Comments

House veto override fails; the wall is going ahead — 14 Comments

1. I’m not tired of the winning yet.
   Now…Build the bloody Wall.

   Oh…and those traitorous buggers who voted against the President…Primary them with rabid determination.

2. I read a summary somewhere about how Trump can proceed. A lot of funding is available from sources not touched by the emergency declaration, so by the time this hits the Supreme Court a lot of work will already have been done or be scheduled.

   Congress needs to fund more border agents and immigration court judges; that’s something Trump can’t do on his own, I think.

3. I’ve already written this post expressing my opinion on the legality of Trump’s declaration.

   actually it doesn’t express your opinion, i just read it again, and cant tell if you think its legal or not… funny…

   however, its legal…
   and they are splitting hairs based on ignorance of other actions in history

   -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

   Immigration was limited principally by the cost of travel, disease, and conflict with indigenous inhabitants. By 1640, the population of the colonies had reached approximately 25,000. Population records can only suggest the rate of increase because no immigration records were kept.
   [snip]
   The Quakers set themselves apart in Pennsylvania – to avoid the persecution
   the Scotch Irish Presbyterians moved west to settle the Mississippi frontier when they received a cold reception in the East.

   the point is that this was originally a colony, and anyone could come IF they wanted to serve england
   however, the nation being so big, there was no way to prevent people from coming and moving out of reach
   [in fact, the original feminists were one of those SEX COLONIES pushed by people like moses harmon who ended up running afowl of comstock acts and mail law. but that was a bit later]

   then there came the slaves… most were indentured..
   They could buy their freedom if they could pay
   the first slave in the US names johnson did so, he also became the first black to own slaves
   and the first black to go to court to have a judgement that it was ok to extend slavery

   Slaves from Africa were forcibly brought. Children were kidnapped from English slums and sold for American labor. English judges were empowered to send both vagrants and felons to the colonies as punishment. These groups also met with disfavor and colonial restrictions; colonies began legislating to exclude “paupers” and “criminals” as early as 1639. Those restrictions excluding “public charges” embraced not only people sent by English courts but also the poor and the diseased who came voluntarily. Southern colonies especially tried to restrict criminals, because that region had received the greatest influx of the 50,000 sent under penal sanction during the fifty years before the Revolution.

   you might know this from music…
   where they tell the story of men bursting into homes,
   grabbing the man and sending them off to america

   So there is your first precident going back to BEFORE US revolution..

   The colonial immigration restrictions may have influenced the later legislation of the United States on this subject. In fashioning its laws, the federal government eventually excluded the same general classes of immigrants as did the colonies. The federal legislation also used certain colonial sanctions on immigrants, such as head taxes on individuals and deportation of undesirable persons.

   The locus of power over the subject of immigration was not definitively identified in any early proclamation of the new government. Under the Articles of Confederation, each state apparently determined its own immigration policy, but there was confusion over the status of prior colonial enactments. The United States Constitution, adopted in 1789, granted Congress broad power to regulate foreign commerce in Article I, section 8, but it was not clear whether foreign commerce included immigration. Not until 1875 did the U.S. Supreme Court in Henderson v. City of New York (Sup.Ct.1875) declare state restrictions on immigration to be unconstitutional, as an infringement on the federal power over foreign commerce.

   so there you have that states have no power over immigration… since 1875…

   however… there is the alternative, point..
   Congress adopted the first naturalization law in 1790

   Well, if it didnt matter, then why did you need to be naturalized?
   if the person doing the naturalizing doesnt have the power to say no, then whats the point?
   and on and on..

   the point is that they didnt enumerate it as they didnt that such a thing would be opposed!

   In 1798 Congress authorized the President to expel “dangerous” aliens in the Alien Friends Act and the Alien Enemies Act, but the Alien Friends Act expired without extension after two years. A new Naturalization Act in 1802 re-established the provisions of a 1795 act, creating a five-year residency requirement for citizenship. In addition, the “passenger acts” of 1819, 1847, 1848, and 1855 set certain minimum space and provisions standards for overseas vessels. Further, in 1808, Congress enacted a law forbidding the importation of slaves.

   but then, a reason raised its head and its the same as today:

   Discontent with the open immigration policy increased with the rate of immigration and with change in the composition of immigrants. Between 1820 and 1880, political conditions and economic devastation brought over 2.8 million Irish immigrants to the United States.

   German Catholic immigrants came in large numbers during the European depressions of the 1840’s. In a predominantly Protestant country, the Catholic Irish and Germans were not well accepted. The anti-Catholicism that had prevailed in colonial days resurfaced. Several groups and overlapping political parties, including social reformers, Protestant evangelicals, the Nativists, the Order of the Star Spangled Banner, and the Know Nothing Party, campaigned for legislation halting immigration and prohibiting even naturalized immigrants from participating in the nation’s political process.

   These groups were somewhat successful at the state level, but failed at the federal level because the Irish and Germans constituted a large voting block. Politicians at the national level actively sought the vote of these and other newly arrived groups. Hence, federal policy, and apparently the majority of the nation, continued to favor immigration.

   hey, arent those the racist whites that did all that bad stuff and build irish democrat taminy hall, and on and on and on? all the police during the draft riots were Irish… five points was not part of the riots (unlike the movie) and five points was also the center of black owned businesses, but these groups pulled a krystal nacht that day, and destroyed and did some horrible things..

   hey, isnt this about the dems of today or the past importing votors?

   part II to come

4. A welfare state and open borders cannot coexist.

5. The 1875 Act also attempted to solve the new problem faced by the western states. Westward expansion demanded huge numbers of laborers for work in the mines and on the railroads.

   Imported Chinese labor had been used since about 1850, and tension between the Chinese workers and the settlers of European descent ran high. Chinese labor depressed wage scales and some Chinese women were being imported as prostitutes.

   The Chinese did not assimilate and the European groups did not tolerate the cultural differences. In response, Congress adopted a law outlawing so-called “coolie labor” contracts and immigration for lewd and immoral purposes.

   Many Chinese, however, continued to immigrate voluntarily or were routed through Canada.

   Hence, in 1882 Congress took stronger action in the Chinese Exclusion Act, the nation’s first racist, restrictive immigration law, and one of several acts in the 1880’s aimed at stemming the tide of Chinese immigration.

   The act suspended all immigration of Chinese laborers for ten years and forbade any court to admit Chinese to citizenship. The act was extended in 1902 and later made permanent.

   Not until 1943 was it finally repealed so that Chinese immigrants could become citizens.

   i will bet that trump has an A in history… it is a military school… DUH

   Congress finally decided by the 1880’s that immigration was appropriate for federal control. The Act of 1882 may be considered the first general federal immigration act. It continued to base restrictions on quality controls; in addition to the 1875 exclusions of “convicts” and “prostitutes,” it barred “lunatics,” “idiots,” and those “likely to become public charges.” The act also for the first time imposed a head tax on every arriving immigrant. The tax served the express function of raising revenues to defray administrative expenses. Congress did not want the poor of other nations to be added to the government relief rolls; the tax served the underlying function of deterring the immigration of people unable to pay. In several subsequent statutes, the head tax was raised from fifty cents to two dollars, making the barrier relatively substantial at that time.

   Despite these limits, over 5.2 million immigrant aliens arrived in the 1880’s. Immigration came to be seen as a threat to the U.S. economy, and Congress began expanding the list of “undesirable classes,” hoping both to upgrade the type of immigrants and to limit overall entry. An 1891 act added the “diseased,” “paupers,” and “polygamists” to the list of excludable persons.

   do the marxists appear now?

   In 1907 the “feebleminded,” the tubercular, and those persons with a mental or physical defect that “may affect” their ability to earn a living were added to the list. During this period, Japanese immigration was restricted by a 1907 agreement negotiated between the United States and Japan. Although the cumulative list was long, these quality controls were not easily enforced.

   More than the huge numbers concerned Congress, however

   In the 1880s, 72% of immigrants to the U.S. came from northern and western Europe. In contrast, during the 1900-10 decade, 71% came from countries in southern or eastern Europe. These “new immigrants” were Italians, Slavs, and Jews, who were considered “inferior” by the predominantly Anglo-Saxon population. Much like the Chinese who preceded them by several decades, the “new immigrants” were slow to assimilate, living together in urban ethnic neighborhoods.

   but notice, those groups are part of the other now, and to be hated..

   In 1907, after several failed attempts to pass a literacy bill, Congress established a joint congressional-presidential commission to study the impact of immigration on the United States. In 1911 the Commission published its findings. It concluded that twentieth century immigration to the U.S. was significantly different from earlier immigration and that the new immigration was dominated by the so-called “inferior” and “less desirable” groups. As a result, the Commission concluded that the United States no longer benefited from a liberal immigration policy and should impose further entry restrictions.

   wow, what a trip, and finally, we get to who and what is responsible for today and more

   WOODROW WILSON again, and all those.. funny how they keep coming up..

   So what the heck did he do… prior to him it was a function of congress, but after him, and his expanding presidential powers and such as a progressive, it was not the same..

   In 1917, over President Wilson’s veto, Congress responded.

6. Artfldgr:

   Here is the quote about my opinion [emphasis added]:

   Looking at that, I think it’s relatively straightforward that the president has very broad powers to declare national emergencies and that what Trump proposes to do—if he uses the Army’s civil works program—might be fully legal under 33 U.S.C. 2293, if the argument is accepted that the wall is essential to the national defense or if it is found to be an “authorized civil work.” Naturally, there will be a legal challenge that the wall and the immigration situation is not the sort of immediate and threatening emergency that would justify such a declaration, and/or that it’s unnecessary for national defense and/or not an authorized civil work.

   An opinion does not have to be a 100% firm conclusion, by the way. In other words, just to make my opinion even more clear, it is that Trump is acting under a quite straightforward statutory power granted to him. The legality of his move will be challenged, and of course the practical outcome depends on what the Court decides, but I see no impediment to its legality other than judicial interpretation of the statute and its scope.

   One can never fully predict what courts will do. But, as I said, it seems pretty clear that he is acting under the statutory powers granted him. I’ve said in another post on the subject (or perhaps it was a comment) that if Congress wants to withdraw those powers it is free to do so, but Congress has granted them and they are quite broad although not so broad as to cover all situations.

7. The 1921 Quota Law marked a major shift in the U.S. approach to immigration control. The law limited immigration from each nation to 3% of the number of foreign-born persons of that nationality residing in the U.S. as of the 1910 census.

   The effect of the quota allotments was to restrict immigration from the disfavored regions; the northern and western countries of Europe did not even fill their quotas under this law. Fortunately for the restricted group, Congress established certain “non-quota” exceptions. For example, the law permitted a person to be admitted to the United States as an immigrant if the individual had lived in the Western Hemisphere for one year (later changed to five years). Hence, by temporarily living in a Western Hemisphere country, many avoided the quotas.

   In 1924, Congress further restricted immigration by reducing the immigration quota from 3% of foreign-born persons under the 1910 census to 2% of the foreign-born under the 1890 census.

   Moreover, although Europe was the targeted region, immigration from the Western Hemisphere began to climb in the 1920’s, presenting border control problems. In response, the Bureau created the Border Patrol in 1924, hiring 45 men to guard the country’s 8,000 miles of land and sea borders.

   In 1929, as provided by the 1924 Act, a new quota took effect.

   The “national origins formula” used the ethnic background of the entire U.S. population, rather than the first generation immigrant population, as its base for calculating national quotas. Because the U.S. population was still predominantly AngloBSaxon, the national origins quota restricted the newer immigrant groups more severely than the foreign-born formula of the previous quota laws.

   over and over, more and more, it was about filtering people.. Because more and more, physical barriers and economic barriers were falling and the new WELFARE STATE of woodrow wilson and weimar and such COULD NOT SURVIVE AN UNLIMITED SYSTEM (and still cant)

   NAZIS!!!

   One of the most tragic consequences of the U.S. restrictive immigration policy fell upon refugees trying to flee Europe before World War II. In 1939, Congress defeated a bill that would have accommodated 20,000 children fleeing from Nazi Germany – despite the availability of willing sponsor families – because the number of children would have exceeded the quota allocated to German nationals.

   In 1940 the State Department did permit consuls outside Germany to issue visas to German refugees when the German quota was unfilled, but this and other measures were inadequate to help the vast majority of victims of Nazi persecution.

   so… it took the Nazis and chinese communists to open the doors of the US immigration!

   As the United States became painfully aware of the Nazi atrocities and the fate of the refugees it had refused, there was a short period of liberalization of the strict quota laws.

   but that was TRUMAN…

   Under the War Brides Act of 1945 and the Fiancees Act of 1946, about 123,000 spouses, children, and fiancées of WW II military personnel were admitted to the U.S.

   and made for some funny movies.. like i was a male war bride – which was propaganda from hollywood to make a situation that may be judged harmless and ok for the public…

   The Displaced Persons Act of 1948 admitted 400,000 war refugees from Austria, Germany, and Italy to the U.S., but these admissions “mortgaged” their countries§ quotas, sometimes limiting or closing off all immigration from a country for several years thereafter.

   my family were displaced persons.. DP camps…etc

   and it went on and on… but this group now makes it clear why they want it open..

   In contrast to its liberalizing post-war legislation, Congress soon thereafter acted to restrict another group. Anti-Communism rose after WW II and particularly during the war in Korea. As a result, national security legislation received high priority in Congress. The Internal Security Act of 1950 amended the 1918 Anarchists Act. The exclusions, however, were expressly directed this time at Communists; the act broadly defined the excluded group, barring anyone “likely to” engage in “subversive activity.”

   but that was what Cree argued in Wilsons justice department…
   and it took how long?

   From this point onwards, it was tweaking this, and playing with that till it got to the point no one really knew what the US immigraiton policy was except for the immigrants themselves coming through in that time period…

   the communist insurgencies made things a problem.. you had the mariel boat lift.. the vietnam boat people, the cambodians, and on and on… now, for the first time, refugees from wars could leave and try to come here and not be a part of things like DP programs.. it was great time to be a communist subversive, as it was easy to smuggle yourself in under the umbrella of refugee.. and many many did

   but it was the eu and the soviet reorganization (called the collapse), that like now trying to give away money as a payment system… was really something else.. [the payment is how you convert a capitalist system to a ration system… they are trying it, and no one ‘gets’ it.. ]

   they wanted to show how it was ok to do that and everything would be great
   it also gave them a long time to move material and people and expertise around
   before people woke up to, its not so great… because they forgot x, y, z..

   and on and on it goes..
   and i have met few lawyers that know this stuff let alone the public

8. I repeat…

   If Congress does not like the law that Congress passed in its infinite wisdom that gave the POTUS the expanded Emergency Power, then Congress should rescind the law.

   Trump’s action is legal until the law is changed.

9. I’m pretty sure if the SCOTUS makes a decision, it will accept that Congress gave the Executive the powers that Trump is now using.

   In the meantime, lots of purple district Dems will be under increasing voter pressure on the Wall.

   How many good conservative candidates will the GOP have? Most will be pro-Trump, and pro-Wall.

10. We are being invaded, send the full force of our military to the southern border. Treat the invaders as enemy agents without regard to age or sex.

11. In re headline:
    Actually, the House override failed; the veto stood.
    And the wall is going ahead.

12. That’s one for civil rights. Hopefully, this will be accompanied with emigration reform to mitigate the collateral damage from immigration reform (e.g. refugee crises, labor arbitrage, democratic gerrymandering) at both ends of the bridge and throughout, and expose the lost victims of age discrimination, summary judgments, and cruel and unusual punishment that became legal and ethical under the Twilight Amendment to The Constitution.

13. AesopFan:

    Thanks for pointing that out. I left out the word “override” somehow. Obviously the House can’t veto something—although I guess the override of a veto would be a veto veto equivalent of sorts.

14. Pingback:House veto override fails; the wall is going ahead – American People Daily

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>