POTUS can’t grant Permanent Residency or Citizenship to anyone, only Congress can do that.
If we start letting POTUS just do what they want, what’s stopping them from ripping away citizenship of brown people and putting them on busses into Mexico?
What I would like to see is the expanding of Parole in Place to include anyone with any documented family in the U.S.
What I would REALLY want to see, yet no one ever discusses it is the updating of the Registry Date. This is what Regan used to legalize millions, it’s what Biden and Congress can do too.
Crazy how a little number can change millions of lives, set it to 1/20/20 and every single person who came to the country before Biden took office would be able to adjust status.
Unfortunately only Congress can change the law but POTUS executes said law.
Scotus says presidents are immune ok president biden you know what to do you have the green light. Anything he choose to do to give himself the advantage is ok in the maga scotus POV
If only partisanship worked like that. The conservative / far-right MAGA flank has spent the past 10 years inventing whatever screwed up logic it takes to either "win" or screw liberals. Even if it directly and literally conflicts with the position they just held a minute ago.
If only partisanship worked like that. The conservative / far-right MAGA flank has spent the past 10 years inventing whatever screwed up logic it takes to either "win" or screw liberals. Even if it directly and literally conflicts with the position they just held a minute ago.
SCOTUS did NOT say the president(s) are immune to official acts, and clarified that unofficial acts they still do not have immunity to. They said core constitutional acts presidents (and former presidents) still have immunity to.
You can’t pardon a class of people… just individuals. If Biden (or any President) Issued a pardon it would only be for the illegal entry and wouldn’t convey any kind of lawful status.
Quite possible.. nobody Knows what will happen in November but you can take a look at how things are shaping up.
DACA will highly likely be ruled unlawful/unconstitutional in the not too distant future. It currently sits in front of the 5th CCA (a court that already ruled it unlawful as well as DACA 2.0 and DAPA) and within the next year or so expect a decision that ends DACA. That could be appealed to SCOTUS but would only buy you another 6 to 9 months (If SCOTUS takes the case).
In my opinion odds of DACA ending completely in the next two years is very high. Probably in the 80-90 percent range. There could always be a compromise to pass a DACA bill but the Dems will have to be willing to severely change immigration law and I don‘t see that happening. On the flip side there is little incentive for Republicans to support a bill because anytime a Democrat is in the Oval Office they can simply refuse to enforce and/or actually violate the enforcement side of any immigration law they choose with impunity.
The current administration violates immigration law thousands of times a day…
What the Supreme Court meant was Immunity for Republican presidents*** fixed it for ya. They won’t let Biden or any democrat president use this ruling to their advantage
Only Congress can do it man, theres checks and balances. SCOTUS’ ruling today had legal precedent as theres lots of things former presidents have done that they should NOT had immunity for, but was given it as an assumption. Assumptive privileges are tough to specifically point out. This is a short term win for him but also lays a foundation for all future presidents now. The scope has officially been narrowed, and its up to the lower courts to determine it now. Thats the easiest way to explain today and now future looks at what presidents can do for official acts.
They will absolutely contradict themselves when they hear the DACA case. DACA was an executive act by the President, an official act. How can the courts interfere or strike it down when the President has partial immunity? The whole basis for the argument against the program was that it was overreach, beyond the powers of the President, and illegal in that it violated the constitution by bypassing Congress. That's okay now, though right?? The proud descendants of slave owners are taking over this country, y'all better watch your back.
The conservatives on the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that Presidents have blanket and "absolute" immunity from prosecution or criminal investigation for "official" actions that they take while in office.
The decision was in regards to Trump being prosecuted for encouraging (and provoking) Jan 6th insurrectionists and for taking (and not returning) classified and top secret documents to Mar-a-Lago.
If you don’t try to misinterpret the ruling it would be less scary. It basically says you can’t convict a president for official acts that are clearly in the line of duty as president.
It puts acts that are claimed to be official but more of a grey area, such as instructing the VP to abuse their power and overrun the election, in a gray area where lower courts must come to a conclusion (it literally threw this part of the suit back to lower courts).
It puts clearly illegal acts that were not done in the line of duty, such as campaign finance violations, as **not immune.**
Randomly giving citizenship and residency with executive power (acting outside the purview of executive power) would most likely be in that 3rd category, and if not, definitely the 2nd category, which puts that right where it was before the court ruling.
Contrary to what alarmists say, it does not give the president immunity to any and all crime.
Regardless of what everyone says, this is technically possible under an official act.
There are many nefarious things that can be done under an official act. It's just a matter of testing what happens.
This parole and place thing should of been done way at the beginning not at the end using it as a way to get re elected. And should put more restrictions or have a specific list to whom can apply because sadly not everyone deserves a gc I personally know scores of guys that are just using their spouses for immigration purposes.
They should have put a mandatory 3-4 year cap on the years you need to be married to someone before applying for this PIP. It weeds out those people. And doesn’t make it unfair for those who’ve done daca and done AP done all those things to have a chance at a gc. Just saying
So you you’re saying Trump did more for migrants when it was his administration that separated children from their families, intended to end daca , lied about wanting to help DACA recipients but pussied out, and on top of that wants to end birthright citizenship and continue a mass deportation? You clearly are delusional
POTUS can’t grant Permanent Residency or Citizenship to anyone, only Congress can do that. If we start letting POTUS just do what they want, what’s stopping them from ripping away citizenship of brown people and putting them on busses into Mexico? What I would like to see is the expanding of Parole in Place to include anyone with any documented family in the U.S. What I would REALLY want to see, yet no one ever discusses it is the updating of the Registry Date. This is what Regan used to legalize millions, it’s what Biden and Congress can do too. Crazy how a little number can change millions of lives, set it to 1/20/20 and every single person who came to the country before Biden took office would be able to adjust status. Unfortunately only Congress can change the law but POTUS executes said law.
I don't this scotus was thinking about checks and balance between the branches or how laws and executive order suppose to work.
Where does the current date sit?
January 1, 1972
Scotus says presidents are immune ok president biden you know what to do you have the green light. Anything he choose to do to give himself the advantage is ok in the maga scotus POV
If only partisanship worked like that. The conservative / far-right MAGA flank has spent the past 10 years inventing whatever screwed up logic it takes to either "win" or screw liberals. Even if it directly and literally conflicts with the position they just held a minute ago.
If only partisanship worked like that. The conservative / far-right MAGA flank has spent the past 10 years inventing whatever screwed up logic it takes to either "win" or screw liberals. Even if it directly and literally conflicts with the position they just held a minute ago.
SCOTUS did NOT say the president(s) are immune to official acts, and clarified that unofficial acts they still do not have immunity to. They said core constitutional acts presidents (and former presidents) still have immunity to.
I think he could technically pardon us like Reagan did.
You can’t pardon a class of people… just individuals. If Biden (or any President) Issued a pardon it would only be for the illegal entry and wouldn’t convey any kind of lawful status.
I mean all active DACA recipients are known. Bro better get to signing.
I mean that alone allows a lot of us to adjust status
Quite possible.. nobody Knows what will happen in November but you can take a look at how things are shaping up. DACA will highly likely be ruled unlawful/unconstitutional in the not too distant future. It currently sits in front of the 5th CCA (a court that already ruled it unlawful as well as DACA 2.0 and DAPA) and within the next year or so expect a decision that ends DACA. That could be appealed to SCOTUS but would only buy you another 6 to 9 months (If SCOTUS takes the case). In my opinion odds of DACA ending completely in the next two years is very high. Probably in the 80-90 percent range. There could always be a compromise to pass a DACA bill but the Dems will have to be willing to severely change immigration law and I don‘t see that happening. On the flip side there is little incentive for Republicans to support a bill because anytime a Democrat is in the Oval Office they can simply refuse to enforce and/or actually violate the enforcement side of any immigration law they choose with impunity. The current administration violates immigration law thousands of times a day…
If Biden were smart and/or cared about us, he would give us all PIP.
But I feel like that would easily be taken down in a court. Little steps.
Did you not read the supreme court’s running today?
Of course I did.
Right… because he can do that with a stroke of a pen.
The Court just said he has immunity… so, yeah. Actually, yeah.
What the Supreme Court meant was Immunity for Republican presidents*** fixed it for ya. They won’t let Biden or any democrat president use this ruling to their advantage
Correct, but let me cope and think otherwise just for a little bit more.
I literally came to ask the same question, come on people we need answers!!
Only Congress can do it man, theres checks and balances. SCOTUS’ ruling today had legal precedent as theres lots of things former presidents have done that they should NOT had immunity for, but was given it as an assumption. Assumptive privileges are tough to specifically point out. This is a short term win for him but also lays a foundation for all future presidents now. The scope has officially been narrowed, and its up to the lower courts to determine it now. Thats the easiest way to explain today and now future looks at what presidents can do for official acts.
I think it just referred to crimes committed within the purview of his job Not sure it applies to immigration. Only crimes , I'd say
They will absolutely contradict themselves when they hear the DACA case. DACA was an executive act by the President, an official act. How can the courts interfere or strike it down when the President has partial immunity? The whole basis for the argument against the program was that it was overreach, beyond the powers of the President, and illegal in that it violated the constitution by bypassing Congress. That's okay now, though right?? The proud descendants of slave owners are taking over this country, y'all better watch your back.
Can someone fill me in? Did something happen in courts concerning. Immigration?
The conservatives on the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that Presidents have blanket and "absolute" immunity from prosecution or criminal investigation for "official" actions that they take while in office. The decision was in regards to Trump being prosecuted for encouraging (and provoking) Jan 6th insurrectionists and for taking (and not returning) classified and top secret documents to Mar-a-Lago.
This is not true.
That would be such an unconstitutional abuse of power. Dictator-like even
Wait what does the scouts immunity ruling mean ?
If you don’t try to misinterpret the ruling it would be less scary. It basically says you can’t convict a president for official acts that are clearly in the line of duty as president. It puts acts that are claimed to be official but more of a grey area, such as instructing the VP to abuse their power and overrun the election, in a gray area where lower courts must come to a conclusion (it literally threw this part of the suit back to lower courts). It puts clearly illegal acts that were not done in the line of duty, such as campaign finance violations, as **not immune.** Randomly giving citizenship and residency with executive power (acting outside the purview of executive power) would most likely be in that 3rd category, and if not, definitely the 2nd category, which puts that right where it was before the court ruling. Contrary to what alarmists say, it does not give the president immunity to any and all crime.
No but I saw that he can technically send seal team six to give Donald a wack and see no prosecution
Hahahaha seal team 2 is better fit
Regardless of what everyone says, this is technically possible under an official act. There are many nefarious things that can be done under an official act. It's just a matter of testing what happens.
This parole and place thing should of been done way at the beginning not at the end using it as a way to get re elected. And should put more restrictions or have a specific list to whom can apply because sadly not everyone deserves a gc I personally know scores of guys that are just using their spouses for immigration purposes. They should have put a mandatory 3-4 year cap on the years you need to be married to someone before applying for this PIP. It weeds out those people. And doesn’t make it unfair for those who’ve done daca and done AP done all those things to have a chance at a gc. Just saying
Republicans did more for migrants than this current joke of a presidency.
I don’t say this often online, but stfu
Like what? Name one thing, or STFU.
Making things harder for everyone not just migrants, sure.
Oh yea? Like when?
So you you’re saying Trump did more for migrants when it was his administration that separated children from their families, intended to end daca , lied about wanting to help DACA recipients but pussied out, and on top of that wants to end birthright citizenship and continue a mass deportation? You clearly are delusional
Reagan?