Seasons Greetings

Flash News: Diego Maradona, gifted Argentine soccer legend, died on Wednesday from a heart attack     - | -     Trump pardons former national security adviser Michael Flynn     - | -     This Is What GOP Feared. Now that Trump Has Governed with Executive Orders, Dems Plan to Do Same      - | -     Man Throwing 'Incendiary Devices' at ICE Detention Center Is Killed in Attack      - | -     Mueller Hearing Pushed Back a Week to Allow More Time for Him to Answer Questions      - | -     Trump Tells 4 Congresswomen of Color to 'Go Back' to 'Crime-Infested' Countries They Came From      - | -     GOP Congressman Invokes 'The Deep State'

National News

Supreme Court Will Hear Case Questioning Trump's Use of Military Funds for Border Wall

viewsViews 196

Supreme Court Will Hear Case Questioning Trump's Use of Military Funds for Border Wall

2020-10-20 18:04:34

By Laura Tucker, Staff writer; Image: Section of border wall completed in 2017 (Image source:DickLyon via Wikimedia Commons)

Donald Trump's immigration policies are still being questioned. He has a few that are still bouncing around through the court system. The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to hear two of them. 

The two cases won't be heard right away, so it's expected that the cases will hit the high court after Amy Coney Barrett is confirmed, going on the assumption that she will be. This will give the conservatives a 6-3 majority.

Both of the cases that will be heard have already been decided in lower courts. They both also deal with his desire to prevent migration from Central America into the United States at the U.S./Mexico border. The rulings went against the Trump administration.

These cases, more or less, date back five years ago — this is when Trump first started to discuss migrants crossing the border, insisting that Mexico wasn't "sending the best."

Trump's first discussed effort to control migration was to build a wall at the border. He insisted while campaigning in 2016 that he would make Mexico pay for it — it never happened.

He then insisted taxpayers would pay for it — but that didn't go well either, as he ended up in a fight with Congress over getting the money for the wall. He even closed the government, trying to force Congress to cough up the cash.

Eventually, Congress ponied up $1.3 billion, but it was short of the $5 billion Trump wanted. He declared a national emergency at the border, then moved $2.5 billion in funding that Congress appropriated for defense and military to his wall project.

A three-judge panel of the 9th circuit Court of Appeals issued a 2-1 ruling that moving the funding violated the Appropriations Clause of the Constitution, which delegates sole power to Congress.

The Supreme Court heard the case in July and did not block Trump from using Defense funds for his border wall project. The four liberal justices dissented, but with the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, it leaves only three.

The other case the justices agreed to hear is another of Trump's immigration policies. Known as Migrant Protection Protocols, it puts a non-physical barrier between the U.S. and those seeking asylum. The policy forces asylum-seekers to stay in Mexico while their cases are heard in court in the U.S.

Lower federal courts in California ruled the asylum-seeker policy violated U.S. immigration law and contravenes international human rights norms. They ordered the administration to halt the program.

In March the Supreme Court allowed the Trump administration to continue with the policy while it appealed the ruling of the lower courts.

The Trump administration has argued that the "MPP" has helped curb migration at the border since it was implemented in early 2019 by the Department of Homeland Security. The department's figures show that from March, more than 60,000 asylum-seekers had been blocked.

The administration told the eight justices that the program created from the policy was used to "process tens of thousands of aliens applying for asylum ... without the need to detain the applicants in the United States during the weeks and months it takes to process their applications."

Critics of the policy have referred to it as cruel and insist it endangers the lives of those seeking asylum because they are fleeing violence, abuse, and other dangerous situations. 

Senators will not know how Barrett will rule on these cases until the cases are before the Supreme Court. She would not give any hint as to how she'll decide a number of cases that are expected to come before the justices in the months to come.

Post Your Comment

Most Recent News

Basketball: Nets-Warriors and Lakers-Clippers on Opening Night Dec. 22, Five Christmas Day Games Highlight Start of 2020-21 NBA Season

2 December, 2020

  -Posted by Daniel Mogollon, Staff Writer; Image: Los Angeles Lakers LeBron James and Kawhi Leonard of the Los Angeles Clippers. (Image Source: Kirby Lee / USA Today Sports) NEW......More

NFL and NFLPA COVID-19 Monitoring Testing Results

2 December, 2020

  -Posted by Daniel Mogollon, Staff Writer; Image: COVID-19 forces Robert Griffin III and Gus Edwards into starting roles for the Baltimore Ravens in Week 12. (Image Source: Scott Taetsch......More

Premier League: Arsenal's Mikel Arteta Backs Temporary Substitutions for Concussions After David Luiz Clash

2 December, 2020

  Arteta backs temporary substitutions for concussions after Luiz clash  ...More