Go back
SCOTUS rules we follow law of TPS for Haitians

SCOTUS rules we follow law of TPS for Haitians

Debates


@Mott-The-Hoople said
What does TPS stand for?
The problem is haters wanting to define temporary.

How long is 'temporary'? Just answer the question.


@no1marauder said
Temporary Protected Status.

Here's the relevant statutory text:

(A)Periodic review
At least 60 days before end of the initial period of designation, and any extended period of designation, of a foreign state (or part thereof) under this section [b]the Attorney General, after consultation with appropriate agencies of the Government, shall review the conditions in th ...[text shortened]... ps://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1254a

at (b)(3)(A)

That's a lot of "shalls" not "cans".
So what part of TEMPORARY do you not understand?

And this is the most important part…

“ (5) Review
(A) Designations
There is no judicial review of any determination of the Attorney General with respect to the designation, or termination or extension of a designation, of a foreign state under this subsection.”

1 edit

@Mott-The-Hoople said
So what part of TEMPORARY do you not understand?

And this is the most important part…

“ (5) Review
(A) Designations
There is no judicial review of any determination of the Attorney General with respect to the designation, or termination or extension of a designation, of a foreign state under this subsection.”
So all those "shalls" mean "if they feel like it"?

Alito changed the meaning of "determination" to mean not only the "individual decision" BUT "“the chain of events leading up to a decision.” This renders the requirement of meaningful consultation with other agencies as mere surplusage.


@Suzianne said
The problem is haters wanting to define temporary.

How long is 'temporary'? Just answer the question.
It is unbelievable the word “temporary” needs to be explained to you! Imbecile thinking


@no1marauder said
So all those "shalls" mean "if they feel like it"?

Alito changed the meaning of "determination" to mean not only the "individual decision" BUT "“the chain of events leading up to a decision.” This renders the requirement of meaningful consultation with other agencies as mere surplusage.
😂 no one changed anything except for liberals trying to change temporary to permanent


@Mott-The-Hoople said
😂 no one changed anything except for liberals trying to change temporary to permanent
You obviously didn't even look at the decision.

No one made the ridiculous claim you invented. But to terminate a TPS designation, certain procedural steps are supposed to be followed according to the law (at least the way Congress wrote it).

Alito took an eraser to it though.


@no1marauder said
You obviously didn't even look at the decision.

No one made the ridiculous claim you invented. But to terminate a TPS designation, certain procedural steps are supposed to be followed according to the law (at least the way Congress wrote it).

Alito took an eraser to it though.
Show me where it says a liberal fed judge has a say in this.


@Mott-The-Hoople said
Show me where it says a liberal fed judge has a say in this.
Who determines if the Executive Branch is obeying the laws Congress passes?

Do you really need a course in Poly Sci 101?


@no1marauder said
Who determines if the Executive Branch is obeying the laws Congress passes?

Do you really need a course in Poly Sci 101?
This is what congress wrote…

““ (5) Review
(A) Designations
There is no judicial review of any determination of the Attorney General with respect to the designation, or termination or extension of a designation, of a foreign state under this subsection.””

Do you need help understanding that?

2 edits

@Mott-The-Hoople said
This is what congress wrote…

““ (5) Review
(A) Designations
There is no judicial review of any determination of the Attorney General with respect to the designation, or termination or extension of a designation, of a foreign state under this subsection.””

Do you need help understanding that?
So what? Judges are supposed to read a law in its entirety and passages in context, not feign one sentence overrides every other provision.

When a law says the Executive Branch "shall" do something, that means they have to. The next paragraph doesn't wipe that clean as the right wingers pretended here.

And it just makes sense; the AG doesn't have any special knowledge of conditions in other countries, while other departments do. That Congress would give the AG carte blanche authority without any meaningful input is contrary to common sense and the intent of the law.


@AverageJoe1 said
Bring Korean citizens here too? It only seems fair?
Do you realize that we cannot heal the world?
You are a small thinker in such matters. They have been here for 15 years.
So America should just stop trying? How does a shining city on a hill stay shining? By giving up? With great awesome power comes great awesome responsibility. While the USA was a beacon of light for freedom and democracy the world was more than happy for it to increase its power. But without that veneer of civility and leadership it devolves into a crass gimme all the stuff sand pit bully. Is that what you really want?


@Mott-The-Hoople said
It is unbelievable the word “temporary” needs to be explained to you! Imbecile thinking
Is it one millisecond? Is it five million years?

Tell us EXACTLY how long is 'temporary'?

You obviously think it's not as long as has already elapsed.

How long, exactly, is temporary?

Again, just answer the question. Don't grandstand.


@no1marauder said
So what? Judges are supposed to read a law in its entirety and passages in context, not feign one sentence overrides every other provision.

When a law says the Executive Branch "shall" do something, that means they have to. The next paragraph doesn't wipe that clean as the right wingers pretended here.

And it just makes sense; the AG doesn't have any special knowled ...[text shortened]... lanche authority without any meaningful input is contrary to common sense and the intent of the law.
So what are they supposed to do when they come to this part?

“There is no judicial review of any determination of the Attorney General with respect to the designation, or termination or extension of a designation, of a foreign state under this subsection”

[b]are they supposed to keep reviewing, or call the dogs in?


@Suzianne said
The problem is haters wanting to define temporary.

How long is 'temporary'? Just answer the question.
Are you for real? Temporary isn't measured by the calendar; it's measured by whether the emergency still exists. If the emergency is over, temporary should remain temporary.. Go back.
Put another way, if temporary last forever, which you seem to think it should, temporary is defined as long enough to solve the emergency that justified it. Stay with me here....... It is not long enough to become permanent by inertia. You probably should look up inertia.
But dont stop here.....tell us your endgame........make it Permanent ?!?!?!?!??? Would that be faaaaaaiiiirrr? There really are other wretches in the world, you know. You pickin and choosin are you??

1 edit

@Suzianne said
Is it one millisecond? Is it five million years?

Tell us EXACTLY how long is 'temporary'?

You obviously think it's not as long as has already elapsed.

How long, exactly, is temporary?

Again, just answer the question. Don't grandstand.
😂 pitiful