Some 400,000 immigrants who fled El Salvador, Nicaragua, Haiti and Sudan to evade disasters natural and man made may be sent back to their native lands after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit (Ramos v. Wolf) said a Trump administration decision to end their temporary protected status (TPS) is Constitutional.
Plaintiffs will likely appeal the ruling, which agrees with President Trump that ‘temporary’ means ‘not permanent’, even for people who fled earthquakes, hurricanes and civil war. Starting in March 2021, the TPS immigrants and their U.S.-born children may hear the U.S. president say, “Go home”…unless Joe Biden is president.
Could the timing of the opinion hurt Trump at a time when Latinos for Trump rally around the country for his reelection?
Background Resource:
400,000 Immigrants Can Be Forced to Leave the U.S., Court Rules
[The New York Times, September 14, 2020]Read the 9th Circuit Ramos v. Wolf opinion below the video.
Bill Whittle Now with Scott Ott is a production of our Members. Join us.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AN-oNe4v1v0
Ramos v. Wolf: 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals
Listen to the Audio Version
Bill Whittle Network · 9th Circuit Court Backs Trump: Temporary Protected Status Immigrants Go Home
15 replies on “9th Circuit Court Backs Trump: Temporary Protected Status Immigrants Go Home”
Scott, nice work linking to the source material lately, and particularly including today’s PDF.
In many cases TPV’s have been issued by governments to people because the country they are fleeing is an Allie and so can not be defined as true refugees fleeing tyranny. This was first a problem with Irish at a time when the USA and Britain were allied. Turkey, South Sudan and Iraq are the current cases.
I guess I would like to ask some of those that think we should not send people home if they expect these poor displaced people to live in exile for the rest of their lives, never seeing their homes and likely never reconnecting with their family before they die?
If you fled and earthquake, well that doesn’t last all that long and a month later you would be safe at home. Might not have a house building if it fell down but you cannot rebuild it if you are here, and wouldn’t that lower standard of living make the money you got here go so much farther? Wouldn’t you WANT to go home?
If you are fleeing persecution, because your family ran afoul especially of the bloody murderous dictator, then it is certainly safer for you and those nearest to stay. If your whole town fled because the country is a wreck, well, either you should be heading back or howling for help from the UN (since the US apparently has been evicted from the World Cop beat by said international “community”). Again, I would expect said refugees would want to return home as soon as possible, where the language, smells, food and weather is more what they expect.
On the other hand, if all of these people are trying to be immigrants instead (and why, if this country is such a white power, racist and going-to-kill-you-brownie / virus-stewpot) then they would be in the immigration list and not just “temporary refugees” so none of this should apply. Right? Oh, you’re not helping them fill out their immigration paperwork and are instead wasting all those dollars and hours on lawyers instead?
A lot of temporary protection visa holder go back home for holidays, weddings, business trips using tourist visas. That’s triggered questions in Australia and the USA. Some of the dreamers in the USA go back and forth three or four times a year. They still retain and maintain there original passport if they had one.
Arguably citizenship is still too hard to get in terms of paperwork and in some cases has some really archaic checking procedures. In the US and most commonwealth countries several months of bureaucracy is used to do what a simple 10 second google search could do. A security database search is also done after months of paper work when it could be done day one. Both would mean faster processing and very fast rejections where necessary. The process needs to go more digital, with good hacking protections, though is still needs the face to face in all cases. That in some cases needs to be off shore face to face. Trump has already made some reforms. American medical, legal, and education records can be used by boomers and temporary protection kids in stead of bureaucrats blindly requesting the non existing docs from the kids birth country.
The idea that “the Hispanic Community” will backlash over having Temporary Protected Status” enforced is a leftist concept. It places ALL people of any Hispanic ethnicity in the same ball of identity politics. There are American Citizens of generational duration, recent illegal immigrants and everything between those two poles in that Politically Correct glob of Identity Politics.
People, individual persons, do not react that way in-real-life. I’m an ethnic Scandanavia, my family all came to this country from Denmark immediately after the Civil War. If for some reason the situation under discussion were regarding Scandinavians, even encompassing the lesser Norse like Swedes and Norwegians (tongue in cheek there), and 400,000 Norsemen were under threat of deportation for these same reasons … I could not care less. Send ’em back. This isn’t their country My people came to this country legally and we have been living and thriving here under the laws of the US. If some large group of Scandinavians thinks they can flout our laws and live here without the legal validity of proper, full immigration status then they can just pack their bags and get out.
I’m sure that many ethnic Hispanic citizens of the United States feel the same way. I’m sure because I have/had friends in California whose families had been in the US or US Territory longer even than my family has been here. They don’t side with illegal immigration as a bloc. They’re just like the rest of us, some conservative some liberal but all Americans. In fact, if anything they see illegal immigration as giving them an undeserved bad name and want something done about it even more than I do. And I want something done about it quite a lot.
Does anyone know more about the background thinking of the founders/ framers as to their expectations concerning the federal judiciary? They left it pretty open for the Congress to complete as an administrative structure, which might be understandable, waiting for experience within the new nation to help guide how that developed. But it seems that judicial review was not part of their original thinking and it became an “oh, right, we should have considered that explicitly, so good on Chief Justice Marshall to have put that in place for us”. The concept of judicial review seems to have been readily accepted at that time, even if we now believe it has been abused by politicized activist judges/ justices. I have an impression (possibly unfounded) that they expected any two branches to help hold the third branch to account. They had countervailing protective measures in place between the legislative and executive branches, plus impeachment of judges and passing new/ altered laws in response to decisions that a given law was unconstitutional.
And how about the prospect and role of “factions” and real political parties? It seems that they did not think through that aspect of things as deeply as they did some of the other parts of governmental design. My perception, until corrected, is that Madison thought factional coalitions would form around a given issue and then dissolve to reform around a new issue with different participants and view points. They did not seem to consider how the English Parliament was already divided into distinct parties (2 or 3? at most 4?) that maintained discernible agenda on a sort of permanent basis. And that a similar situation would develop within the new nation.
This is a test. I accidentally clicked on the comment box and don’t see a way to remove or back out of it. But then I noticed the little box on the lower right corner that is supposed to allow you to attach an image to the comment, so let’s see if/ how it works:
https://lawliberty.org/app/uploads/2020/09/Trump-Dignified-1060×530.jpg
It would be better if this image showed him as a little older, and at this smaller size it looks like he has a mustache that is clearly absent when the larger image is viewed. And we know he doesn’t think much of mustaches.
Wow, BWDC guys, that is a dangerous capability to allow commenters to have!! Who knows where it might lead? 🙂
The picture looked smaller while in the commenting box before posting it. Be forewarned, if it should happen to matter.
More OT: at my request Scott has increased the number of words in a comment up to 100 words, from whatever it was previously, before you need to click on the “Read more” link for the rest of the comment to be visible. Thus fewer of your comments will need to click on the “Read more” link to be viewed in total. For those of us with writer’s diarrhea, that will not apply.
Scott, it seems to be working as desired. Thanks for the fix.
No, Bill, they gave your wife / fiance the $100 gift certificate; but you got her and that was enough, right?
Oh, and I think the forest fires continue to burn at night (per the newscasts, anyway) along with their protester set brethren fires. 🙂
As this sort of law violation and pushing of the boundaries of our general generosity towards immigrants continues, I get less and less sympathetic even to the DACA type situation, where the children were born here or brought here and had no control over their situation. But if they have obtained (are obtaining) a high school education; can read, write, and speak English well (hopefully with a minimal accent, given my hearing loss as I get older); and have a good knowledge of our (real) history and civics, then they can help contribute to our society as fully assimilated citizens. We will need 400 to 450 million such citizens (in total, not just DACA residents) to help resist the CCP, with their control over 1400 million Chinese and the resource and talent pool that they provide. [As long as we have enough water we also have plenty of land to accommodate such an increase in population.
Judgement Day must truly be at-hand — the 9th Circus Court has ruled on the side of a reasonable interpretation of the law. Who would’ve predicted such thing?
Very well said!
Words mean things. Temporary does not mean “in perpetuity”. It means “for a limited time”. However, we are taking about the fact that an objective reality exists, it is what it is, and it isn’t what it isn’t. Further, that we can know what that objective reality actually is. This is rational, ordinary common sense staying in contact with reality. The definition of sanity.
The demented left of left don’t agree. They believe they can change the definition of a word and that reality changes to agree with their new definition. They also believe that when they call something what it is not, it becomes what it is not. In other words, reality is not only optional, it is subject to their whim and is irrelevant. THIS IS INSANE!
“They believe they can change the definition of a word and that reality changes to agree with their new definition.”
Yes, the left of left think Orwell wrote a few good how to manuals rather than tales of warning about the dangers ahead. In their version of Newspeak, we get to choose our pronouns and men can get pregnant. History will not be kind to us.