Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Trump poised to end DACA as early as Friday (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter adonis
- Start date
jm192
Footballguy
I think this string of SCOTUS losses takes the winds out of the sails. Anything can happen, but I think the whole appointing judges thing has been one of his biggest strengths--and now the Conservative judges aren't siding with him.
Juxtatarot
Footballguy
I'm having trouble understanding the reasoning. Roberts wrote...
It seems procedural rather than based on some overarching constitutional principle.
Trey
Footballguy
It’s completely procedural. The 5 justice majority found the APA (Admin Procedures Act) was violated in rescinding DACA.
squistion
Footballguy
Barack Obama @BarackObama 31m
Eight years ago this week, we protected young people who were raised as part of our American family from deportation. Today, I'm happy for them, their families, and all of us. We may look different and come from everywhere, but what makes us American are our shared ideals…
...and now to stand up for those ideals, we have to move forward and elect @JoeBiden and a Democratic Congress that does its job, protects DREAMers, and finally creates a system that’s truly worthy of this nation of immigrants once and for all.
https://twitter.com/BarackObama/status/1273637590013480961
Eight years ago this week, we protected young people who were raised as part of our American family from deportation. Today, I'm happy for them, their families, and all of us. We may look different and come from everywhere, but what makes us American are our shared ideals…
...and now to stand up for those ideals, we have to move forward and elect @JoeBiden and a Democratic Congress that does its job, protects DREAMers, and finally creates a system that’s truly worthy of this nation of immigrants once and for all.
https://twitter.com/BarackObama/status/1273637590013480961
Chicago Hooligan
Footballguy
Zow
Footballguy
Because he's legally wrong.
I wish people would come to realize that not everything in law is political.
jm192
Footballguy
I get your point. I also don't think it matters.
DACA is a political issue. SCOTUS appointments are political issues. Voters see Trump has appointed 2 conservative judges and is taking losses in the courts. Whether it's legal/political/or the weather, he's taking losses. And it looks bad. It doesn't help the idea that he'll appoint conservative Judges and will get things done.
Green Balloons
Footballguy
timschochet
Footballguy
Of course this still leaves the issue of what to do with the 10-14 million undocumented immigrants who are not part of DACA. They’re not going anywhere. Despite Trump’s racist rhetoric, very few are violent criminals. Most of them are hard working people who perform necessary jobs. Should we finally consider letting them become legal?
Juxtatarot
Footballguy
What makes me skeptical is that 4 of the 5 "conservative" justices didn't agree. It seems like arguments can often be made to support either side and the justices can choose the side that fits their politics. I believe this is true for both the "conservative" and "liberal" justices. It seems to be true with lower courts too.
jm192
Footballguy
We should probably address the people still trying to and successfully entering the country illegally every day first. Because providing 10 million undocumented illegal immigrants only further ok's more to enter illegally.
I support legal immigration through a process. We need to require anyone wanting to come in to go through the same process as those that play by the rules and wait their turn.
The Commish
Footballguy
I generally agree with the "follow the rules" sentiment, but we have to remember that the people we are talking about here were most likely under the age of 10 when they came to this country, many of them really younger than that (and I am confident there are exceptions, but lets treat them like exceptions and not the rule). I can't see a logical thought here that lays this issue at the feet of children who most likely didn't have any idea of what was going on at the time. This is a completely different animal from standard "illegal immigration" process IMO.jm192 said:
Last edited by a moderator:
jm192
Footballguy
Sure. Fantastic point.
I still think amnesty across the board without a solution to illegal immigration will encourage thousands of parents to try to rush their kids into America. And we're just going to continue doing right by the kids.
shadrap
Footballguy
Trey
Footballguy
Considering the written opinion was about the Admin. Procedure Act, I think it’s safe to say it was a procedure thing.
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
Ultimately a lower court asked them to further explain themselves and they more or less choose to say no thanks we are sticking with the original. So that original explanation was deemed insufficient and while maybe Roberts (and possibly others in the majority) might have agreed with the administration on the legal interpretation (Thomas and Alito seem to have sound reasoning here) of the constitutionality of the Obama DACA order, they didn't go there and instead said nope you can't shortcut the process and ignore the reasonable request of the lower courts. One justice adding just because King Donald told you to jump.
This is the summary from a non lawyer, non legal scholar, non court scholar, bleeding heart liberal who doesn't have it in him to hate Trump but still doesn't want him anywhere near the White House so take this with a grain of salt.
Mile High
Footballguy
If the Democrats aren't already inspired to vote over SC justices then they deserve what they get. They should have been inspired enough in 2016 when there was an open seat for the taking.
Trey
Footballguy
The Commish
Footballguy
You're probably correct. My whole issue here is having the willingness to apply the rules. We have a bunch of rules already in place. We should abide by them. If we don't, then we shouldn't continue with the masquerade and get rid of them. What does with having the rules is having the resources in place to enforce the rules and run the process established by the rules. We have fallen woefully short and have HUGE backlogs of people because of that. In my view THAT is what our issue is more than anything. People aren't following the process because it's completely broken from neglect. Most of my sympathy for those coming here like they are is because of how screwed up our system is. That needs to be fixed.
jm192
Footballguy
I would think that we would have less back logs if we weren’t dealing with so much illegal immigration.
Legal immigrants are being affected by those not following the process. It sounds like we agree that we need to allow for more legal immigrants at a faster pace.
We need to stop letting illegal immigrants take their spots. We can address the status of illegal immigrants Without consideration for a flood wave of undocumented children. We don’t need a wall, but we need a real solution to stop illegal immigration through the southern border.
CletiusMaximus
Footballguy
Republicans have appointed 14 of the last 18 Supreme Court justices. Roe v Wade (for one example) has been one of the most important campaign issues since it was decided in 1972 and it still stands. I continue to beat the drum that SCOTUS appointments are massively overrated in the context of a presidential election issue.
The Commish
Footballguy
Based on everything I've read on this over the last few years, I'm not confident this is the way it should be looked at. By that I mean, there is no "accounting" that says "hey, 10,000 illegal immigrants came into the country this year, so we have to take 10,000 less legal immigrants, at least that I am aware of. The quantity of legal immigrants is set by the federal government, and honestly, I don't understand the point of having "a number" here.
All the evidence I've been presented shows me that our backlog is primarily driven by the insufficient amount of manpower at the borders all the way from agents, to judges, to lawyers to paper pushers. I am pretty confident most would happily follow "the process" if it didn't take 5 years to traverse it.
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
Stop calling it illegal and allow the free market of ideas and ideals and opportunity determine how the free market of labor moves around. Don't we believe that the market is always the better solution than government? Is trying to police immigration such a success that we see actual benefits?
jm192
Footballguy
There are laws against it. That by definition is...illegal.
We can call it turtles, but it’s still violating laws.
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
What is the point of laws?
- In general?
- Specifically for immigration?
What is the point again? Besides big government.
jm192
Footballguy
Well what bad things happen with the result of ILLEGAL immigration?
Drugs?
Sex trafficking?
Perhaps reducing those things is a benefit.
timschochet
Footballguy
If we had no undocumented immigration whatsoever, there would be no effect to drug use or sex trafficking. We’re not able to reduce either by clamping down on undocumented immigration.
timschochet
Footballguy
Suppose you lived in Massachusetts in the year 1850 and a bunch of escaped slaves from the southern states arrived. Would you regard them as illegal? Would you support arresting them and returning them to their masters?
jm192
Footballguy
Of our own citizens? No. But Undocumented citizens—especially women and children are huge vulnerable targets for sex trafficing.
Enforcing border laws and deterring people from coming into the country would likely reduce that population being exploited. But it’s not exactly the sort of thing you run trials on.
jm192
Footballguy
Comparing slavery to People from another country entering illegal is preposterous, Tim. I’m not saying someone should own them.
I’m saying they should go through a process and enter legally. People that enter legally bring less problems than those who don’t.
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
If we had a mechanism in place where laws needed to be justified by spelling out how the benefits outweighed the costs would the above speculative guesses satisfy you?
timschochet
Footballguy
They’re even more vulnerable south of the border than they are over here.
You’re not stopping this terrible crime. All you’re doing is shoving it away where you don’t have to look at it. If you really want to stop sex trafficking, make these poor people legal and give them protection under our law.
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
Exactly! Do our current immigration laws help or hinder this? Especially considering that for many that "sneak in" there is no legal process to enter legally.
jm192
Footballguy
They’re not kidnapped and sold into sex trafficking until they try to cross much of the time. But sure. I think Mexico should protect it’s own citizens.
timschochet
Footballguy
Not preposterous at all. They are risking their lives in order to gain a better life. I’m not seeing much difference.
My grandparents survived the Holocaust only to find themselves in the Russian sector of Vienna in 1946. Had they stayed there, they would have been doomed to live a life of Communism and slavery. At midnight one night they snuck into the American sector. They didn’t have papers. They broke the law by doing so. Russians were shooting anyone whom they caught trying to cross the barrier. My grandparents were lucky. I’m lucky they survived. But what difference between them and your definition of an “illegal immigrant”? There isn’t one to me.
jm192
Footballguy
jm192
Footballguy
You compared immigrants to slaves in the American South. Now you’ve changed the comparison to Jewish persons in other countries that would have been slaves.
Decide which comparison you’d like to make, Tim.
You describe a good outcome, but there are countless instances of criminals entering, drugs entering, children being brought over under the guise of safety only to be sold into sex trafficking.
Last edited by a moderator:
timschochet
Footballguy
Both. It’s all the same to me.
Give me your tired, your hungry, your poor
Thats what America is all about. We’re the country that welcomes immigrants and refugees from everywhere else. That’s why nationalism will never work here because we’re the anti-nation. I’m a huge believer in American exceptionalism. Our acceptance of immigrants, with or without papers, is key to that exceptionalism. It defines us and makes us the greatest country in human history.
jm192
Footballguy
Yes. Give me your tired, your hungry, your poor, but make them come legally. Make their be a process. Don’t bring me your criminals, your fentanyl. Don’t bring me a swarm of unprotected children with sex trafficker.
There are good outcomes. There are bad outcomes. There’s no reason we can’t have a process to minimize the bad outcomes.
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
And I am asking what is the benefits of the current laws? Or, why is enforcing the current laws a cost that we as a society choose to not pay?
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
Do you want them to come legally or do you want to enforce the current laws?
The laws are the problem. Placing limits in the laws beyond criminal records, disease prevention, etc. is the problem.
Government interfering in the free market is the problem. Government trying to solve problems is the problem.
CletiusMaximus
Footballguy
One of the interesting amicus briefs filed in the DHS v Regents of Cal case came from the American Association of Medical Colleges (which represents all 154 accredited medical colleges in the US), joined by 32 other health care industry organizations such as the AMA, the American Nurses Association and the Federation of American Hospitals. (Brief)
Their argument noted there are estimated to be over 27,000 physicians, nurses, assistants, home health care professionals, pharmacists, etc. who live and work here due to DACA. The brief provides numerous specific examples of DACA recipients currently engaged in covid hotspots and related fields such as scientists developing tools to combat the illness. The brief discusses the ongoing need for health care workers and the time and expense commitment needed to train new workers. The brief also talks about the substantial investment these schools and related organizations have made in current students, many of whom are DACA recipients. This is one example of the type of reliance interest the government should address in order to avoid a decision being labeled arbitrary and capricious.
Their argument noted there are estimated to be over 27,000 physicians, nurses, assistants, home health care professionals, pharmacists, etc. who live and work here due to DACA. The brief provides numerous specific examples of DACA recipients currently engaged in covid hotspots and related fields such as scientists developing tools to combat the illness. The brief discusses the ongoing need for health care workers and the time and expense commitment needed to train new workers. The brief also talks about the substantial investment these schools and related organizations have made in current students, many of whom are DACA recipients. This is one example of the type of reliance interest the government should address in order to avoid a decision being labeled arbitrary and capricious.
![[scooter]](/data/avatars/m/22/22287.jpg?1659477690){kind=avatar}
[scooter]
Footballguy
There are two issues with this.
First, you're using the phrase "make them come legally" in a thread about children who never got that chance -- they were illegally transported here without their consent. So, that talking point would be more appropriate for a different thread.
Second, many people would argue that "make them come legally" is a phony argument to begin with, since the U.S. government has tacitly allowed (if not encouraged) businesses to employ illegal workers, and has also tacitly allowed illegals to live and work here for decades.
"Make them come legally" could just as legitimately be expressed as "Make businesses employ legal workers". If this country is going to allow it and benefit financially from it, then we have to own it.
sho nuff
Footballguy
Similar threads
