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

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
a reply to: JinMI

The hypocrisy comes in when you understand how borders, laws and immigration systems work but don't care that they are being subverted for political ends.

But, mon ami - this would make you the hypocrite

"Nuh-uh, yOu aRe!"

....well played...?

a reply to: network dude

No, Network. You've lost your chance at ever having a real discussion with me. You and I are done here I'm afraid

I wish you good luck in all your future endeavors though

:-)

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
a reply to: network dude

No, Network. You've lost your chance at ever having a real discussion with me. You and I are done here I'm afraid

I wish you good luck in all your future endeavors though

:-)

be sure to stick to your guns.

a reply to: F2d5thCavv2

I agree. I can understand how they could...but not why they did. This is why I used all the other examples of State vs Federal Law.

a reply to: Threadbarer

So you cannot stop people from coming in? That is what you are saying.

Again, nothing is blocking CBP from doing their job. Boat Ramps. Bridges. Docks. All accessible. You cannot obstruct someone who is entering illegally but you can deny access.

The law is designed so they cannot block waterways. If you look back into this law it has been applied a lot for land arguments. Dams. Water Access.

NEVER has it been used to remove a protective border. Never.

a reply to: matafuchs

That the creation of any obstruction not affirmatively authorized by Congress, to the navigable capacity of any of the waters of the United States is hereby prohibited; and it shall not be lawful to build or commence the building of any wharf, pier, dolphin, boom, weir, breakwater, bulkhead, jetty, or other structures in any port, roadstead, haven, harbor, canal, navigable river, or other water of the United States, outside established harbor lines, or where no harbor lines have been established, except on plans recommended by the Chief of Engineers and authorized by the Secretary of the Army; and it shall not be lawful to excavate or fill, or in any manner to alter or modify the course, location, condition, or capacity of, any port, roadstead, haven, harbor, canal, lake, harbor of refuge, or inclosure within the limits of any breakwater, or of the channel of any navigable water of the United States, unless the work has been recommended by the Chief of Engineers and authorized by the Secretary of Army prior to beginning the same. (33 USC 403)

Source

The law is pretty clear. Any kind of structure installed in a navigable river, from the smallest mooring post to the largest floating dock, has to be approved by the Chief of Engineers. Did Texas submit a Section 10 form for their "boundaries?"

a reply to: Threadbarer

DA permits are required for structures or work in or affecting navigable waters of the United States.

For the purpose of this regulation, the following terms are defined: (a) The term navigable waters of the United States means those waters of the United States that are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide shoreward to the mean high water mark and/or are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible to use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.

So, tell me how are riverbank fits? There is no tide.. It is not presently used. Has not been used in the past. It is not passing interstate or foreign commerce.

From your link

Link

a reply to: Spiramirabilis

Yeah, there is a right way of doing it and your virtue signalling is not the way. NYC is proving it.

The right way was to do it in a controlled fashion and adding resources to legally help get illegals processed faster and holding American companies accountable that hire illegals to a point its not cost effective for them to do it. If we can send Ukraine billions we can spend billions on better processing the illegals you care so much about.

However, you and the rest of your virtue signalling buddies created a disaster and don't give one Fk of the consequences you created. Well until it starts to impact you ofcourse just like NYC.

The dumbest thing todo was to give incentives and tell everyone to come here , when you aren't ready to support it. Democrats purposely created an unsustainable disaster.

Which part of your self absorbed morality superior feeble complex mindset is not understanding the disaster you are creating?.

We can't support it . this is not up for debate your own sanctuary cities that virtue signal this crap are now even acknowledge it.

Allowing everyone to come here without preparation is not good for America AND the illegals themselves.

a reply to: matafuchs

Look at it generically, a state cannot dictate to the federal government.

I know it was for a good reason, and it nauseates me to say this, but the Court ruled correctly.

a reply to: interupt42

the reason these discussions come down to hurt feelz, is there is no logical way to explain why open borders is a good thing. it's not. For all the reasons we are seeing. I know you know this, but others reading this may not.

Even the Democratic mayors and congressmen at the border understand this, and are being vocal about the problem. It's unsustainable.

originally posted by: interupt42
a reply to: Spiramirabilis

Yeah, there is a right way of doing it and your virtue signalling is not the way. NYC is proving it.

The right way was to do it in a controlled fashion and adding resources to legally help get illegals processed faster and holding American companies accountable that hire illegals to a point its not cost effective for them to do it. If we can send Ukraine billions we can spend billions on better processing the illegals you care so much about.

However, you and the rest of your virtue signalling buddies created a disaster and don't give one Fk of the consequences you created. Well until it starts to impact you ofcourse just like NYC.

The dumbest thing todo was to give incentives and tell everyone to come here , when you aren't ready to support it. Democrats purposely created an unsustainable disaster.

Which part of your self absorbed morality superior feeble complex mindset is not understanding the disaster you are creating?.

We can't support it . this is not up for debate your own sanctuary cities that virtue signal this crap are now even acknowledge it.

Allowing everyone to come here without preparation is not good for America AND the illegals themselves.

Clear, concise.

Point by point.

Well done.

a reply to: matafuchs

The Rio Grande is considered a navigable river from the Webb-Zapata County line to the New Mexico border. Eagle Pass fits firmly in that area.

Source

Texas responds by adding more razor wire in eagle pass after the SCOTUS ruling.

Source

originally posted by: watchitburn
Texas responds by adding more razor wire in eagle pass after the SCOTUS ruling.

Source

Good for them!

a reply to: DBCowboy

The only way I know of, that the Federal Government can control a state, is if that State is actively going against the Constitution.

The 10th Amendment states...

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people

Look up Commandeering in the 10th Amendment. The Federal Government has enacted laws and have created laws but if they are not part of the actually Constitution they cannot be enforced.

Since 1992, the Supreme Court has ruled the Tenth Amendment prohibits the federal government from forcing states to pass or not pass certain legislation, or to enforce federal law

I know people reference back to the Supremacy clause but.....I do not see where it says a state cannot defend itself.....

a reply to: matafuchs

The federal gov't is in the right here. It has powers over the border as it's part of commerce and foreign relations.

Yet the executive branch is clearly breaking our nations laws.

There is one and only one answer for this if we are being consistent.

Impeachment.

Biden, Mayorkas and Garland.


Which is being bandied about but as usual no action.

a reply to: JinMI

That is what is driving me nuts. It is not so much the decions as much as what it entails. These laws were not created to allow people to enter the country. They were designed because early in our nations history there was a lot of conflict and infighting between states or land owners. Other countries who still have land.

Now, if this is being enacted then why is the 100 mile border zone not being enforced? CBP and ICE should be able to conduct arrests and searches but many states have ruled they cannot do this and do not cooperate with Federal Authorities.

To me it is nothing more than the erosion of rights and precedent to protect us. No decision any branch of US government makes should put US citizen in harms way.

They should have known Texas will not back down as soon as Governor Abbott started bussing illegals to sanctuary cities.
Also, Congressman Roger Williams (R-TX) is introducing a new bill called the State of Texas Operational Protections Act, to authorize Texas to enforce their southern border and be reimbursed from the federal government for doing so.
Hold the line.

a reply to: matafuchs

As much as the blame can be placed at Bidens feet, congress is the problem here.

Their inaction allows for this lawlessness to continue. Their inaction has allowed it to get this far.

IMO, Texas should find that line between fed and Texas and begin there. Every illegal should be deposited in downtown DC. Then Texas should bill congress for dealing with fed problems.

Yet even then, it's just more movement of taxpayer funds. Yet it may just get the point across.

Marthas Vinyard was evidence of putting points on the board.

a reply to: JinMI

Marthas Vinyard was evidence of putting points on the board.

Honestly that is the only way they will stop.

Completely Flood their elite playgrounds and make them accountable for their own actions and make them taste the up-rise in homeless , crime, and drugs in their backyard.

Send them to Virginia (3 letter agency haven) , Martha vineyards. Hollywood and all the most prestigious areas that they enjoy inside their non climate friendly mc mansions, guarded walls, and security with guns.