US Customs and Border Patrol....SMDH

Steve Bannon.

http://www.rawstory.com/2017/01/ste...include-green-card-holders-in-travel-ban-cnn/

The very fact Trump appointed this guy is, alone, enough to inform any sensible person he has no business making any further choices.

ALL illegal aliens are criminals by definition of what it means to be an "illegal alien". I would think that the word "illegal" would give that away.

Actually, the term is "unlawful entry'. The act, not the person. This is why people who come here on visas and overstay, are not in the same category as people who slip across the border.

And yet, it's the ones who come here on visas and overstay that are the ones committing the majority of the crimes - even the criminals coming from Latin American countries. If they enter unlawfully after being deported, they go to prison. They get a visa and overstay and commit crimes.

People who enter unlawfully, get a job, pay taxes, send money home to their families, and are better people than some of the posters here - from what I can tell by the way you post.

Some people *are* better than some other people. Refreshing admission.

And, psst, "unlawful" also necessarily implies illegal. D'oh!!

If you ever even studied a business law class, you'd know that, legally, different words mean different thing.

Unlawful means "not authorized by law".

Illegal means "forbidden by law".

Trump's WH chief of staff Reince Priebus said on "Meet The Press" that the program worked fairly well for Day One.

"The fact of the matter is that 325,000 people from foreign countries came into the United States yesterday, and 109 people were detained for further questioning. Most of those people were moved out. We’ve got a couple dozen more that remain," Pr

http://www.dailywire.com/news/12903/wh-trumps-immigration-order-no-muslim-ban-joseph-curl

All illegals aliens are in fact criminals actively breaking the law. That is just a fact even if you do not like it.

Oh, look, we have another genius who doesn't understand that an ideology, like Islam, is not based upon race. This is why your side keeps losing, you aren't even smart enough to use words correctly and instead just turn them into meaningless snarl words you use when ever you lose a debate.

Eventually you guys will figure out name calling does not pressure anyone to adopt your views but until then enjoy having no power in government.

Not quite. Illegal entry certainly is a crime, but the vast majority of those here "illegally" actually entered legally. They simply overstayed their visas.

Being present in the US without authorization is in fact a civil infraction, not a criminal infraction. Deportation is not considered to be a criminal punishment, but rather a civil penalty.

After all, if it were a criminal matter, the deportees would be entitled to much more substantial constitutional due process rights. But because it's a civil violation, immigrants are subject to administrative proceedings, and not a court trial.

I suggest you read the Supreme Court decision from Fong Yue Ting vs. United States (or least a summary). It's from 1893 but it is still valid law.

Over staying of visas is against the law, we call that a crime. People who commit crimes are criminals. Yes, yes, pandering politicians have tried to pander for votes downgrading this crime and it needs to be restored to its proper place. We have about 10-13 million illegals and every last one of them need to go if we are to restore law and order.

Except it is not considered a crime, and is not written in the US Code to be a crime.

From the Supreme Court case:
"The order of deportation is not a punishment for crime. "

In 2015, a bill was introduced in Congress to make overstaying a visa a criminal offense. It was never passed, but shouldn't that clue you in that overstaying a visa is not actually a crime?

That you wish it to be a crime does not make it so.

https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2017/01/trump-immigration-executive-order-fact-fiction

Very fact filled for the few who are interested in facts. It includes links to high court rulings in the past on the subjects in question.

By fact filled, I assume you mean alternative fact filled?

Only if you think SCOTUS rulings are "alternative facts". Personally, I would just call them facts but I guess legal facts would work if you want to be really precise.

AAMOF, I took bus. law in high school. Then again in college. Gotta tell you, after those two classes, law school was a breeze.

Oh damn, I really liked your previous post,a s it seemed to make some clear and plausible points. But they're not in that source.

Yeah, and @Zombie could at least do us the favor of quoting where he thinks the relevant information is on that long-winded page.

Despite claims that the ban only impacts dual nationals if they are travelling to the US from one of the seven listed nations, the US embassies in both Germany and the UK have said they will not be processing visa applications from any dual nationals of those nations and to not bother showing up if you have an interview pending.

Trump has gone about this in the most chaotic fucking manner possible. But we can't expect much from a man whose campaign team lost him states in the primary because they didn't bother checking the procedural rules before the vote.

Just gotta ram those executive orders out to mollify the bigots, who cares how they actually get done?

I'm still waiting for a case of an illegal alien being charged with the 'crime' of BEING an illegal alien. Where's the link? How much jail time did he get?

I want to see the court case where an illegal alien was arrested for BEING an illegal alien.

Trumptweet:

And a lot of uneducated ones too, if he thinks you can get a US visa application approved inside of a week.

You realize @Kilometres O'Brien is in law school RIGHT NOW and probably has had this drilled into him in the recent past?

@Faceman's been a lawyer for the past decade, I'm sure he can confirm this if you want.

And the article is still very fact filled. Perhaps he would like to read the embedded links about case law. They are all there.

I am specifically speaking about the points raised in the article.

The link you posted has some errors (unsurprisingly).

Most notably:

This is not entirely accurate. It depends entirely on the time frame and circumstances involved. A non-citizen can be denied reentry (i.e. be inadmissible) if they departed the US in certain circumstance. However, there are circumstances in which leaving the country doesn't legally qualify as a departure, and so in those circumstances the non-citizen cannot be inadmissible.

A recent example of this, Matter of Arrabally and Yerrabelly.

Trump's broad use of INA 212 (f) is unprecedented to be sure, but that section cannot be read in isolation from the hundreds of other pages in the INA.

Meanwhile, Australian Teen Denied Visa For Space Camp in US Because His Parents Are From Iran.

I'm sure this kid posed a huge security risk.

It shouldn't be rocket science to work that out.

BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
ಠ_ಠ

In NYC, there were students coming home from winter break that were held up at airport.

Winter break or terrrorjst training camp!

Norwegian terrorists?