Businessman Sued over Holiday Home that Looks Like Temple Pavilion

[webfact]

U.S. states, immigrant groups to fight Trump's Dreamer decision

By Lawrence Hurley

 

Demonstrators gather outside the White House to protest President Donald Trump's plan to repeal DACA in Washington, U.S., September 5, 2017. REUTERS/Aaron P. Bernstein

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Several U.S. states and immigrant advocacy groups vowed on Tuesday to fight President Donald Trump's decision to end a programme that protects people brought illegally to the United States as children from deportation. But legal experts said the challenges will face an uphill battle.

 

Democratic state attorneys general in California, New York, Washington and Massachusetts said they will sue to defend the Obama-era policy known as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, and the immigrants known as Dreamers.

 

"We are going to court to defend DACA and to fight for these Dreamers," said Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healy. The states have not said what their legal claims will be.

 

The Trump administration on Tuesday announced it would phase out the programme but urged Congress to enact immigration reform if it wants to protect DACA recipients.

 

Whatever lawsuit the Democratic states file, winning will not be easy, said Jonathan Adler, a law professor at Case Western Reserve University College of Law.

 

"DACA did not create any legally enforceable rights, and certainly did not create any right to indefinite presence in the country," he said.

 

One immigrant group, the National Immigration Law Center, has already filed court papers seeking to block the Trump administration's action by amending an existing lawsuit pending in New York.

 

The case was filed last year on behalf of DACA recipient Martin Batalla Vidal, an immigrant from Mexico who came to the United States when he was 7. It originally contested a ruling enjoining a programme of former President Barack Obama that offered protection to undocumented parents of U.S. citizen children.

 

In the new filing, Vidal's lawyers outlined a two-prong challenge to Trump's DACA action. One claim was that the move violated the federal Administrative Procedure Act, a law requiring government agencies to follow set processes when making major policy changes.

 

Batalla Vidal's lawyers said Trump's announcement was an "abrupt policy shift" affecting nearly 800,000 programme participants who had assumed the protections would remain in place.

 

Trump promised during his presidential campaign to dismantle DACA but since taking office in January has taken a softer tone. The lawyers noted that he told DACA recipients he would "take care" of them.

 

The filing also asserts that the new policy is discriminatory and was "substantially motivated by the animus of the president and his administration toward Latinos and Mexicans."

 

Stephen Yale-Loehr, an immigration law professor at Cornell Law School, said any litigation against Trump's action will face multiple obstacles.

 

Among them is the fact that courts are "generally more deferential to immigration actions by the executive branch than in other areas, because immigration touches on sovereignty and national security," he added.

 

(Reporting by Lawrence Hurley; Additional reporting by Mica Rosenberg; Editing by Cynthia Osterman)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-09-06

[khwaibah]

30 minutes ago, webfact said:

U.S. states, immigrant groups to fight Trump's Dreamer decision

 

Reminds me of the old saying "spitting in the wind."

[hawker9000]

1 hour ago, khwaibah said:

 

Reminds me of the old saying "spitting in the wind."

It was implemented with nothing but an EO in the first place; why would anyone think it'd take more than an EO to kill it?   'Guess the key word there is, "think", as in, not really required...

 

So, wonderful.  More downtown marches; more fires set; more shops vandalized; more windshields smashed; more roads & highways closed; more verbal abuse in Spanish.  If we're lucky, maybe we can get another Congressman shot at some charity event. 

[Jingthing]

8 minutes ago, hawker9000 said:

It was implemented with nothing but an EO in the first place; why would anyone think it'd take more than an EO to kill it?   'Guess the key word there is, "think", as in, not really required...

 

So, wonderful.  More downtown marches; more fires set; more shops vandalized; more windshields smashed; more roads & highways closed; more verbal abuse in Spanish.  If we're lucky, maybe we can get another Congressman shot at some charity event. 

That congressman should not have been shot. No congressman should be shot.

But he's no angel. trump has brought the ugly, racist, xenophobic politics of white resentment well out of the closet. 

 

Quote

Steve Scalise reportedly said he was 'like David Duke without the baggage'

http://theweek.com/speedreads/440133/steve-scalise-reportedly-said-like-david-duke-without-baggage

 

[Baerboxer]

27 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

That congressman should not have been shot. No congressman should be shot.

But he's no angel. trump has brought the ugly, racist, xenophobic politics of white resentment well out of the closet. 

 

http://theweek.com/speedreads/440133/steve-scalise-reportedly-said-like-david-duke-without-baggage

 

 

That white resentment has been simmering for year, and a backlash likely to happen. Trump took the lid off.

 

The pandering to illegal immigrants from some sections of the political arena, and not always for humanitarian grounds, creates a something for the vile racist bigots to attack. 

 

And caught in the middle are the vast majority of citizens, who aren't racists, bigots, and are law abiding, including new legal immigrants. It's those citizens taxes that will have to pay for the extreme politically driven actions of the minorities stirring up the trouble. Whether it be right wing racist neo Nazis or left-wing extremists using immigration as an excuse to wreak havoc and cause trouble on the streets.

 

If a government makes laws or changes things that you don't like, then vote them out. 

 

 

[ilostmypassword]

2 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

That white resentment has been simmering for year, and a backlash likely to happen. Trump took the lid off.

 

The pandering to illegal immigrants from some sections of the political arena, and not always for humanitarian grounds, creates a something for the vile racist bigots to attack. 

 

And caught in the middle are the vast majority of citizens, who aren't racists, bigots, and are law abiding, including new legal immigrants. It's those citizens taxes that will have to pay for the extreme politically driven actions of the minorities stirring up the trouble. Whether it be right wing racist neo Nazis or left-wing extremists using immigration as an excuse to wreak havoc and cause trouble on the streets.

 

If a government makes laws or changes things that you don't like, then vote them out. 

 

 

You seem to steadfastly want to disregard the fact the most Americans don't want the Dreamers out.

[Baerboxer]

Just now, ilostmypassword said:

You seem to steadfastly want to disregard the fact the most Americans don't want the Dreamers out.

 

I don't know if that's the case or not. But whether it is or not is irrelevant. Or do you think that government should make decisions by opinion polls?

 

Switzerland would conduct a referendum on such an issue, as that't the way their government system works. The US doesn't work that way.

 

Or are you suggesting this is OK now because you don't like Trump?

[Jingthing]

3 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

I don't know if that's the case or not. But whether it is or not is irrelevant. Or do you think that government should make decisions by opinion polls?

 

Switzerland would conduct a referendum on such an issue, as that't the way their government system works. The US doesn't work that way.

 

Or are you suggesting this is OK now because you don't like Trump?

It definitely IS the case. 

 

Quote

Politico Poll: Majority of Americans Say Dreamers Should Stay

 

https://www.newsmax.com/US/daca-dreamers-americans-work-visas/2017/09/05/id/811805/

Edited September 6, 2017 by Jingthing

[Baerboxer]

26 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

It definitely IS the case. 

 

 

https://www.newsmax.com/US/daca-dreamers-americans-work-visas/2017/09/05/id/811805/

 

Are you advocating that government decisions be made by opinion poll?

 

"58 percent said they believe DACA recipients, also called Dreamers, should be allowed to stay and become citizens if they meet certain requirements.

68 percent said DACA recipients should be granted work permits.

Regarding illegal immigrants as a whole, 49 percent said those currently living in the U.S. illegally should be allowed to stay and given a pathway to citizenship.

22 percent said illegal immigrants should be removed or deported." 

Form your link

 

But again, the point is, government decisions aren't made by opinion polls. If public opinion turns against an elected government then they don't get re-elected. 

Or does democracy and the government process only count if you happen to like the government?

[JohnOFphon]

If you are in the country illegally...no matter how...get out!!

Illegal doesn't mean...maybe, doesn't mean not my fault. It means..illegal.

 

[ujayujay]

19 minutes ago, JohnOFphon said:

If you are in the country illegally...no matter how...get out!!

Illegal doesn't mean...maybe, doesn't mean not my fault. It means..illegal.

 

......you and Donald are Dreamers......

[ilostmypassword]

2 hours ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Are you advocating that government decisions be made by opinion poll?

 

"58 percent said they believe DACA recipients, also called Dreamers, should be allowed to stay and become citizens if they meet certain requirements.

68 percent said DACA recipients should be granted work permits.

Regarding illegal immigrants as a whole, 49 percent said those currently living in the U.S. illegally should be allowed to stay and given a pathway to citizenship.

22 percent said illegal immigrants should be removed or deported." 

Form your link

 

But again, the point is, government decisions aren't made by opinion polls. If public opinion turns against an elected government then they don't get re-elected. 

Or does democracy and the government process only count if you happen to like the government?

But there's nothing stopping the government from acting in accordance with the will of the people in this case either.

[Jingthing]

DACA Shame --