Trump vowed to have military replace the wall

[Revoltingest]

Those are the ones I call anti-American. I classify fanatics as anti-American.

So if one is too pro-Americastanian, one becomes "anti-", eh.
This reminds me of right wing types I know who claim that
liberals hate Americastan. You extremists are so alike.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Ok let's visit short term history a bit for starters

Obama Did Not Suspend Posse Comitatus to Put Troops on Mexico Border

One more...

New Requirements for a New Challenge: The Military’s Role in Border Security - HOMELAND SECURITY AFFAIRS

Those both look like they support my claims. Unless you can find a quote to the contrary in them.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I observe that soldiers arrest & detain people in various conflicts.

In wars perhaps. This is not an armed conflict. All I can tell you is what I have found and heard. It appears that the military would not have such a right on our borders in a time of peace.

ETA: Please note I am not pro-open borders. But the president still must follow the rule of law when he tries to oppose illegal immigration.

 

[Revoltingest]

In wars perhaps.

And in police actions.

This is not an armed conflict.

Is that legally significant?

All I can tell you is what I have found and heard. It appears that the military would not have such a right on our borders in a time of peace.

Not acting against citizens.
But against invading illegals, very likely.

ETA: Please note I am not pro-open borders. But the president still must follow the rule of law when he tries to oppose illegal immigration.

I agree.

 

[Subduction Zone]

And in police actions.

Is that legally significant?

Not acting against citizens.
But against invading illegals, very likely.

I agree.

All the source that I can find say that they cannot act in this way. I know that I am not a valid source when it comes to this argument that is why I look for supporting sources. Can you find any?

 

[sun rise]

So if one is too pro-Americastanian, one becomes "anti-", eh.
This reminds me of right wing types I know who claim that
liberals hate Americastan. You extremists are so alike.

My yardstick is the same for patriots, Christians, Muslims and various political positions. There's a psychological condition that causes people to slip from being pro something to be fanatics whose actions undermine what they think they're in favor of.

 

[columbus]

It would be easy to justify arresting illegals trying to breach the border.

Why is it so easy for people to justify arresting desperate Mexicans trying to get a job, but arresting the US citizens who give away jobs to undocumented immigrants is too difficult?

I believe that it's because those illegal immigrants are so profitable.
Tom

 

[idav]

Why is it so easy for people to justify arresting desperate Mexicans trying to get a job, but arresting the US citizens who give away jobs to undocumented immigrants is too difficult?

I believe that it's because those illegal immigrants are so profitable.
Tom

It is a bit hypocritical for a person to be so against giving immigrants jobs but more than willing to send jobs to China.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Why is it so easy for people to justify arresting desperate Mexicans trying to get a job, but arresting the US citizens who give away jobs to undocumented immigrants is too difficult?

I believe that it's because those illegal immigrants are so profitable.
Tom

it should be easy to force businesses to account for who they hire. If a name and social security number do not match then there should be no reduction from profits for that paid income.

 

[Revoltingest]

All the source that I can find say that they cannot act in this way. I know that I am not a valid source when it comes to this argument that is why I look for supporting sources. Can you find any?

I heard that both Bush & Obama called out the National Guard for this purpose.
This precedent would suggest legality.

 

[Revoltingest]

My yardstick is the same for patriots, Christians, Muslims and various political positions. There's a psychological condition that causes people to slip from being pro something to be fanatics whose actions undermine what they think they're in favor of.

People will pursue agendas which have unintended consequences
running counter to their intention. But to brand someone as
"anti-Americastanian" would normally speak to the goal.

 

[Revoltingest]

Why is it so easy for people to justify arresting desperate Mexicans trying to get a job, but arresting the US citizens who give away jobs to undocumented immigrants is too difficult?

I believe that it's because those illegal immigrants are so profitable.
Tom

You always oppose businesses hiring illegals because this incentivizes illegal entry,
with nary a peep about government giving them benefits which do exactly the same.
But this isn't about your personal agendas, just the legality & efficacy of using the
military to enforce border security.
Btw, the illegals are also very attractive as voters to Democrats, hence their support
for a porous southern border, & keeping illegals here.

 

[Stanyon]

Yeah, just what we needed - potential terrorist anti-American groups using the border as a free fire zone.

"potential terrorist anti- American groups" - who sold you that fear mongering bill of goods?

 

[Subduction Zone]

I heard that both Bush & Obama called out the National Guard for this purpose.
This precedent would suggest legality.

Yes, but they did no arrests, all they were good for was extra eyes on the border.

 

[Shad]

Order was signed tonight (Wednesday) along with supposedly some Governors signing off. I expect Cali is filing a lawsuit and some judge will fail to block it

 

[Revoltingest]

Yes, but they did no arrests, all they were good for was extra eyes on the border.

Since the military captures prisoners during armed conflict,
I'd expect them to be able to arrest people entering illegally.

I'm not claiming expertise. But over many decades I notice
that a great many questionable things are or become legal.
It's generally a matter of political will, more than law.

 

[metis]

"Illegals" can't vote and the NG cannot arrest those crossing the border.

Wanna stop most illegal immigration? Here's how. Update E-Verify, and then arrest any employers that hire the "illegals" and give these employers VERY hefty fines matched with some prison time.

So, why don't the Pubs wanna do that? Guess.

 

[Revoltingest]

"Illegals" can't vote and the NG cannot arrest those crossing the border.

Wanna stop most illegal immigration? Here's how. Update E-Verify, and then arrest any employers that hire the "illegals" and give these employers VERY hefty fines matched with some prison time.

So, why don't the Pubs wanna do that? Guess.

You might also ask why Democrats give illegals benefits & sanctuary.
You could say it's out of kindness, generosity, & belief that there should be no borders.
But it could also be that they see illegals as a massive voting block for the party.
When Dems controlled the presidency & Congress, why didn't they implement E-Verify?

I don't see much ideological purity on either side.

 

[averageJOE]

Yeah, but who's really going to say no? Typically that is not what is done - they do whatever he wants. Anyone that wouldn't help him protect the border is politically dead... career over... I promise you.

Some governors will 100% be all for it. Some won't be able to (because they will be on a mandatory stand down coming off deployments). Some will flat out say no. And others will be strong armed into it. What I find interesting is that Texas and Arizona governors are 100% on board for this. However, they have the absolute authority to deploy their own National Guard to their own boarders any time they want. Notice how they are not? It seems it's only a big enough problem if Washington is willing to front the bill for this.

 

[averageJOE]

I heard that both Bush & Obama called out the National Guard for this purpose.
This precedent would suggest legality.

Wasn't right then, and isn't right now. Especially now, being that illegal boarder crossing is down much lower than it was then.