Because illegals are now considered a special protected class, courts are violating settled law by granting them citizen constitutional rights and even super-rights that citizens don't have.
Evelyn Sineneng-Smith, a naturalized immigrant from the Philippines, operated a boutique immigration consulting business in San Jose with several other branches across the country to help illegal aliens obtain visas in the U.S. She was convicted in 2013 in the Northern District of California of two felony counts of violating immigration law in addition to two non-immigration counts of mail fraud for knowingly advising her illegal immigrant clients to take advantage of worker programs for which they weren't eligible.
Judges can't veto laws; they can merely grant or deny relief to individual plaintiffs.
The courts would never interfere with federal law if lawyers set up businesses to actively thwart our tax or health care laws, but illegal immigration has become a civil rights issue in their minds, thereby allowing them to create new First Amendment rights to break the laws.
Last week, another New York federal judge declared sanctuary policies in seven states because, evidently, there's now a constitutional right for states to obtain federal law enforcement grants even when they subvert federal law enforcement.
Using absurd pretense of state powers, Judge Edgardo Ramos declared section 1373 of the INA, which requires local law enforcement to cooperate with immigration enforcement, unconstitutional and applied his ruling in New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Washington, Massachusetts, and Virginia, He ruled this from Newton, Massachusetts.
Shouldn't we be at least as aggressive when we have the law and the Constitution on our side in the face of judges concocting new rights for illegal aliens?
https://www.conservativereview.com/news/judges-are-now-openly-treating-illegal-immigration-as-the-new-civil-rights-movement/
Evelyn Sineneng-Smith, a naturalized immigrant from the Philippines, operated a boutique immigration consulting business in San Jose with several other branches across the country to help illegal aliens obtain visas in the U.S. She was convicted in 2013 in the Northern District of California of two felony counts of violating immigration law in addition to two non-immigration counts of mail fraud for knowingly advising her illegal immigrant clients to take advantage of worker programs for which they weren't eligible.
Judges can't veto laws; they can merely grant or deny relief to individual plaintiffs.
The courts would never interfere with federal law if lawyers set up businesses to actively thwart our tax or health care laws, but illegal immigration has become a civil rights issue in their minds, thereby allowing them to create new First Amendment rights to break the laws.
Last week, another New York federal judge declared sanctuary policies in seven states because, evidently, there's now a constitutional right for states to obtain federal law enforcement grants even when they subvert federal law enforcement.
Using absurd pretense of state powers, Judge Edgardo Ramos declared section 1373 of the INA, which requires local law enforcement to cooperate with immigration enforcement, unconstitutional and applied his ruling in New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Washington, Massachusetts, and Virginia, He ruled this from Newton, Massachusetts.
Shouldn't we be at least as aggressive when we have the law and the Constitution on our side in the face of judges concocting new rights for illegal aliens?
https://www.conservativereview.com/news/judges-are-now-openly-treating-illegal-immigration-as-the-new-civil-rights-movement/
No comments:
Post a Comment