Tag Archives: immigration

Illegal Aliens and Endangered Plant Species

Posted on by
Reply

Now President Joe Biden (D) is trying to block border enforcement by using his Interior Department’s Fish and Wildlife Service to declare the prostrate milkweed to be an endangered species under the Endangered Species Act. In conjunction with this, he’s moving to declare some acreage along the border between two Texas counties and Mexico as “critical habitat” for the plant.

All of that is a naked move to try to prevent Texas from building a border wall using Texas resources, so that Biden-Harris can continue to flood our nation with illegal aliens (who aren’t required to be vaccinated against the Wuhan Virus, even though legitimate travelers and returnees to our nation are so required. See nearby).

This time, though, the Biden-Harris cynicism, though, can be used against him.

If he truly is concerned about the welfare of the prostrate milkweed, then Biden-Harris must take concrete steps to close those stretches of the border in order to keep the illegal aliens from trampling the plants as they come across.

Duplicity

Posted on by
Reply

DHS continues to require legitimate travelers to our nation and legitimate returnees at the end of their overseas travels to prove their vaccination status against the Wuhan Virus as a condition for their entry.

[T]ravelers entering the US through legal ports of entry will continue to be forced to show proof of vaccination….

But that doesn’t apply to those entering our nation illegally. The illegal aliens get a free pass in to go with their existing free midnight flights to the interior destinations of their choice.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement continues to “apply CDC guidance through its Pandemic Response Requirements,” under which “ICE cannot mandate individuals in detention consent to be vaccinated,” according to the agency.

Who says crime doesn’t pay? It plainly does when Progressive-Democrats are running the show.

Border Removal

Posted on by
Reply

The latest example of President Joe Biden’s (D) move to erase our nation’s borders is this: exemptions to Title 42 health restrictions, which Biden plans to implement in the next few days, and which will largely make elimination of the Title 42 restrictions themselves, or their retention, irrelevant. The exemptions apply, in particular, to illegal aliens; legal immigrants remain held to different standards.

The exemptions certainly sound pretty:

…a physical or mental illness, disability; pregnancy; lack of access to safe housing or shelter in Mexico (under 21 years old or younger or over 70, including families); and an indication that an individual has been threatened or harmed in Mexico.

All of these, though, with the exception of the pregnancy, are easily claimed by the illegal aliens, knowing our border agents are in no position to verify the claims.

Nor is any of this relevant to Title 42’s health restrictions or to the state of the Wuhan Virus in the US. Those restrictions are to protect the US from entry by immigrants who are coming from countries with serious outbreaks of infectious disease(s), not just a Wuhan Virus outbreak. Biden and his Progressive-Democrats (and too many Republicans who argue against Title 42 restriction lifting from a different perspective) know this full well.

This is a move to not bother stopping anyone from entering our nation from anywhere, for any reason, no matter who they are or what diseases they might bring with them—if any.

There no longer are any meaningful health checks under Biden-Harris, so we won’t know how healthy or unhealthy these illegal aliens are.

No Law

Posted on by
Reply

…but merely convenience. Australia’s immigration ministry makes Australia a nation ruled by men and not by law.

Immigration Minister Alex Hawke made clear in court documents concerning his second revocation of Novak Djokovic’s entry visa that the law counts for nothing.

Hawke didn’t dispute Djokovic’s claim of a medical exemption from rules that travelers to Australia must be vaccinated against Covid-19…. Hawke, who canceled Djokovic’s visa on Friday, said allowing the player to stay could sway some Australians against getting vaccinated.

Additionally,

Hawke didn’t refute Djokovic’s contention that he posed a negligible health risk, documents showed.

In his separate visa cancelation notice, though, Hawke said,

His [Djokovic’s] presence in Australia, given his well-known stance on vaccination, creates a risk of strengthening the antivaccination sentiment of a minority of the Australian community[.]

Because government convenience is all that matters.

Australia isn’t the US, and Aussies can accept the style of governance they choose—or that gets imposed on them by the men and women in their government. That, though, does not make their decision to be ruled by men—a very hard choice to reverse—rather than by law any less foolish.

UPDATE: Australia’s federal court upheld Hawke’s order to revoke Djokovic’s visa and ordered the tennis star deported. The court’s reasoning was this:

Chief Justice James Allsop said the decision came down to whether Immigration Minister Ethan Hawke’s decision was “irrational or legally unreasonable.”
“It is no part of the function of the court to decide upon the merits or wisdom of the [government’s] decision,” Allsop explained.

That’s appropriate, as far as it goes. Court judges should rule on the legality of the matter, not interpose their own views of societal needs or their own feelz.

It doesn’t, though, detract from Hawke’s decision to act on his feelz and his views of government convenience being more important than law.

Rules Don’t Matter

Posted on by
Reply

The Progressive-Democrats want to toss inconvenient Senate rules so they can have anything they demand. And they’ve become very open about that.

A group of House Democrats, including Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D, NY) penned a letter urging the Senate’s Democratic leadership to ignore the Senate Parliamentarian ruling that a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants cannot be included in a budget reconciliation bill.

And from the letter,

We do understand that the Senate Parliamentarian has issued a memorandum dismissing—despite evidence to the contrary—the budgetary impact of providing a pathway to citizenship. But the role of the Parliamentarian is an advisory one, and the Parliamentarian’s opinion is not binding.

Never mind the carefully unsubstantiated claim of budgetary impact. Consider the demand that the Parliamentarian’s ruling be blithely ignored. It is an advisory ruling, but under Senate reconciliation ruling it is binding, and the Senate is bound by it.

Sure, the ruling can be overridden, but that capability is irrelevant, as the Progressive-Democrats know full well. Statutes are binding, also, as are Federal agency regulations, and statutes and regulations also can be overridden: by subsequent statute or regulation, by the issuing agency rescinding its regulation, by the courts overruling or striking altogether the statute or regulation.

But overrule it the damned thing, Progressive-Democrats demand; it’s inconvenient to their purpose.

Nor will such disregard be limited to immigration. They’ll move to ignore any Senate rule, any regulation, any statute that gets in their way.

The Progressive-Democrats, in their drive to “fundamentally transform our nation,” now are saying out loud that a Critical Item in their desired transformation is that we should no longer be a nation ruled by law, but a nation ruled by men and women—their men and women in particular.

Remember this next fall, and keep it firmly in mind for 2024.