monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

the courts are not suppose to create laws

It's only via Supreme Court decisions that the legislative and executive branches acquired the power to determine immigration policy.

It is the court's job to interpret the constitution and other laws.

Homeland Security using eminent domain to seize private citizen property along Mexican border. No individual voices allowed when going against a bureaucracy. Can we defund these unconstitutional bureacracies yet? Including Homeland Security, IRS, EPA, BLM, FEC, etc… the list of acronyms is endless… gosh what a free America we could be.

“A man’s home is his castle,” said Tony Sedgwick, the co-owner and manager of Carmencita Ranch. “We’ve owned that since the 1950’s.”

But now Sedgwick is losing a chunk of it.

“They have taken the choicest part of my land,” he said.

It’s a valuable, not to mention scenic spot atop a high hill. And he’s losing it because of a BP surveillance tower there. It keeps a close eye on activity along the fence. It’s a mobile tower, but now that the Department of Homeland Security has taken the land, permanent towers may soon prop up. It’s all part of an effort to tighten up security along the U.S.-Mexico border.

“If your neighbor had lights shining on your property, you would call police,” Sedgwick said. “Who do I call? They are the police.”

One property owner we talked to says each acre of land can sell for $10,000. The U.S. government is offering this woman $3,000 for two acres. She says it doesn’t take a genius to realize this isn’t a good deal.

“It’s a terrible deal,” said Sedgwick.

Most property owners were hesitant to go on camera. They say they fear upsetting Border Patrol.

“What is not fair is that we don’t have a voice in all this,” said Sedgwick.

So Sedgwick is raising his voice. He says his land means the world to him. And at the end of the day, he says there’s not much more he can lose.

“It’s very difficult to go against the U.S. government,” said Sedgwick.

And difficult really an understatement in this case. If Sedgwick wants to fight this it would cost him almost $60,000 in legal fees. And even after that spending all that money there’s still no guarantee he would win.

Great to see this kind of defense of the Living Constitution approach coming from you, layman.

Trump's tax return shows that he checked "yes" when asked if he wanted $3 of his money to go toward financing presidential elections.

All a self-serving money grab, because he knew he would get part of his $3 back 11 years later when he ran for office, obviously.

Oh,this was 2013 and Obama was doing it? Well, it was perfectly fine then, right?

Immigration policy: rules, regulations and legislation about who can travel and/or move to the country.

Naturalization policy: rules, regulations and legislation about eligibility and process of becoming a citizen of the country.

The power to create immigration policy is not one of the enumerated powers of the legislative branch in the Constitution.

t's only via Supreme Court decisions that the legislative and executive branches acquired the power to determine immigration policy.

The courts do not in anyway set immigration policy and I challenge you to show me in the Constitution where it says the courts set immigration policy? I'll wait for your answer.

I can tell you are not American and I can tell you have no knowledge of our political system.

giujohn wrote:

But then that is the nature of blind hatred.

It's not "blind hatred" when the causes are there to be seen in plain sight.

giujohn wrote:

I defy each of those here in this forum who have expressed their hatred for Trump and his presidency to find one thing that he is proposing or has done that would benefit the United States of America, it's people, it's standing or security in the world...Just ONE.

I haven't expressed hatred for Trump so I hope that doesn't disqualify me from answering your exciting challenge. So, here goes: he retained David Shulkin from the previous administration and chose him to head the Department of Veterans Affairs.

Now, why don't you and your conservative spear carriers each find just one thing that Trump's done that you disagree with.

What's really great about Trump is that he so perfectly embodies the classic caricature of the "Ugly American". He's overweight, he's functionally illiterate, he watches too much TV, he eats his steaks well-done, he has no understanding of environmental science, his buildings and resorts are tacky, and he has a massive ego which is incommensurate with his limited personal accomplishments. What's to hate? Couldn't have picked a more stereotypical "Leader of the Free World" if I'd tried! No, not often do we get a leader who personifies every negative cliche about the US, all those characteristics which have inspired anti-American riots around the world! He's right out of Central Casting.

It looks like ACA topped out with a max of 18 million enrollees. Now, we may potentially lose perhaps 14 million from present (lower) enrollment, and it looks like they were bullied into acceptance by threat of penalties. It looks like the general population isn't much impressed. In fact, it looks like a lot of money spent for almost nothing in terms of public acceptance.