Expedited removal has been going on for quite some time. Under Obama, most caught crossing the border or within a couple hundred miles of the border who had been in the country for less than two weeks were summarily deported. I’ve noted previously that the Trump administration is looking to expand this, and Democrats do not like this at all
White House continues to strip due process from immigration courts
In addition to the president’s own comments, his administration is apparently implementing a systematic plan to dramatically undermine judicial independence and due process in immigration cases. At a Nov. 1 hearing on the immigration courts, ranking Democrat John Conyers said new administration plans will turn the courts into “a forced march toward deportation.â€
The White House immigration principles call for measures that will “ensure swift return of illegal border crossers†where “swift†appears to be a code word for eliminating the Constitution’s fundamental guarantee of due process. Attorney General Sessions has claimed that fraudulent asylum seekers are flooding the courts, but in fact, less than one out of five people who are removed ever get a fair day in court. The vast majority of people are removed singlehandedly by an immigration officer without any court review. Unable to make their case in court, asylum seekers, including children, have been wrongfully deported back to life-threatening dangers.
If the administration were committed to fairness, it would strengthen the courts and cut back on the use of summary removal procedures that bypass them, like expedited removal. Instead, the administration intends to do just the opposite.
If they’re here in contradiction of U.S. law, how can they be wrongfully deported? You’re either legally entitled to be present in the U.S., or you’re not. If you cross the border illegally or overstay your visa, you’re here illegally. Per law. What’s going on, here, though, is that Democrats want to jam up the immigration courts even more, which would mean illegals are released pending their court date(s), and it’s already been shown that the majority never show up for their court dates. Like 90%.
On February 20, 2017, the Department of Homeland Security announced plans to greatly expand the use of expedited removal to the entire region of the United States and to include people who have lived here up to two years. By itself this tactic will mean the rapid deportation of many more people, irrespective of family or other ties to our country, without any chance to appear before a judge for a full hearing. Mass deportations on a summary basis is not the ideal of justice envisioned by America’s Founders.
I like when Leftists suddenly care about what the Founders believed. On guns, the Electoral College, freedom of speech, and a wide range of other issues, we hear about the Constitution/Bill of Rights being written by “old white men hundreds of years ago.” Regardless, what’s the difference between seeing a judge for a quick hearing or a monstrously long one, when there only needs to be one question asked “is this person lawfully or unlawfully present in the United States?” U.S. code, such as 8 US Code 1325, lay out the conditions. Illegal entry, illegal presence, overstaying visas. If unlawfully present, deportation.
In Hashmi v. Attorney General of U.S., the Third Circuit Court of Appeals found that an immigration judge abused his discretion in denying a continuance request by a Pakistani man, Mr. Hashmi, because the case had been pending longer than the eight-month case completion guideline.
And there is the point of all this: to jam the courts up to the point where illegals are barely being deported, at which point Democrats (and some idiot Republicans) will call for giving them lawful status, up to free citizenship.
Read: Democrats Seem Pretty Upset Over Expedited Removal Of Illegal Aliens »
(
(
Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn. – who looks like a pining presidential candidate – was of course out front in a rush to the microphones. He demanded that we all do “something,†without ever actually disclosing what that something might be. Apparently, what he really wants is confiscation of firearms from law-abiding Americans, who are now once again facing media backlash for a crime they had nothing to do with.
The winners of Tuesday’s elections — Republican or Democrat, for governor, mayor or dogcatcher — all have one thing in common: They received more votes than their opponent. That seems like a pretty fair way to run an electoral race, which is why every election in America uses it — except the most important one of all.
There are lots of reasons why we have an Electoral College, and they aren’t primarily because of slavery, as the NYTEB wants you to believe. I’m not going to go over them again. You know them, and Democrats will play dumb, because that’s what they do. If they’re still upset, perhaps they should think of why they rigged the primary in order to nominate a terrible candidate, who was less than personable, who enjoyed slurring a huge segment of the population, who passed out on camera, was beyond polarizing, and ran a poor campaign, not even bothering to visit states she needed in order to win.
