Are You A Sexpat Or Do You Ride The Backwards Morality Train?

[webfact]

U.S. judge allows lawsuit over end of immigrant protections to proceed

By Nate Raymond

 

Undocumented immigrant families arrive at a respite center after being released from detention in McAllen, Texas, U.S., July 4, 2018. REUTERS/Loren Elliott/Files

 

BOSTON (Reuters) - A federal judge in Boston on Monday rejected a bid by the Trump administration to dismiss a lawsuit alleging that its decisions to end temporary protections for immigrants in the United States from Honduras, Haiti and El Salvador were racially motivated.

 

U.S. District Judge Denise Casper in Boston ruled that a group of immigrants and two organizations could move forward with a lawsuit challenging the administration's termination of the protective status enjoyed by thousands of people from those three countries.

 

She said the lawsuit's allegations about "statements of animus" by officials including President Donald Trump coupled with claims about a shift in policy "allege plausibly that a discriminatory purpose was a motivating factor in a decision."

 

The lawsuit cited statements it said showed Trump's "dislike and disregard for Latino and black immigrants," including reported remarks in January by Trump saying immigrants from Africa and Haiti come from "shithole countries."

 

"Plaintiffs have successfully made out their prima facie case," Casper wrote.

 

The U.S. Justice Department, which represented the administration in court, had no immediate comment. It had argued that the courts lack jurisdiction to review the decisions at issue.

 

Temporary protected status, or TPS, offers protection from deportation to immigrants already in the United States, including those who entered illegally, from countries affected by natural disasters, civil conflicts and other problems.

 

The Trump administration has shown a deep skepticism toward the temporary protected status program and has moved to revoke the special status afforded to thousands of immigrants from El Salvador, Haiti, Honduras, Nicaragua and Sudan.

 

About 400,000 immigrants from countries designated for temporary protected status live in the United States, including 262,500 from El Salvador, 58,550 from Haiti and 86,000 from Honduras, according to the lawsuit.

 

In May, the Department of Homeland Security said it would end temporary protections for Hondurans in January 2020. Haitians and Salvadorans are set to lose their special statuses in July 2019 and September 2019, respectively.

 

The lawsuit was filed by 14 immigrants from those three countries and two non-profit organizations, Haitian-Americans United and Centro Presente.

 

The complaint contends the administration's actions violate the U.S. Constitution's equal protection and due process provisions.

 

"The judge in this case made clear that TPS recipients have viable constitutional claims and that they deserve a day in court," said Iván Espinoza-Madrigal, the executive director of the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights and Economic Justice, which represented the plaintiffs.

 

(Reporting by Nate Raymond; Editing by Sandra Maler and Lisa Shumaker)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2018-07-24

[Tug]

Ahh poor Steven miller I bet his dolphin head is about ready to explode every time I see that evil dude I just want to pop that big head of his like a puss filled cyst

[Voodoochile]

Amazing! How can the U.S  shoot themselves in the foot despite having the heindsight the example of what is heppening to Europe due to mass immigration.

this is one subject Mr. Trump is 1000% right

[Chomper Higgot]

7 hours ago, Voodoochile said:

Amazing! How can the U.S  shoot themselves in the foot despite having the heindsight the example of what is heppening to Europe due to mass immigration.

this is one subject Mr. Trump is 1000% right

Illiberal doesn’t understand percentages let alone US politics or indeed the part ‘mass immigration’ has played in the founding of the USA.

[Scott]

A racist post has been removed. 

[mrwebb8825]

Here we go again. Obviously this liberal judge didn't get the memo from the SCOTUS that the president has broad power over making immigration policy and NOT her.

Just another big waste of time. As soon as the new SC judge is approved this will get kicked up the them and it will be overturned. These people were given Temporary protection and should have been sent home a decade ago. Sessions and ICE should just ignore this lower liberal judge and start getting all the deportation paperwork in order so when it's overturned by judges that Don't make policy but uphold it, they can expedite their swift return to their beloved homeland and apply correctly.

No hurricane in history has destroyed a country so completely that it took over 10 yrs to rebuild it and the oppressing governments have been change at least 3x in the same time frame.

[mtls2005]

34 minutes ago, mrwebb8825 said:

Sessions and ICE should just ignore this lower liberal judge and start getting all the deportation paperwork in order so when it's overturned by judges that Don't make policy but uphold it, they can expedite their swift return to their beloved homeland and apply correctly.

 

Maybe have them wear some sort of symbol so that they can be easily identified and rounded up? Would a yellow badge work for you?

 

These folks have been here (U.S.) longer than they've probably been in their birth countries. Most are contributing members of our society, and I don't feel threatened by them. The moral thing to do was to give them refuge initially (yeah), and the right thing to do now is to give them a path to citizenship.

 

“Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

 

 

I just don't get why some of my fellow citizens are so anti-immigrant?

 

[mrwebb8825]

6 minutes ago, mtls2005 said:

 

Maybe have them wear some sort of symbol so that they can be easily identified and rounded up? Would a yellow badge work for you?

 

These folks have been here (U.S.) longer than they've probably been in their birth countries. Most are contributing members of our society, and I don't feel threatened by them. The moral thing to do was to give them refuge initially (yeah), and the right thing to do now is to give them a path to citizenship.

 

“Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

 

 

I just don't get why some of my fellow citizens are so anti-immigrant?

 

I'm not anti-immigrant in the least. I AM however, anti-line cutting, anti-illegal, anti-short route for some but not others, anti-federal funding for illegals while true American citizens are starving and homeless.

I'm also against liberal judges trying to dictate/make policy that they don't have the authority to do thereby wasting billions in taxpayer dollars.

That lamp lifted beside the golden door is through an immigration gate that requires legal applications to be made. Temporary assistance during a time of crisis is still Temporary.

If some family moved into your home while you were overseas for a couple of yrs, would you just say; "Oh well, they've been here longer than they've been in their own home so just let them stay" just because they cut the lawn and trimmed the bushes?

[mtls2005]

9 minutes ago, mrwebb8825 said:

If some family moved into your home while you were overseas for a couple of yrs,

 

I do not believe any of these folks have committed a crime like home-invasion, and if they did they should be arrested and prosecuted.

 

Again, I have absolutely no problem granting these people a path to citizenship. I think that the majority of Americans support a path to citizenship for all these folks (DACA, Temporary Status, other "illegals", et al.).

 

Anyone can become a "true American". That's what makes (made?) our country unique. These folks commit crimes at about 25% the rate of your average white citizen and serve in the military at much higher rates.

 

AFAIK, my ancestors came to the U.S. on a boat, without papers or much money. A couple spoke English, or Gaelic, the others, Swedish and French. They entered on a dock, not through "an immigration gate", or with "legal applications".

 

16 minutes ago, mrwebb8825 said:

I AM however, anti-line cutting, anti-illegal, anti-short route for some but not others, anti-federal funding for illegals while true American citizens are starving and homeless.

 

Does this apply to someone like Melania Knavs?

 

 

 

 

[mrwebb8825]

11 minutes ago, mtls2005 said:

 

I do not believe any of these folks have committed a crime like home-invasion, and if they did they should be arrested and prosecuted.

 

Again, I have absolutely no problem granting these people a path to citizenship. I think that the majority of Americans support a path to citizenship for all these folks (DACA, Temporary Status, other "illegals", et al.).

 

Anyone can become a "true American". That's what makes (made?) our country unique. These folks commit crimes at about 25% the rate of your average white citizen and serve in the military at much higher rates.

 

AFAIK, my ancestors came to the U.S. on a boat, without papers or much money. A couple spoke English, or Gaelic, the others, Swedish and French. They entered on a dock, not through "an immigration gate", or with "legal applications".

 

 

Does this apply to someone like Melania Knavs?

 

 

 

 

It's so incredibly naive to keep falling back on a pre-WWI dead-horse argument. Even go out and see the world in the last 20 yrs?

PS. Ellis Island WAS an immigration gate and the applications were filled out when they arrived.

 

PSS. Stooping to attacking Melania is just too low for comment but typical dem tactics.

[mtls2005]

4 hours ago, mrwebb8825 said:

PS. Ellis Island WAS an immigration gate and the applications were filled out when they arrived.

 

Yes, circa 1892. Before that, Castle Green. Not sure how many "applications were filled out"? People just got stamped in without papers. 

 

4 hours ago, mrwebb8825 said:

PSS. Stooping to attacking Melania is just too low for comment but typical dem tactics.

 

Yet that didn't stop you now did it.

 

And it required no stooping at all. Just some schtupping on her part. Gosh darn ferners stealing all our trophy wife jobs. And then her family "chain migrating". The horror, where will it all end.

 

 

[easton]

8 hours ago, mtls2005 said:

 

I do not believe any of these folks have committed a crime like home-invasion, and if they did they should be arrested and prosecuted.

 

 

 

 

 

Maybe not home invasion but what about identity theft? How do you suppose they obtained a SS number legally? 

 

Legal immigration is good illegal immigration is bad, send them back.

[stevenl]

1 hour ago, easton said:

Maybe not home invasion but what about identity theft? How do you suppose they obtained a SS number legally? 

 

Legal immigration is good illegal immigration is bad, send them back.

Why is illegal immigration bad?

[bristolboy]

2 hours ago, easton said:

Maybe not home invasion but what about identity theft? How do you suppose they obtained a SS number legally? 

 

Legal immigration is good illegal immigration is bad, send them back.

Actually, the money that illegal immigrants pay to social security is a big plus since they mostly can't claim any benefits.

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/09/undocumented-immigrants-and-taxes/499604/

[Credo]

4 hours ago, stevenl said:

Why is illegal immigration bad?

I am pretty liberal, but I think illegal immigration is not good.   

 

A country needs to have some control over its borders and needs to know who is entering (and leaving).   A big one in the past is making sure that people are not entering with communicable diseases.   

 

I think the big difference comes into the equation when people present themselves at the border and apply for asylum and every effort is made to prevent their lawful entry.   I also believe that some people, for a variety of reasons, may have to enter illegally and then apply for asylum.   

 

I have nothing against the people who are entering either legally or illegally, but entering illegally causes a lot of problems and expenses.   People entering illegally should not be mistreated or denied any constitutional rights.

 

Edited July 29, 2018 by Credo