Nothing will change, in terms of who is deported, as a result of the Supreme Court's decision on the...
Nothing will change, in terms of who is deported, as a result of the Supreme Court's decision on the President's immigration executive order. Everyone in that courtroom -- all eight justices, and all the attorneys -- agrees that the President has full authority to decide to not deport someone, individually or as a group. I've been saying that from the beginning of this controversy, and the Texas Solicitor General conceded it in court:
"[C]an the government say to all of these people, and say it all at once, not one by one, yes, ….all of you are low priority. We will not be coming after you, and we will not deport you unless we change our minds?" "Justice Kagan, they can do that."
So all of the protestors saying "don't break up families!" on one side, and "deport the illegals!" on the other, are simply arguing the wrong case, because it's got nothing to do with this one.
This case is only about one thing: whether those people covered under the executive order can get certain benefits, in particular, whether they can start accruing time for Social Security and Medicare benefits.
And remember, an "executive action" is not a real thing in the law. It's just the President telling the people who work for him what to do, and this action to give these benefits is lawful (or not) regardless of whether he tells those people what to do verbally, through a written executive order, or sent using Morse code generated by dribbling a basketball. All that matters is whether the order he gives, however transmitted or recorded, is lawful.
"[C]an the government say to all of these people, and say it all at once, not one by one, yes, ….all of you are low priority. We will not be coming after you, and we will not deport you unless we change our minds?" "Justice Kagan, they can do that."
So all of the protestors saying "don't break up families!" on one side, and "deport the illegals!" on the other, are simply arguing the wrong case, because it's got nothing to do with this one.
This case is only about one thing: whether those people covered under the executive order can get certain benefits, in particular, whether they can start accruing time for Social Security and Medicare benefits.
And remember, an "executive action" is not a real thing in the law. It's just the President telling the people who work for him what to do, and this action to give these benefits is lawful (or not) regardless of whether he tells those people what to do verbally, through a written executive order, or sent using Morse code generated by dribbling a basketball. All that matters is whether the order he gives, however transmitted or recorded, is lawful.
"It is the common fate of the indolent to see their rights become a prey to the active. The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance; which condition if he break, servitude is at once the consequence of his crime and the punishment of his guilt."
Leave a comment