Over the last several years, even going back into the Obummer years, I don’t think it has become much of a stretch to say that America now seems to be under siege by what can be described as being a rather left-leaning judiciary. And while President Trump has done much in his attempt to rectify that situation, it has been over the course of the last couple of years that we’ve seen a rather disconcerting number of examples where a growing number of political hacks dressed in black robes have seemed to be far more interested in advancing the left’s political agenda than in following our Constitution. It’s almost as if we are now being held hostage by a cadre of black robed anarchists, many of whom have succeeded in taking the term ‘activist judge’ to what is an entirely all new, and very dangerous level.
When it comes to the Judicial Branch of our government, there is a role for it to play ensuring the survival of our Republic but there are areas in which it has no business even attempting to get involved in. One such area over which it has absolutely zero jurisdiction is that of national security. There is but one individual responsible for the protecting of the nation, and that is the President of the United States. And it was yet again that we have another rogue judge choosing to insert himself into an area that he has absolutely no business trying to insert himself but, because the area of concern, illegal immigration, is near and dear to the heart of Democrats and President Trump has a different approach, this judge, appointed by Barry, saw fit to declare the president’s actions unconstitutional.
And so by now I’m sure that all have heard about how a U.S. District Judge, Jon S. Tigar, has issued a temporary restraining order after hearing ‘arguments’ in San Francisco. The request was made by two groups that are essentially nothing more than front groups for the Democrat Party, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Center for Constitutional Rights, which quickly sued after President Trump issued the ban this month in response to the massive caravans of migrants headed to the U.S. and that have now officially arrived at the U.S.-Mexico border. There is nothing in the ruling that stops the hardened border enforcement and/or current expedited review and deportation program. In essence, keep the illegal aliens out and the judicial ruling is moot, at least until defeated in higher courts.
Though it will likely frustrate Democrats, as well as their many cohorts in the left-wing ‘fake news’ media along with the many others in the open borders crowd, no court can successfully demand that the President of the United States stop all manner of border enforcement. This is why it is critical to have a strong Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary focused on stopping illegal entry. This ruling will obviously be appealed by the Department of Justice (DOJ); and, politically, the Democrats realize, in the big scheme of things, this ‘open-border’ narrative is not good for them. But, at least for the short term Democrats continue to think that there is some level of political gain to be made, and so we shouldn’t expect their calls for an open border to fade away anytime soon.
On its face this ruling is ridiculous as it eliminates/undermines the legal process for asylum requests by removing the distinction of illegal or unlawful conduct in the application process. President Trump issued a proclamation on 9 November that said anyone who crossed the southern border would be ineligible for asylum. The regulations, which will remain in place for three months absent a court order, could potentially make it harder for thousands of people who enter the U.S. to avoid deportation. In recent years, tens of thousands of immigrants each year have shown up in the Arizona desert or on the north bank of the Rio Grande in Texas, surrendered to immigration agents and requested asylum. President Trump has rightly argued that the recent caravans pose a pretty serious threat to our national security.
Here we have another political hack in a black robe who has come totally off the rails and who has allowed himself to be convinced that he somehow possesses the authority to dictate to the president how he can carry out the duties of his office. The issue at hand is a National Security crisis and it the president, and the president alone, who has the authority to do whatever it is that he deems necessary in dealing with it in his effort to protect American people and the sovereignty of the nation. And in carrying out the most important duty, that of Commander in Chief, the president has the moral right to ignore this judge’s order. These hostile mobs of insurgents declined asylum in Mexico therefore are not ‘entitled’ to asylum and must apply for immigration status in accordance with all U.S. laws, rules and regulations.
Now I may be wrong in thinking this, but I do not see what enforcement powers this judge can bring to bear, particularly since his ruling infringes on the Constitutional responsibility of the President to defend the nation’s security, starting with its borders. I would say to the judge, the case has no standing; you can rule all you want, but just try to enforce it. I also would come back at the judge with proceedings to impeach, convict, disbar, and then charge with sedition, and prosecute. When other leftist judges see what happens to one of them acting out of bounds, it should deter more than a few of them. Again, the best defense is a good offense, so I would take every one of these overreaching rulings by leftist judges as opportunities to go right at them with every hammer in the tool chest of the Executive Branch.
a "Backwoods" Conservative 