Please disable your Ad Blocker to better interact with this website.

Connect with us

Op-Ed: Supreme Court Says Foreign Nationals Have No Due Process Rights Here

Published

on

With the whole controversy going around about illegal aliens and their rights the Supreme Court of the United States recently took a stand and said enough. After President Donald Trump suggested that illegal aliens should be sent back to their home country without any hearing or years of litigation the Supreme Court agreed and ruled that contrary to what the liberal mainstream media and open-borders advocates might say, foreign nationals aren’t owed the same constitutional protections and rights as regular Americans.

Here is what the United States Supreme Court had to say via Lifezette:

President Donald Trump recently suggested that illegal aliens should be sent back to their countries of origin without the hearings and the years of litigation that often follow.

He branded the current process, which permits illegal aliens to repeatedly contest orders of removal, as “a mockery to good immigration policy and law and order.”

Trending: FBI: Hundreds of Agents Took Bribes From CNN, NY Times, NBC News And More – They’re Flipping!

The mainstream media wasted no time in characterizing his suggestion as a “push to end due process for illegal immigrants.” And multiple news outlets made all manner of wild claims about the so-called rights of illegal aliens. But once again, in an effort to portray the chief executive as a xenophobe, the open-borders lobby has gotten its facts backward.

Trump is actually right on the mark. Much of the current legal framework for removing illegal aliens from the United States consists of badly reasoned federal district-court decisions, ridiculous settlement agreements, and politically motivated policy decisions.

The open-borders lobby and its handmaidens in the mainstream media have consistently represented this hodgepodge as a clear articulation of “affirmative rights.”

But that representation is misleading.

Illegal aliens are entitled to considerably less immigration due process than their advocates would have us believe.

And the Supreme Court has been remarkably consistent on this point over the years:

It is not within the province of the courts to order the admission of foreigners who have no formal, legal connection to the United States. “As to such persons, the decisions of executive or administrative officers, acting within powers expressly conferred by Congress, are due process of law.” (Murray’s Lessee v. Hoboken Land and Improvement Co.; Hilton v. Merritt)

“It is an accepted maxim of international law that every sovereign nation has the power, as inherent in sovereignty and essential to self-preservation, to forbid the entrance of foreigners within its dominions or to admit them only in such cases and upon such conditions as it may see fit to prescribe.” (Ekiu v. United States)

The United States need only provide an alien with a judicial trial when charging them with a crime and seeking a punitive sentence. (Wong Wing v. United States)
“Whatever the rule may be concerning deportation of persons who have gained entry into the United States, it is not within the province of any court, unless expressly authorized by law, to review the determination of the political branch of the government to exclude a given alien.” (Knauff v. Shaughnessy)

Unadmitted, nonresident aliens have no right of entry to the United States as non-immigrants, or otherwise. (Kleindienst v. Mandel)

What does this all mean? That foreign nationals outside our borders are not owed any due process whatsoever. The United States may exclude them at will. It also means that illegal aliens apprehended within the United States are entitled only to such due process as Congress accords them.

Congress could act to streamline their removal and provide the type of no-hearing framework that the president has suggested. In fact, it has already done so for certain classes of aliens:

Using a process called administrative removal, the government may, without any hearing, remove illegal aliens who have been convicted of an aggravated felony.

Similarly, aliens found inadmissible to the United States upon arriving at the border may be repatriated without a hearing, employing a process called expedited removal.

Aliens who re-enter the U.S. after having been previously deported may also be removed without a hearing, utilizing a process called reinstatement of removal.

What about all of those asylum applications that illegal aliens supposedly have a right to file? As the Supreme Court made clear in INS v. Cardoza Fonseca, asylum is a discretionary form of relief. The United States is not obligated to grant asylum to anyone, even those who clearly qualify for it.

Because of this, Congress could pass legislation prohibiting those unlawfully present in the U.S. from filing asylum applications.

Far from “pushing to abolish due process for illegal aliens,” Trump is posing a legitimate question. It’s time for Americans to start asking just how many of our precious tax dollars should be spent providing illegal aliens with expensive immigration hearings to which they are clearly not entitled.”

You might be asking what all this might mean, simple. Just like with any other nation on earth, foreign nationals outside our borders are not owed any due process whatsoever. The United States has the right to exclude any foreign nation they please from constitutional protection.

But what’s probably even more interesting about this is that it also means that illegal aliens apprehended within the United States are entitled only to such due process under the constitution if Congress formally gives them the rights.

In fact, Congress can go as far as to streamline the removal of illegal aliens without any hearing whatsoever, just as the president has previously suggested. Even asylum seekers all of which we as a nation aren’t obligated to take in.

The Supreme Court is right on, it’s asinine to even believe for one second that foreign nationals who broke the law in order to come here to the United States would ever be protected by our nation’s laws. Only Liberals could come up with a talking point so foolish, and only the week minded left could buy into it.

Isn’t it funny how the President who the left calls an idiot and mentally handicapped on a regular basis seems to know more about U.S. Law than the “famed” constitutional law scholar that was Barack Hussein Obama?

 

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please hover over that comment, click the ∨ icon, and mark it as spam. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.

Trending Now on Right Wing News


Trump About To Drop Presidential Hammer On Obama For Attempting To Overtake Investigation

Published

on

...

* By

More and more is coming out about Spygate. The Obama administration tried to take over the FBI’s investigation of the Trump campaign, according to The Hill’s John Solomon. He covered it last night on Hannity’s show and then wrote on it extensively at The Hill. Solomon claims that the FBI began spying on members of the Trump campaign to gather the intelligence that ultimately justified the collusion investigation, weeks or even months before the FBI had a formal predicate. If true, the whole thing was cooked up and premeditated. It was indeed a pre-planned coup and President Trump is about to drop the presidential hammer on all of them.

“That’s very important. The rules say you can’t use sources until you have a predicated investigation. The predication is July 31, 2016,” Solomon told Hannity. The investigative reporter said he had sources and documents backing up his claim that he would be making public in his report in The Hill on Friday and he did just that.

Solomon started off his well-researched piece with this:

“The bridge to the Russia investigation wasn’t erected in Moscow during the summer of the 2016 election.”

“It originated earlier, 1,700 miles away in London, where foreign figures contacted Trump campaign advisers and provided the FBI with hearsay allegations of Trump-Russia collusion, bureau documents and interviews of government insiders reveal. These contacts in spring 2016 — some from trusted intelligence sources, others from Hillary Clinton supporters — occurred well before FBI headquarters authorized an official counterintelligence investigation on July 31, 2016.”

“The new timeline makes one wonder: Did the FBI follow its rules governing informants?”

A very good question and of course the answer is a resounding “no.”

Solomon stressed that informants were making contacts with the Trump officials and providing information to the FBI “much, much earlier than July 31.” Then he drops the bombshell that according to the FBI, the White House and Obama wanted to take over the whole investigation. Here is where that led on Sean Hannity’s show last night:

John Solomon: I’m putting finishing touches on a column that I think will come out tomorrow. And it will reveal two really important things. The efforts to begin targeting and reaching out to Trump campaign officials to gain intelligence on Russia that would ultimately justify the investigation began weeks and maybe months before the FBI had a formal predicate. And that’s very important the rules say you can’t use sources until you have a predicated investigation. The investigation is July 31, 2016. My sources and documents that I will be able to make public tomorrow will show that there were contacts going on by people identified as informers, informants, people who provided information began much, much earlier than July 31st. That’s the first part. The second part is as the investigation was just starting to ramp up there are internal FBI documents showing FBI agents talking about the White House trying to take over the investigation. Fears that the Justice Department were going to leak for political reasons and their own personal fear.

Sean Hannity: Slow down. When you say the White House you mean the Obama White House- they were attempting to take over the investigation.

John Solomon: That’s what these messages say.

Sean Hannity: These are FBI messages and this is the Obama White House. How high up are we talking about here?

John Solomon: We don’t know the messages are just what they are.

Solomon covers in the second part of his report the internal FBI communications between former counterintelligence agent Peter Strzok, his mistress Lisa Page and others discussing how the Obama White House was trying to take over the investigation. “The words ‘the White House is running this’ are clear in the text message,” Solomon told Hannity, adding that “the FBI agents who opened this case feared that Barack Obama was weak on national security and wouldn’t do what they needed for Russia.” Wowzers. He went on to say, “The political elements of the administration were trying to intrude on the FBI investigation.”

Solomon’s report does not sync with what former Obama deputy national security adviser Ben Rhodes wrote about the investigation in his new book “The World as It Is,” which is set to be published next week by Random House. Well, duh. Rhodes is lying. That’s what he is good at and has done from the beginning. In his book, Rhodes claims that Obama didn’t know there was an FBI investigation into the Trump campaign’s possible contacts with Russia until he left office. That’s just laughable. Rhodes said that “neither he nor Mr. Obama knew at that time that there was an F.B.I. investigation,” according to the New York Times, which obtained an advance copy of the book. Way to cover your collective backsides. No one believes that.

The failed novelist claims in the book that he learned about the FBI investigation from news reports after he left office. Gee, that is the same excuse Obama used multiple times during his presidency. Tell a lie often enough, these guys really think Americans are gullible and stupid. Rhodes is simply insulting our intelligence here. I wouldn’t buy his book to use as a doorstop.

No collusion between President Trump and Russia has ever been proven because it does not exist. The only ones gaining from this are Mueller and his team who are getting paid a ton to try and tie the President’s hands to keep him from doing his job. Taxpayers have wasted almost $17 million on the Russia probe since Mueller took over in 2017, according to a spending report just released by the DOJ. About $10 million was spent in the five months between October 2017 and March 2018 alone. That includes $4.5 million in hefty salaries for Mueller’s team of Trump-hating Democratic attorneys and another $5.5 million spent on random expenses.

Solomon’s report gives justification to President Trump to stop this nonsense.

Do you think Trump should swing the hammer down hard?

What is your opinion of this situation?

Write your answer below and share to a friend who is on the same page.

Continue Reading

Melania Unveils This Year’s White House Christmas Decorations That Libs Are SURE To Hate

Published

on

...

* By

Melania Trump’s first year in office was marked by immense criticism of our incredible first lady, who in the eyes of the Trump family’s numerous detractors, Melania could do nothing right, or at least as well as her predecessor, Michelle Obama. This included her full Christmas decor plan, which was stunning in silver and white, and a beautiful modern take on the same tired style that Michelle un-creatively came up with.

This year’s decorations will likely be no different, if not worse.

Last year, liberals claimed she decked the halls in depression and gloom, likening it to looking more like a haunted house than a holiday home. So, what will they say about this year’s new look?

Chicks On The Right reports:

FLOTUS doesn’t just slay on the fashion front. Her decorating skills are off the charts. (Yes, yes– I know she didn’t do this by herself, but if you really believe she didn’t have a say, you’re nuuuuuuuuuuuuts.)

ANYWHO. She finally unveiled this year’s White House Christmas decorations, and they’re GORGEOUS.

You have no idea how much I want to stroll through those halls of beautifully decorated trees. Oh well. I’ll have to settle for the aisles of Hobby Lobby.

It all looks great. I’m obsessed. TY, that is all.

Continue Reading




Latest Articles

Become an insider!

Thank you for your interest in receiving the Right Wing News newsletter. To subscribe, please submit your email address below.

Send this to a friend