so that could mean there are more apprehensions simply because they are just better at catching the immigrants and thus causing each person to have more attempts.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
There was a dip in 2020, but there was a spike in 2019, so that made the dip look like more than it was.I thought I had seen a dip during covid but maybe it was due to expulsions rather than apprehensions.
Most figures are number of apprehensions (figuring out how many got by undetected would be guesswork). You can't blame an administration on people trying to come in. The fact that there are tons of apprehensions seems like the border patrol just doing their job. politicians make it sound like there are no apprehensions and they are just handing our brochures.
As a matter of fact, according to CBP, recidivism has shot up in recent years. In 2019, 7% of encounters were individuals apprehended more than once in the same year. In 2020 and 2021, that went up to 26% and 27%, respectively.so that could mean there are more apprehensions simply because they are just better at catching the immigrants and thus causing each person to have more attempts.
God, I hope so, but not likely their decisions are based only on "fundamental law."Perhaps GOAT is right and the court, while politicized to a degree, still remains grounded on fundamental law?
That’s pretty much ignorant.God, I hope so, but not likely their decisions are based only on "fundamental law."
It's impossible to separate the absolute power wielded by human justices-appointed-for-life from their upbringing, early formative years and parents.
As I recall, a majority of the Dred Scott justices came from slave owning families.
In the new Texas razor wire case, someone on this board suggested that the "inhumane" effect of the underlying Texas' razor wire policy was a factor in leading to the SCOTUS result against Texas. That could very well be related to Amy Comey Barrett's vote against Texas, because she is a known lover of children.
And we shouldn't ignore or diminish the possible effect of the experience of Gorsuch's mother in the federal government, of which he was totally aware:
.https://www.denverpost.com/2017/03/19/neil-gorsuch-anne-burford-colorado/
Maybe SCOTUS might vote your way, but I'm skeptical the reason will be solely "fundamental law."
Do tell.That’s pretty much ignorant.
First of all, SCOTUS can never wield absolute power because it doesn’t have it. SCOTUS can only decide a case which means it can’t initiate anything.
If you are going to criticize Gorsuch, you’ll need to do better than talking about his mother. His opinions in a few cases I mentioned here are works of art.
I agree the court seems more political than ever. If that is true, I think it comes from the unprecedented litigation against the government. Any controversial policy will result in some interest group filing suit. That is a real problem.
I noticed Fox “News” has stopped telling us about all the fentanyl stopped at the border. I guess stopping all those drugs was supposed to make Biden look bad. Wonder why they stopped covering it.so that could mean there are more apprehensions simply because they are just better at catching the immigrants and thus causing each person to have more attempts.
Brain damage?
How do you know justices put party and politics in decisions?Some justices being able to put party politics aside doesn't mean all are able to do so.
Some are pretty obvious. Roe wouldn't have been overturned for one.How do you know justices put party and politics in decisions?
It's actually not the way. As much as I understand the frustration felt by Abbott and Texas, ignoring Supreme Court rulings is a path towards chaos.
Nothing like wasting taxpayer dollars to score political points.
In Abbott's defense, he's not actually ignoring the ruling. The ruling allows the feds to take the fencing down, but it does not prevent Texas from installing it.It's actually not the way. As much as I understand the frustration felt by Abbott and Texas, ignoring Supreme Court rulings is a path towards chaos.
After Dobbs, many many irresponsible and promiscuous people were extremely upset. Yet, the ruling was followed. Roe was no longer the law of the land.
Would you be okay with rogue doctors performing late term abortions in Florida and Texas? Planned Parenthood staffs loading up on weaponry to fight the authorities that have come to shut them down?
Biden is refusing to follow his duties. That's the whole problem. Intentionally ignoring the law.It's actually not the way. As much as I understand the frustration felt by Abbott and Texas, ignoring Supreme Court rulings is a path towards chaos.
After Dobbs, many many irresponsible and promiscuous people were extremely upset. Yet, the ruling was followed. Roe was no longer the law of the land.
Would you be okay with rogue doctors performing late term abortions in Florida and Texas? Planned Parenthood staffs loading up on weaponry to fight the authorities that have come to shut them down?
You claim to be a lawyer. Can you cite the provision that Biden is refusing to enforce?Biden is refusing to follow his duties. That's the whole problem. Intentionally ignoring the law.
In that case, good for Wheels.In Abbott's defense, he's not actually ignoring the ruling. The ruling allows the feds to take the fencing down, but it does not prevent Texas from installing it.
More apprehensions have occurred under Biden than under Trump. Sounds like they are doing their duty.Biden is refusing to follow his duties. That's the whole problem. Intentionally ignoring the law.
More apprehensions have occurred under Biden than under Trump. Sounds like they are doing their duty.
Pretending like dems are failing at the border is about like blaming biden for inflation. If we are in the business of misplaced blame, how about blaming Trump given the $8.4 trillion that was added to deficit under his watch.
oh right, it's about politics, not facts. Carry on.
Stop lying. why do you lie so much? you lie about blm and dems. you lie about the same stuff over and over and over. are you just a shill for hte party? wtf is your deal? this stuff isn't opinion. you outright lie.is about like blaming biden for inflation.
it's more than one involving temporary protections, aslylum status, removals, etc. i really hate this topic because i know we can't have open borders but man i feel so badly for these families. i'm in awe of the ones bringing little kids and toddlers and babies. i simply cannot imagine.You claim to be a lawyer. Can you cite the provision that Biden is refusing to enforce?
Dbm = Alina Hanna ??You claim to be a lawyer. Can you cite the provision that Biden is refusing to enforce?
Not even smart enough to be that dumbass lawyer.Dbm = Alina Hanna ??
The real problem here is that these people think of a desperate civilian migration as an "invasion."
Those are just wordsThe real problem here is that these people think of a desperate civilian migration as an "invasion."
Words have power. An invasion is something enemies do.Those are just words
I agree with that. Are these people nomads?Words have power. An invasion is something enemies do.
I already said. I don't think Abbott and others should be using this type of rhetoric. I think it's incredibly dangerous. I think it helps reinforce the mindset that these folks are other, less than, and again, the enemy.I agree with that. Are these people nomads?
What do you think Texas is doing wrong?
So….what are they seeking asylum from?I already said. I don't think Abbott and others should be using this type of rhetoric. I think it's incredibly dangerous. I think it helps reinforce the mindset that these folks are other, less than, and again, the enemy.
Those questions are irrelevant to my point.So….what are they seeking asylum from?
Are they coming legally thru a port of entry?
Not really…maybe the landowners view it as an invasion if they aren’t coming in thru a port of entry.Those questions are irrelevant to my point.
They shouldn't. And our leaders shouldn't be encouraging that narrative.Not really…maybe the landowners view it as an invasion if they aren’t coming in thru a port of entry.
That’s easy for us to say. We aren’t the ones dealing with it in real time.They shouldn't. And our leaders shouldn't be encouraging that narrative.
Yes, it is easy for us to say. It should be easy. That kind of language is morally unjustifiable.That’s easy for us to say. We aren’t the ones dealing with it in real time.
What about the actions of the “civilian migration”? How do you justify it from a lawful perspective? Should they follow the law? Are they immune from the law?Yes, it is easy for us to say. It should be easy. That kind of language is morally unjustifiable.
Again, irrelevant to my point.What about the actions of the “civilian migration”? How do you justify it from a lawful perspective? Should they follow the law? Are they immune from the law?
Because it is.The real problem here is that these people think of a desperate civilian migration as an "invasion."