Connect with us

Border Security

SCOTUS Justice Sonia Sotomayor Blasts Court’s Conservative Shift In Public Charge Dissent

This is relatively unprecedented for the Supreme Court.

Published

on

Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor blasted the court’s conservative turn since the additions of new Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, claiming the court was losing its credibility in a dissent for a case approving the Trump’s new ‘public charge’ denying admittance for immigrants dependent on public benefits.

Sotomayor issued the dissent on Friday, when the court ruled in a 5-4 vote to uphold the public charge rule. The rule makes immigrants who are “likely at any time to become a public charge” ineligible to receive green cards. The rule in effect reserves assistance programs such as Medicaid and food stamps for U.S citizens.

Such a public charge rule has wide-ranging precedent in the history of American immigration policy, and the term was first used in law more than a hundred years ago in the Immigration Act of 1882. Yet to the Supreme Court’s liberal activist wing it’s always been a violation of the Constitution. Sotomayor claimed the court’s credibility was being threatened by its audacity to approve commonsense restrictions in immigration.

Trending: SANITY: Black Lives Matter Rioter Charged With Attempted Murder After Opening Fire at Motorist Crossing Roadblock

That is because the Court—in this case, the New York cases, and many others—has been all too quick to grant the Government’s ‘reflexive’ requests. But make no mistake: Such a shift in the Court’s own behavior comes at a cost.”

take our poll - story continues below

RIOTS: Who do you blame for the violence on America's streets?

  • RIOTS: Who do you blame for the violence on America's streets?

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Sotomayor was alluding to Trump administration victories in the Supreme Court. The administration has won a plethora of legal victories at the highest level of America’s justice system, often overturning dubious national injunctions from activist judges of liberal circuit courts.

I fear that this disparity in treatment erodes the fair and balanced decisionmaking process that this Court must strive to protect.

It’s quite unusual for a Supreme Court Justice to openly criticize the judgements of her own institution. The court has become increasingly unpopular on the Left, posing an unavoidable obstacle to attempts to enshrine leftist policy priorities through the court system.

Perhaps it turns out that unrestricted judicial activism isn’t the flawless political strategy the Left has imagined it to be.

 

Border Security

Supreme Court Rules President Trump Cannot Touch DACA with John Roberts Casting the Deciding Vote

SCOTUS stands for amnesty.

Published

on

The U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) determined on Thursday via a 5-4 ruling that President Donald Trump cannot end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, which protects some 800,000 illegals from being deported from the country.

Trump had sought to reverse an executive order made by former President Barack Obama which granted amnesty to the illegals, believing Obama’s order was unconstitutional. Although it is well-understood that presidents have the authority to reverse executive orders, SCOTUS arbitrarily revoked that power for Trump because he did not give them a reason they found satisfactory for doing so. Trump is now effectively banned from revoking DACA until he can give an explanation that the courts and left-wing special interests determine as acceptable.

This is an example of the activist judiciary at its worst, and the man who flipped is yet again Chief Justice John Roberts, the same despicable individual who protected Obamacare and abortion rights.

Far-left lawyers seized on the coronavirus pandemic to make their case to keep the privileges for illegal immigrants, claiming that DACA recipients included “dentists, pharmacists, physician assistants, home health aides, technicians.”

take our poll - story continues below

RIOTS: Who do you blame for the violence on America's streets?

  • RIOTS: Who do you blame for the violence on America's streets?

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

“Termination of DACA during this national health emergency would be catastrophic,” the immigration attorneys claimed in their April 2 filing.

However, hospitals were letting personnel go throughout the COVID-19 pandemic as nurses danced in TikTok videos due to lack of activity on the job. The lack of logic behind their argument did not seem to matter to SCOTUS, who bought it hook, line and sinker.

The SCOTUS ruling comes after a bipartisan push by corporate Republicans and Democrats who have backed widespread amnesty to push down the cost of labor and increase their massive profits:

Billionaire heirs Charles and David Koch are gearing up to wage a public influence campaign in favor of granting amnesty to ‘dreamers,’ illegal immigrants brought to the United States at a young age.

TIME magazine reported that the inheritors of the massive Koch family fortune plan to use their extensive political infrastructure to exert muscle with the hopes of securing a legal status for the approximately 700,000 DACA illegals. The political move would come as the latest effort in the Kochs’ long history of seeking to increase levels of immigration to the United States even higher, further than the current record-breaking annual flow.

Formerly holding a prominent role in national Republican politics, the Koch brothers fell into disrepute among conservatives and Republicans for a series of policy views at odds with the everyday citizen, including financial support for wage-sinking mass immigration. The Kochs declined to support Donald Trump’s presidential campaign, although they had previously been among the most extensive and prolific political donors in the United States…

While fashioning themselves as “free market capitalists,” the family fortune that the eponymous Koch brothers use to advance their political ideals was obtained through methods foreign to their own conception of free markets, to put it mildly. The founder of the family business, Fred Koch, became a multi-millionaire after accepting a partnership with the Soviet Union under its leader Joseph Stalin to build oil refineries. Somewhat shockingly, the overseas business activities of Fred Koch also included the construction of a plant in National Socialist Germany under Adolf Hitler in the 1930’s.

The notion of reclaiming the judiciary is looking more like a pipe dream with rulings such as this and the LGBT mandate against private businesses being approved by so-called conservative justices.

Continue Reading
It's time to name Antifa a terror org! Sign your petition now!


Trending