Comments by "Scott Farner" (@scottfarner5100) on "Dem Lawmaker Blasts House Republicans For 'Unconstitutional' Impeachment Of DHS Sec. Mayorkas" video.

  1. 5
  2. 2
  3. 2
  4. 2
  5. 1
  6. 1
  7. 1
  8. 1
  9. 1
  10. 1
  11. Due to false claims of voter fraud, asylee’s not showing up for court, criminal activity, and just right wing claims used to breed hate. The Right has unilaterally decided to undermine legal asylum. And have dubbed it as an open border policy and fed that buzz word to a right wing base who have no understanding of immigration laws. Trumps zero tolerance policy to separate children, Remain in Mexico, Title 42. All attempts to stop legal asylum under US laws that have been in place for over 40 years. This attempt have pushed immigrants away from ports of entry to crossing between. Cartels and traffickers have now taken advantage of that and overwhelmed border patrol. Open borders did not cause this crisis. Yet now using this hate filled rhetoric to trigger a base that is now openly full of hate on immigrants and this hate is now fed by GOP governors feeding off of that for votes from GOP supporters who immoral views support separating children as a deterrent, use of lethal force, lying to immigrants to ship them to dem cities to stick it to libs, incarceration, placing them in the hands of traffickers. All because of immigrants who may or may not have violated a misdemeanor that carries a civil penalty. And the Right are doing nothing to help fix the problem. Trumps immoral policies were violating US law by snatching children from legal asylum seeks as a deterrent. Harris was never appointed as border czar. There are no 85000 missing children and no they cannot use their drivers license to vote. The Right does nothing but lie.
    1
  12. 1
  13. "Congress’s determination that place of entry not be disqualifying to an application for asylum is consistent with the treaty obligations underlying §1158’s asylum provisions. Congress enacted the Refugee Act of 1980, including 8 U.S.C. §1158, “to bring United States refugee law into conformance with the 1967 United Nations Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees, 19 U.S.T. 6223, T.I.A.S. No. 6577, to which the United States acceded in 1968.” Because the Protocol is not “self-executing,” it “does not have the force of law in American courts.” Khan v. Holder, 584 F.3d 773, 783 (9th Cir. 2009). Nonetheless, it provides “a useful guide in determining congressional intent in enacting the Refugee Act.” Id.(citation omitted); see also Cardoza-Fonseca, 480 U.S. at 436-37.Of particular relevance here, Article 31of the Protocol provides: The Contracting States shall not impose penalties, on account of their illegal entry or presence, on refugees who, coming directly from a territory where their life or freedom was threatened in the sense of [A]rticle 1, enter or are present in their territory without authorization, provided they present themselves without delay to the authorities and show good cause for their illegal entry or presence.19 U.S.T. at 6275 (emphasis added).Considering the text and structure of the statute, as well as the interpretive guide of the U.N. Protocol, reveals Congress’s unambiguous intent. The failure to comply with entry requirements such as arriving at a designated port of entry should bear little, if any, weight in the asylum process. The Rule reaches the opposite result by adopting a categorical bar based solely “[a]n alien present in the United States who has not been admitted or who arrives in the United States (whether or not at a designated port of arrival and including an alien who is brought to the United States after having been interdicted in international or United States waters) shall be deemed for purposes of this chapter an applicant for admission.” Inadmissible aliens are generally placed in full removal proceedings"
    1
  14. 1