The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday granted a request by President Donald Trump’s administration to fully enforce a new rule that would curtail asylum applications by immigrants at the U.S.-Mexico border, a key element of his hardline immigration policies.
The court said the rule, which requires most immigrants who want asylum to first seek safe haven in a third country through which they traveled on their way to the United States, could go into effect as litigation challenging its legality continues.
This is a very simple concept. If a person is truly in fear to the point that they are seeking asylum and safety, then you should seek safe haven in the first country you come to. If someone is fleeing Honduras, for example, and they traverse the entire length of Mexico to get to the U.S., they they aren’t really seeking asylum. They just want to emigrate to the U.S. That’s fine and there is a legal process for that.
Excellent. Nice to see Trump appointments have brought sanity to the liberal 9th Circus.
I don’t follow your logic. So you can only seek asylum in adjacent countries if you’re walking? Or if you can afford a plane ticket, you get more options?
jjf, actually, yes. Makes perfect sense. If on a plane, and the plane goes to the US, then yes, unless you want them to parachute out over their next door country.
Liberal trying to acquire logic.
How cute. Like a unicorn in the woods.
>I don’t follow your logic.
It’s telling that you can’t understand such a simple concept, and I know I’m wasting my time with this…
If you feared for your and your families lives, would you choose to walk 2500 miles across two countries to ask for asylum from country #3? Without trying to get asylum from those two countries you’ve crossed? If you’re truly in fear of your life from the political authorities from your home country? Honestly?
I’m no geography expert, but I imagine there is a lot of inhospitable terrain and poor to no infrastructure on the walk from Honduras to the US.
Rather simple, Kevin. Are you safe in Country 2?
Would you like to read the dissent?
Actually, this more about a liberal activist judge deciding to rule for the entire country and that was what was really decided.
Who cares about the dissent? She lost.
>Are you safe in Country 2?
Oh that’s rich Jif. Our job now as the USA is to ensure that people fleeing from Country X are safe in Country Y and if not bring them here? You’re getting dumber.
What does asylum mean to you, Jason, and what should it mean for our country? You want the USA to be a shining city on a hill, but with a sign at the city’s edge that says “No vacancy”?
It’s defined already Jif, look it up.
jjf, 90% of people are denied asylum and that is even before Trump.
What’s wrong with people coming here legally?
Applying for asylum is coming here legally.
There is “no vacancy” for individuals who arrive here and lie under oath about their situation in their home country. We have enough liars in D.C., (many in office), as it is.
We have enough liars in the “news” business as it is.
And of course, Democrats (or Democrat lawyers) train people to lie. See, e.g., BlaseyFord and/or the Trayvon Martin case, or the genesis of Roe v. Wade, or the genesis of Lawrence v. Texas.
Why should we add more liars and perjurers? Because they lie in Spanish?
I’m sure jjf wouldn’t mind if these asylum seekers were detained a couple of years to make sure their claims were verified. After all, jjf is a patriot and doesn’t want anybody breaking the law to enter the US.
I’m sure that jif has taken a few in, seeing as how he’s so concerned with their safety. How many asylum seekers do you have in your house now jif?
If I can get $750 a day per, as Trump’s cronies can, why not?
So your concern for 2500 mile walking asylum seekers does actually have a price. I thought you were genuinely concerned for the safety of these people. My bad.
Yeah, that’s what I meant, Jason. Show me the money.
Dad29, I’m all for eliminating the liars. Just streamline the vetting process.
Just streamline the vetting process
> > the rule, which requires most immigrants who want asylum to first seek safe haven in a third country through which they traveled on their way to the United States
They did stream line it, and the Supreme Court approved it… and yet you’re here complaining. Showing off your comprehension issue again…
Jason speaks for me: Trump just streamlined it very well.
By the way, exactly which “Trump buddies” are knocking down $750/day/illegal? I don’t know of ONE Catholic Bishop who is a “buddy” of Trump’s.
New rule, Jason. New rule.
Dad29, you are not familiar with the $750 a day detention centers?
Seriously,, jjf, you use as your source, Nation of Change? And you expect to be taken seriously?
Still waiting for jiffy to specifically ID the “Trump buddies” who own? operate? the Homestead shelter.