACA as to when it should have ended. Big O himself said it was temporary. What steps did his administration take in the 4 years he had in office since he originally passed it?

Shhhh truths can't be talked about

Obama weighs in on DACA, disingenuously

vincente fox once again accurately points out what a slimy piece of irredeemable human garbage trump is.


ajpsU1ZuqHw

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
vincente fox once again accurately points out what a slimy piece of irredeemable human garbage trump is.


ajpsU1ZuqHw

Considering the shithole Mexico is I just laugh whenever this guy talks

Former Mexican president taunts Trump on Twitter, gets immediate blowback

Lol...

dK_RCtW2oU8

Cos Nazis

Originally posted by Sable
Cos Nazis

I love how one guy starts talking about the water in Flint Michigan lol. Then at the end someone goes on about "whitesplaining". Lmao, are these real live people? They can't be. Either they are robots or somebody paid them.

Carthage reminds me of one of these dumb idiots. It's hard to even believe people like this exist. I mean who here actually thinks these people have a fcking clue what's going on?

I want one Liberal here to make a defense for any one of these retards

Obama: Here is a stolen car but it's not my fault if you get in trouble. But I love you.

Trump: let's take the car back and do it the right way and make it permanent.

Liberals: HOW FCKING DARE YOU!! THE CHILDREN!!

Funny thing is, at the end of the day, I do not think anyone covered under DACA right now who is doing their own thing, keeping their nose clean, etc. will be deported.

I more so think Trump wants to prevent more people from coming here and trying to use DACA. No more new applications.

BUT JESUS, THE CHILDREN, THE HUMANITY!!

Originally posted by Sable
BUT JESUS, THE CHILDREN, THE HUMANITY!!

F*ck those issues, what about the water in Flint Michigan?!

Nazis probably poisoned it using nazi science.

I was gonna say now after DACA they need to go after Title IX as well, but it seems Betsy DeVos wants to roll some of that back, good

Before the usual suspects come out: Yes, I certainly do want actual rapists to be punished. I just cannot get on board with how Title IX has been abused.

Originally posted by Sable
Gives Congress Time to pass Immigration Reform

Trump gives Congress 6 months to deal with DACA or else. Or else what? Or else Trump will revisit this issue. So in other words, Trump gives Congress 6 months to handle or else...well...let's let Trump's on words fill you in.

Via Twitter: "For all those (DACA) that are concerned about your status during the 6 month period, you have nothing to worry about - No action!"

Originally posted by ESB -1138
Trump gives Congress 6 months to deal with DACA or else. Or else what? Or else Trump will revisit this issue. So in other words, Trump gives Congress 6 months to handle or else...well...let's let Trump's on words fill you in.

Via Twitter: "For all those (DACA) that are concerned about your status during the 6 month period, you have nothing to worry about - No action!"

Not true..

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/pelosi-trump-dream-act_us_59b1640be4b0354e440ff994?ncid=inblnkushpmg00000009

Just a lil something something for those curious why this isn't constitutional:

boFJDEJwUhY

Try to ignore the screeching banshee that fails to grasp his points. It's adorable seeing her try to process all this information though.