SCOTUS 5-4 rules to allow Federal Government to cut razor wire Texas NG installed at border

originally posted by: Allaroundya4k
a reply to: sine.nomine

I bet if we outsourced even more jobs to ?ant of the countries south of us everything will work itself out.
I mean atleast at that point there would be no reason to travel here because it would be just as sh1tty.
Just my 2 cents

I'd prefer to live in a nice place. Maybe even one with justice and freedom. Or at least one that strives for it. Perhaps I'm too late.

This article was about Devin Nunes family farm in Sibley, Iowa and undocumented laborers.

Sibley is a solid read area as are most of the areas with Dairy farms and meat processing facilities. Solid Trump supporters, except on immigration.

She and her husband, Gene, were dairy farmers and had recently sold their business. “You should talk to Gene,” she said. When I mentioned Trump’s immigration policy, she was quick to add, “Well, we don’t agree with him on that!”

When the subject turned to Trump’s zero-
tolerance policy on immigration, the mayor replied with what was already becoming a familiar refrain: “I don’t agree with him on that!”

Most workers start at fourteen or fifteen dollars an hour, the first farmer said. If dairies had to use legal labor, they would likely have to raise that to eighteen or twenty dollars, and many dairies wouldn’t survive. “People are going to go broke,” the farmer said.

The second dairy farmer, speaking of Trump’s and King’s views on undocumented immigrants, added, “They want to send ’em all back to Mexico and have them start over. What a crock of malarkey. Who’s gonna milk the cows?”

I asked Nelson what would happen, hypothetically, if ICE raided every dairy farm in the area tomorrow. “It would be a disaster for the dairies,” he said. “They would suddenly have nobody to milk or feed the cows. I don’t know what they would do.”

Esquire

This is a huge problem. I know people in a meat processing plant and road construction here in Michigan, both use illegal immigrants. All extremely hard working people, but here illegally.

As the business owners state, they cannot afford legal workers, as they cannot find those that either want to do the job even if it pays decently, or they don't want the starting wage. There was one young legal lady at the processing plant who quit after a day. She had no high school diploma and never had a job before. She said " I'm quitting, I'm worth more than this". Owners of both of those companies are conservative and do not want to pay higher labor rates. Employees at those jobs will work upwards of 70 hours a week, 7 days a week.

Just adding some context to the conversation, as cracking down and deporting is a very big conversation around business and farm owners.

a reply to: interupt42

You take the easy solution to make yourself feel better

It's actually you that's choosing the easy position. The court chose the more difficult route

Difficult situations become much easier to deal with if you're inhumane

You talk to me about people with nothing - no jobs, no paperwork - as if they're vermin

Shame on you

a reply to: matafuchs

Why would the Justices provide their reasoning? It's an order in an ongoing case. It's not a final ruling. It would be extremely rare for any court to issue anything more than what SCOTUS did in this case.

That said, the fact it was so close is extremely disturbing. The Constitution is very clear on who the authority is on border protection. The Supremacy Clause is also very clear. So I don't see how the four dissenters can justify their decision using the Constitution.

a reply to: frogs453

Everybody knows both parties love cheap labor.

The problem is the current jerk in charge has let in more people than the last 2 presidents combined in only three years.

Those people are also unscreened, unvetted and undocumented. Court dates, for those who have them, are up to 2033. 🤡

a reply to: Vermilion

If you read the article, these business owners know they are undocumented, etc.
They do not agree with any mass deportation plan of Trump.

a reply to: frogs453

If I read the article?
What part of my response to you “Everybody knows both parties love cheap labor.” do you not understand?
The article says that fact is a ‘politically explosive secret’.
It’s not a secret when everyone knows.
The problem is the current jerk in charge has let in more people than the last 2 presidents combined in only three years.
Those people are also unscreened, unvetted and undocumented. Court dates, for those who have them, are up to 2033. 🤡
Care to respond to that? Does that fact make you happy enough to vote for sleepy joe again?
Back to the OP..
What do you think of this decision by the supermajority extreme MAGA republican Supreme Court?

a reply to: Vermilion

Oh, there needs to definitely be an improvement. Never stated there didn't be.

I don't have the legal knowledge to argue for or against SCOTUS decision. Some of those judges were championed by the right, so can't complain it's some Dem agenda.

originally posted by: frogs453
a reply to: Vermilion

Oh, there needs to definitely be an improvement. Never stated there didn't be.

I don't have the legal knowledge to argue for or against SCOTUS decision. Some of those judges were championed by the right, so can't complain it's some Dem agenda.

Just don’t forget that goes both ways. 😉

a reply to: Vermilion

Indeed.

a reply to: Spiramirabilis

You talk to me about people with nothing - no jobs, no paperwork - as if they're vermin

Shame on you

No that is you that associates no jobs and no paper work to a vermin. As a matter fact I stated I don't blame them as I was immigrant myself and I fully understand why they are wanting to come here.

I blame and label our liberal virtue signalling democrats that can't think 2 seconds into the future of the consequences of their actions that have papers and jobs as the vermins.

However you talk as a naive person that has no idea of the reality of hardship as an illegal immigrant that has no way to support themselves and the system tells them to go pound sand . The reality is they become slave labor and are subjected to non humane labor conditions because they are not documented and not protected or provided worker rights . They are also susceptible to crime,sex trafficking, and other horrible things out of desperation and lack of means to provide for themselves.

You are just like the NYC virtue signalling democrats that are now facing the consequences of their naiveness and are scrambling to make the illegals go away or send them away to anywhere but there.

a reply to: frogs453

Illegals have been here forever. I used to laugh at the Cheech and Chong movie where he said his cousin called immigration on himself to get a free ride back to Mexico.

I grew up most of my life in Florida. We have Mexicans. Working the fields/resturants/etc. The difference. They all worked. They send money home. It was a rarity they were violent or committed crime.

There should be zero tolerance for illegal immigration but it used to be something hidden...not thrown in our face with this.

This is from DHS.

Last month, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) reported a 40% increase compared to September 2021 and 18% compared to September 2022. Since President Biden took office, there have been 7.5 million encounters nationwide and 6.2 million encounters at the Southwest border, in addition to 1.7 million known gotaways

Link

This link shows the skyrocket since 2021. This is a multi-prong issue.

a reply to: Threadbarer

They are NOT protecting the border. They are making it easier. That is not in the Constitution. You also know that the SCOTUS will provide more information especially on the hot topic like this.

Maybe the reason is that there is no constitutional basis for this since the Biden Admin is citing the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899.

a reply to: matafuchs

Section 10 of that act grants authority to the federal government over any un-authorized obstructions in navigable waters. The Supremacy Clause of the Constitution says that federal law overrides any state laws. So, unless you can show where Section 10 of the Rivers & Harbors Appropriation Act of 1899 was repealed, this is a very clear cut case backed up by the Constitution.

a reply to: Threadbarer

Are you #ing crazy? You and whoever gave you stars.

The Federal Government is removing a protective barrier from a state border that is being used to stop illegal immigration. CBP boats still have unobstructed access to ports and the ability to dock. Texas is not stopping the Federal Government from doing their job. They are impeding no waterways.

The Supreme Court of the United States of America just agreed with the Executive Branch to open the border in Texas putting millions of US citizens in danger.

a reply to: matafuchs

The state of Texas added razor wire to the river with the intent of obstructing people from crossing, without the approval of the government. And you're really going to argue these aren't un-authorized obstructions?

a reply to: Threadbarer

Yes. Any day of the week. So is their governor. He should. Any state should.

This is not about a choice or rights being hindered. Abortion. Legal Weed. 2A arguments. These are all choices and arguments the Feds have had with states and vice versa. How can state sell marijauana when it is illegal Federally? SCOTUS ruled Medical MJ was illegal....but it still occurs.

They are no obstructions. Those are called boundaries. One side it is legal to be on and one it is not. How hard is this to understand?

a reply to: matafuchs

Yep.

Bet dollars to doughnuts that the Supremes made their decision thinking, "we can't let a state unilaterally override federal authority" ... even if, in this case, it makes perfect sense for Texas to do so.

The real problem here is the dependency of the states on federal funds. That is why they won't go to the mat on these issues. Much like the countries of the EU ... too damned addicted to the money they get from the Brussels crowd.

Cheers

a reply to: matafuchs

What is the purpose of a "boundary?"

a reply to: F2d5thCavv2

In fact, the ruling also goes against Federal Funding that is being provided. Operation Stonegarden is a FEMA/DHS grant program. It has been in play since for almost two decades.

Operation Stonegarden is a federal grant program administered by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), a component of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), as part of the State Homeland Security Grant Program. Operation Stonegarden provides funding to state, local, and tribal law enforcement agencies to enhance their capabilities to “support joint efforts to secure the United States’ borders

Support joint efforts to secure the United States

To me this is simply more insanity.