@no1marauder saidwhat changed?
OMG that first article is from ...................................................... 2006!
Times change, Bro.
Right now, the US has approximately 8.8 million job openings. https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/job-offers
we growing more water melons?
@no1marauder, quoting Texas Governor Abbot, said -
"The only thing that we're not doing is we're not shooting people who come across the border,
because of course, the Biden administration would charge us with murder,”
-------------------
which begets the question:
What if the guards shot the migrants from American territory while the targeted migrants were on Mexican territory?
Jurisdiction problem of the new century
@no1marauder saidHe should protect his border. You may as well do a forum candy-ass question, ‘should Abbot rob a bank”:
Governor Abbott is now in open defiance of a SCOTUS order in a case he started.
Should he be arrested for contempt of court?
This is a man doing what keepers of- the-border do. Are you saying that no leader should protect the border????
I submit that I just put you on the spot
.
Marauder……………protect the border, or, not protect the border.?
Marauder????
@earl-of-trumps saidThat would be murder of foreign citizens in their own country.
@no1marauder, quoting Texas Governor Abbot, said -
"The only thing that we're not doing is we're not shooting people who come across the border,
because of course, the Biden administration would charge us with murder,”
-------------------
which begets the question:
What if the guards shot the migrants from American territory while the targeted migrants were on Mexican territory?
Jurisdiction problem of the new century
@athousandyoung saidSo the Mexicans would have to arrest and prosecute. that could be interesting.
That would be murder of foreign citizens in their own country.
@averagejoe1 saidAbbott should obey the law like everyone else.
He should protect his border. You may as well do a forum candy-ass question, ‘should Abbot rob a bank”:
This is a man doing what keepers of- the-border do. Are you saying that no leader should protect the border????
I submit that I just put you on the spot
.
Marauder……………protect the border, or, not protect the border.?
Marauder????
If he refuses to, he should be arrested.
@athousandyoung saidApparently Border Patrol agents have been getting away with doing just that for years. https://www.southernborder.org/_cross-border-shootings-by-border-patrol
That would be murder of foreign citizens in their own country.
Just say the people on the other side were "throwing rocks" and the US won't prosecute you or extradite you nor can your survivors sue the US government. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/supreme-court-rules-parents-of-slain-mexican-teenager-cannot-sue-border-agent
@earl-of-trumps saidI'm trying not to respond to your highly offensive comments because you seem to want to be friendly with me but you make it very difficult.
So the Mexicans would have to arrest and prosecute. that could be interesting.
If you really think US government agents should be murdering Mexicans in Mexico because they think they might become illegal immigrants in the future I want you to know I think you are sick in the head. If you think there will be no consequences of significance to such callous government action because Mexico fears the US you are naive.
Maybe Texans will start getting shot with all that military grade ordinance the cartels are getting from the US and the US will have to prosecute. Maybe Mexican Americans will start setting off car bombs in revenge for the murder of their relatives. A lot of things might happen in retaliation.
The fact that you, a self proclaimed Libertarian, is recommending using government agents to murder foreigners in their own country who have not even committed a crime, is truly bizaare.
There's something wrong with you Earl.
@no1marauder said
Apparently Border Patrol agents have been getting away with doing just that for years. https://www.southernborder.org/_cross-border-shootings-by-border-patrol
Just say the people on the other side were "throwing rocks" and the US won't prosecute you or extradite you nor can your survivors sue the US government. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/supreme-court-rules-parents-of-slain-mexican-teenager-cannot-sue-border-agent
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Rogelio_Martinez
Rogelio Martinez (c. 1981 – November 19, 2017) was an agent of the United States Border Patrol who died in the line of duty on November 19, 2017, in Culberson County, Texas. His cause of death remains unsolved despite a four-month investigation by the FBI.
@no1marauder
The problem with arresting Abbott is he has national guard at his disposal and governors in other states who would back him up if it came to a fight between feds and states. It could get messy and deadly and civil war #2 would begin.
@averagejoe1 saidWhat law has Biden broken?
Legal duty is to protect us and the border. He should go to his offfice this morning and do an executive order to stop the hell. He will not. Let's just stipulate for sake of argument it is all Trump's fault. That will keep Sonhouse from writing in.
So, Biden could, with a pen, stop the influx. You might say that his edict would be in conflict with some 'law' or ...[text shortened]... tire post. One simple decision, no conference needed. Biden needs to act. I cannot WAIT for Trump.
Come on, put up or shut up.
@sonhouse saidIt's already "messy"; a Governor is disobeying a SCOTUS order by threatening the use of force against federal law enforcement agents preventing them from fulfilling their legal duties. If this is allowed to stand, it will override the US Constitution's explicit provision guaranteeing Federal supremacy of laws.
@no1marauder
The problem with arresting Abbott is he has national guard at his disposal and governors in other states who would back him up if it came to a fight between feds and states. It could get messy and deadly and civil war #2 would begin.
Fortunately, Biden has the power to bring the Texas National Guard under his direct control in these circumstances:
10 U.S. Code § 12406 - National Guard in Federal service: call
Whenever—
(1)the United States, or any of the Commonwealths or possessions, is invaded or is in danger of invasion by a foreign nation;
(2)there is a rebellion or danger of a rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States; or
(3)the President is unable with the regular forces to execute the laws of the United States;
the President may call into Federal service members and units of the National Guard of any State in such numbers as he considers necessary to repel the invasion, suppress the rebellion, or execute those laws. Orders for these purposes shall be issued through the governors of the States or, in the case of the District of Columbia, through the commanding general of the National Guard of the District of Columbia.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/12406
Abbott's political stunt is a rebellion against the authority of the United States that needs to be suppressed as quickly as possible if the Constitutional system is to be preserved. The Texas National Guard should be federalized and ordered to stop interfering with Border Patrol officers; those who refuse such lawful orders should be court martialed. And if Abbott attempts to use any other State forces or issues contrary orders to the TNG, he should be taken into custody by federal marshals or the FBI.
There's an excellent article here by libertarian legal scholar Ilya Somin shredding the claim that current levels of illegal immigration constitute an "invasion" and justify States to ignore Federal government authority: https://reason.com/volokh/2024/01/25/texas-gov-greg-abbott-doubles-down-on-dangerous-claim-that-immigration-is-invasion/
"Those who cite Madison in support of equating immigration and invasion ignore the one time he directly addressed this very question: the Report of 1800, which rebutted claims that the Alien Friends Act of 1798 (which gave the president broad power to expel non-citizens) was authorized by the Invasion Clause. There, Madison explicitly rejected the idea that immigration qualifies as invasion, emphasizing that "Invasion is an operation of war.""
"[I]f illegal immigration or drug smuggling really do qualify as an "invasion," then [Article I, § 10, Clause 3 of] the Constitution [the provision cited by Abbott] authorizes states to "engage in War" as a response. In other words, Texas would be authorized to take such actions as sending its National Guard to invade Mexico, in order to attack drug cartels or forestall undocumented migration…. This absurd—and dangerous—implication of Texas's argument is an additional reason to reject it.
And Texas could then "engage in war" without any congressional authorization, and—if Abbott is right—in defiance of federal statutes to the contrary."
"If illegal migration and drug smuggling count as "invasion," we are always in a state of "invasion" and affected states can "engage in war" anytime they want. Even if there is relatively more illegal migration now than a few years ago, there have long been hundreds of thousands of cases per year. If illegal migration qualifies as an "invasion" at all, it does so all the time, not just when a Democratic president is in office or when there is a spike compared to previous years."