Lora Ries said the left enables human trafficking across the U.S.-Mexico border because they view migrants as future Democrat voters.
Following President Donald Trump’s decision to phase out the Deferred Action Against Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, U.S. Citizen and Immigration Services (USCIS) officials announced implementation details.
What broke it? Both parties acquiesced in bank liberalization, in open-borders immigration, and in Wall Street bailouts. But the most acute challenge was Barack Obama’s direct attack on the constitutional framework itself. Obama sought to transform America, and believed that the ends would justify the means.
A joint motion was filed Friday morning by the plaintiff states and the defendants, including the United States, in the executive amnesty litigation. The movants write, “the parties have met and conferred and have reached agreement on how to proceed in this case.” They want a stay until exactly one month after President-Elect Donald Trump is sworn in.
The United States Supreme Court has denied President Obama’s request to rehear the executive amnesty case.
Hillary Clinton vowed to defend Obama’s two executive amnesty programs DAPA and DACA, and promised to expand it if elected president. DACA gives amnesty for illegal immigrants brought to the country as children and DACA gives amnesty for their parents. But Clinton touted additional cases where she would unilaterally give illegal immigrants legalization.
A federal judge hearing the case from the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) against Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said he wonders if the prosecution is trying to fit a “square peg in a round hole.”
In a lawsuit filed Thursday with the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, DACA beneficiary Martín Batalla Vidal — represented by the National Immigration Law Center (NILC), the Make the Road New York (MRNY), and Yale Law School’s Worker and Immigrant Rights Advocacy Clinic (WIRAC) — seeks to exempt New York residents from the Texas v. United States injunction.
More than 728,000 illegal immigrants have been shielded from being deported and granted work permits through President Barack Obama’s 2012 executive amnesty program, according to the Migration Policy Institute. With the four year anniversary of Obama’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals
While normally parole is an immigration benefit selectively offered to largely inadmissible aliens for only “urgent humanitarian reasons” or in cases of “significant public benefit,” the Obama Administration has been allowing DACA recipients to seek advance parole — allowing re-entry to the U.S. after traveling abroad — for “educational purposes, employment purposes, or humanitarian purposes.”
President Barack Obama’s decision to invite Central American relatives of traditionally unqualified immigrants — including the illegal immigrants protected by his executive amnesty — to the United States is unlawful and will worsen the tide of migrants on the U.S.-Mexico border, says Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL).
In a petition to the court, Acting Solicitor General Ian Gershengorn requested that the justices rehear the executive amnesty case once the seat of the late Justice Antonin Scalia is filled and the court stands at nine members.
The federal government filed a petition for rehearing in the United States Supreme Court asking the Court to take the extraordinary move and grant a rehearing to decide the executive amnesty case when there are nine justices present.
The CAM program allows immigrants who, in most cases, would not normally qualify for legal family reunification programs, to petition to have their children living in El Salvador, Guatemala, or Honduras to come to the U.S. as refugees or parolees.
Texas held the largest naturalization ceremony this week that the Lone Star State’s capital has ever seen. The ceremony was used to assault Donald Trump, the Second Amendment, and the death penalty before 1,210 new U.S. citizens and their families and friends.
The Senate’s most vocal opponent of President Barack Obama’s immigration policies, cheered the Supreme Court’s decision Thursday to continue blocking Obama’s executive amnesty programs from moving forward.
The United States Supreme Court issued two major decisions in Texas cases today. The first leaves in place a block of President Obama’s unlawful executive amnesty order, and the second ruling allows continuation of the affirmative action program in admissions at the University of Texas.
Dealing a significant hit to President Barack Obama’s effort to grant work permits and de facto legal status to millions of illegal immigrants, the Supreme Court on Thursday effectively blocked the administration’s executive amnesty programs from moving forward.
The lawyer who argued and lost U.S. v. Texas, the case for President Barack Obama’s executive amnesty at the U.S. Supreme Court called for “righteous anger” to be aimed at the U.S. Senate for refusing to confirm Judge Merrick Garland’s nomination.
The United States Supreme Court issued three opinions today but left three important cases arising out of Texas pending. The nation’s highest court has not issued a decision on these cases from Texas involving abortion, affirmative action, or the state’s challenge to the federal government’s executive amnesty order.
A federal judge has agreed to delay the sanctions he ordered against the Obama administration for misleading his court about the implementation dates for executive amnesty.
In a court filing Tuesday, the Justice Department argued that District Court Judge Andrew Hanen “far exceed the bounds of appropriate remedies for what this Court concluded were intentional misrepresentations” when he ordered government lawyers to undergo ethics training and turn over the immigration records of the illegal immigrants who benefited from the government’s implementation snafu.
A federal judge demands Obama administration lawyers to undergo ethics training after they knowingly and repeatedly misrepresented the implementation dates for executive amnesty in both oral and written offerings to the court.
Chicago Tribune Editorial Board member Clarence Page argued that “there are a lot of people who are in the country, who are not documented. But they’re not breaking the law” on Friday’s “McLaughlin Group.” After fellow panelist Tom Rogan said that
Columnist Charles Krauthammer argued that if President Obama’s executive actions on immigration are upheld United States v. Texas “It’ll mean that the Congress has no role” and a Republican president could tell the IRS to avoid collecting capital gains taxes using the
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton released a statement in support of President Obama’s executive amnesty as the Supreme Court hears legal arguments today in the United States v. Texas case on the legality of his actions.
President Obama’s executive amnesty represents a “threat” to America’s very system of government, according to House Speaker Paul Ryan.
Nearly one in 14 children in the U.S. live with a parent who is an illegal immigrant, according to the Migration Policy Institute’s annual compilation of “Frequently Requested Statistics on Immigrants and Immigration in the United States” released this week.
Democrats, immigration activists, and business leaders cheered President Obama’s executive actions on immigration. However, as quickly as Obama moved to block millions of illegal immigrants from deportation, a future president could not only revoke Obama’s orders but also implement dozens of pro-immigration enforcement actions that would make former executive amnesty cheerleaders grimace.
Columnist Charles Krauthammer argued that if the Supreme Court fails to overturn President Obama’s executive actions in United States v. Texas and allows the administration to grant government benefits to noncitizens “you can send Congress home, and can you eliminate Article I
Many Senate Republicans are offering their support to the 26 states challenging the president’s executive amnesty programs. They’re filing an amicus brief to the Supreme Court arguing Obama’s November 2014 unilateral actions are in violation of the “spirit” of immigration law and a threat to the separation of powers.
Forty-two House Republicans are pressing appropriators to defund sanctuary jurisdictions that protect illegal immigrants by refusing to cooperate with federal immigration authorities. In a letter to the committee heads that oversee Department of Homeland Security and Justice Department funding, the
The House approved legislation Thursday authorizing House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI) to file an amicus brief with the Supreme Court on the House’s behalf in opposition to President Obamaa’s executive amnesty.
Chicago Tribune Editorial Board member Clarence Page argued President Obama’s executive action on immigration is “constitutional” and “especially now when you got fruit on the vines out there waiting for people to pick it” the president can “very easily” argue that action
Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg and a coalition of tech and business leaders are joining the administration’s call for the Supreme Court to “unfreeze” President Barack Obama’s 2014 executive-amnesty programs.
House and Senate Democrats are pressing the Supreme Court to uphold President Obama’s executive amnesty for illegal immigrants as legal and not a violation of the Constitution, which is what 26 states and Republicans are arguing.
While President Obama assured that illegal immigrants granted executive amnesty would not be put on a path to citizenship, a loophole expanded by the administration has allowed just that, and two Republican lawmakers are demanding answers.
The House will vote on whether to file a brief in opposition to President Obama’s executive amnesty with the Supreme Court.
Illegal immigrants may soon be teachers, pharmacists, dentists, and other professions that require certification in New York.
WASHINGTON, DC—As the United States mourns the loss of a legal titan, Justice Antonin Scalia, many Americans are wondering what happens now at the Supreme Court, especially on issues that were expected to go 5-4.
