Below is my column on Fox.com on the two immigration decisions yesterday from the Supreme Court. One of the cases turned on a Clintonesque debate of what the meaning of “in” is. In the end, however, the Court went “all in” with executive authority over immigration policy.
Here is the column:
“In ordinary speech, no one would say that a person ‘arrives in’ a place … before the person enters that place.”
Those words may seem ripped from the pages of Dr. Seuss but they are taken from the 6-3 majority opinion of Justice Samuel Alito in Mullin v. Al Otro Lado. They captured the lost-in-translation character of the Court’s fight over whether undocumented persons must be physically present in the United States to make an asylum claim. In one of a pair of major immigration wins for the Trump Administration, the Court ruled that asylum seekers who are stopped on the other side of the Southern border are not present in the United States. If treated as inside the country despite being outside it, these individuals would be allowed to enter and remain while their asylum claims are pending.
The case highlights the lengths to which the Biden Administration went to facilitate the entry of undocumented persons into the country. It rescinded a policy of “metering” that was put into place by the Obama Administration (and later restored and expanded by the Trump Administration).
In seeking to bar Trump from enforcing the same policy as the Obama Administration, the three liberal justices sounded positively Clintonesque in debating what the meaning of “in” is. Justice Sonia Sotomayor denounced the majority’s “illogical interpretation is driven almost entirely by a fixation on a single word: ‘in.’ Words, however, must be read in context and with attention to how they fit into the statute as a whole.”
In their view, “contextual” reading means that you can be “in” the United States without actually being “in” the United States.
The sharp disagreement in the opinions spilled over to the release of the opinions. Justice Alito read a summary of his opinion, followed by a more lengthy reading by Justice Sotomayor of her dissent. The stinging dissent produced a rare rebuttal from the bench by Alito, who was surprised by the extended comments and said that, if he had not been blindsided, he would have said more, including how “the policy in question was adopted by two very different administrations.”
The court also delivered a major victory in Mullin v. Doe, upholding the right of the Administration to strip more than 356,000 Syrian and Haitian immigrants of temporary protection status. Again, lower courts afforded the Obama and Biden Administrations greater leeway in granting such status than Trump in rescinding it.
The combination of the two opinions offers significant advances for the Administration in addressing millions of undocumented persons in this country.
In her dissent in Mullin, Sotomayor invoked the image of the voyage of the M. S. St. Louis, where Jews fleeing Nazi Germany were not allowed entry in various countries only to be returned to Germany, where many died in the Holocaust.
The problem with the analogy is that all of those on the St. Louis were demonstrably in flight from lethal persecution. Virtually all of the asylum claims made at our borders are rejected as unsupported or invalid. Immigration groups hand out material across the border, coaching immigrants to claim asylum status to guarantee that they can stay in the country for years before any final adjudication can be made. The acceptance rate of these claims is currently below five percent.
The question is how to limit such constructive entries if being “in” the United States does not require actually being in the United States. More importantly, absent a clear legal basis for such constructive entries, it is not clear why courts should be able to dictate such policies. The control of our borders has long been an area marked by heavy deference to the Executive Branch. During the Biden Administration, courts often embraced that discretion as the Administration allowed over ten million unvetted immigrants to enter.
Trump was elected on the pledge to reverse these policies by using the same discretion that his predecessor employed to open the border.
The dissent shows how untethered these opinions are from not just “ordinary speech,” but principles of judicial restraint. Placing these disputes in “context” is a liberating construct that allows a court to read the words “arrives in the United States” to include those outside of the United States. It also gives a glimpse at the likely approach of the new expanded Supreme Court that Democrats are pledging if they regain power.
The decisions in Mullin v. Doe and Mullin v. Al Otro Lado will not erase the backlog in immigration cases or remove millions of unvetted immigrants. That will require both an expansion of our immigration courts and real reforms to further streamline the removal process. However, in two 6-3 opinions, the Administration regained substantial authority in the management of our borders.
Jonathan Turley is a law professor and the New York Times best-selling author of “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution.”
OT, James Carville disavows Mamdani-backed candidate Darializa Avila Chevalier: ‘Start your own party’
https://nypost.com/2026/06/26/us-news/james-carville-disavows-mamdani-backed-candidate-darializa-avila-chevalier/
There is no doubt that if seating Darializa Avila Chevalier with the Dems was the difference between the Dems and the Repubs controlling the House, the two-faced, opportunist, James Carvile would be kissing Chevalier’s a$$ on the capitol steps at high noon on the Fourth of July to make sure she was a Dem.
Carvile may be right that he is just “an old washed-up” political hack, but with the remarks he made about Israeli governmental policy, and if the Israeli lobby stays true to form, they will see to it that he is indeed washed-up and erased.
-g
What are they going to do, blackmail him? Did Epstein get to him too?
“James Carville disavows Mamdani-backed candidate”
Ol’ Jimmy is about a decade late and several billion bucks short with that lame attempt to disavow policies that he and his fellow Dems have been countenancing for a least that long. Sorry, Jimmy, those are your very own commies, and most of us (hopefully even some of the fools who have been voting “D” on reflex) are well aware of it.
What just transpired will be a pipe dream if dems ever regain majority control. The modern DNC are socialists/communists (thanks, Obama and Soros). That is all. STOP voting for them if you value freedom or believe in our Constitution and laws, period, and stop coddling your far too old ‘children’. Your imagined healthy and sane view of the left is an illusion in 2026, and always has been; at the least since 2008. I wanted to believe in hope too, I voted for Obama the first time.
I am looking at you, older, vote blue no matter who folks with terminal TDS; the younger folks are too pampered and stupid to even know what they are doing and creating for their future (which once again brings the abdication of parents on their part into question, but that is a digression). Stop voting for dems out of a fantasy delusion, especially in blue places.
And the recent treatment of Scot Presler in SD – draining the swamp means draining the entire swamp.
In her dissent in Mullin, Sotomayor invoked the image of the voyage of the M. S. St. Louis, where Jews fleeing Nazi Germany were not allowed entry in various countries only to be returned to Germany, where many died in the Holocaust.
There is a pronounced intellectual vacuity on the left. The only thing they know of history is Nazi Germany. The only names and comparisons they use to denounce people with whom they disagree is Nazi Germany. This is a consequence of their failure to obtain an actual education.
Supreme Court justices are supposed to be better. But here we are. Leftist Supreme Court justices suffer from the same lack of sophistication.
P.S. The biggest problem with always comparing your ideological opponents to Nazis is that that’s as high as you can go. It falls flat because it doesn’t stand up to the facts, but you’ve got nowhere else to go.
One of the biggest problems with the left is their comparison is garbage.
Many of those on the St. Louis returned to Europe only to die in Nazi Gas Chambers.
US Deportees are returning to the country they came from – socialist countries that according to the left are utopias.
We KNOW Why Jews fled Germany. But why have possibly as many as 20M illegal immigrants Come to the US – a place that according to the left is a giant H311hole ?
Oh, really, these are immigrants? Everyone has drunk the coolaide.
Is there a dept of illegal migration? 😏
PT is a democrat. I always forget that.
Thanks truly
“The only thing they know of history is Nazi Germany. ”
Is that the only thing they know, or the only thing that they think they can sell the public that is decidedly worse than the changes they want to make?
I wonder how Justice Sotomayor would view “in” in terms of penetration? It seems the law fully understands the meaning of being “in” even when it is slight.
At her weight, “slight” might be the maximum potential for penetration…
Trump and his supporters are the ones who should be ashamed of themselves.
But why not the monkeys redefining words like ‘arrive’? No shame for them?
For what ? Following the law ?
John Say,
Exactly!
I remember a time long in the past. POWs and such disembarked a flight, down the steps, fell to knees, kissed the ground sobbing.
They were not following the law. That’s the point. The Trump administration did not follow statutory procedures for TPS review. It’s a requirement set by law. So no they were not “following the law.”
It’s a requirement set by law under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), specifically 8 U.S.C. § 1254a(b)(1), which explicitly mandates:
“The Attorney General [Secretary of Homeland Security] may designate a foreign state… only after consultation with appropriate agencies of the Government…”
The administration completely bypassed these mandatory agency consultations regarding the catastrophic conditions on the ground.
^^^this is X/George, afraid to show his face after getting slam-dunked again yesterday.
You would think he/sheeeeit would be use to it by now?!
If X were a lawyer he would know how to cite correctly. Not only does his citation have nothing to do with anything (biden, NOT Trump, granted TPS status to them in 2021; before that, it was OBAMA in 2010), X needs to READ and COMPREHEND (b)(3)(B) which talks about 60-day time frame for ending the designation. Trump has done nothing so far, so I am sure his staff is preparing 60-day notice.
X, as usual, has no idea what he is talking about
No, Democrats should. Democrats were obviously pushing for legal outcome based on emotion and feelings, as all they can cite is “compassion”, yet that is not how a court, especially the Supreme Court, is supposed to rule, they are entrusted to rule solely on the U.S. Constitution and the laws of the land. Regarding “compassion”, the modern day push by Dems to open the borders has provided an utter lack compassion for American citizens, the 250K children that were disappeared into human trafficking, the Women and children raped and killed by illegals, the taxpayers fleeced out of welfare benefits and through fraud and the workers who experienced downward pressure on wages has been an utter act of violence on American citizens that laced empathy and compassion. Democrats should be ashamed at the destruction they have wrought upon America!
Clinton is not president now.
And Hillary NEVER will be, Praise God!
Amen
Trump has said a lot of things in bad taste.
Trump should lose his job as president.
Bill Clinton DID something in bad taste with a cigar.
And dont forget all those trips on the Lolita Express.
Monica said Bill Clinton left a bad taste in her mouth.
You’re an immigrant? Thanks for the ot reminder of what never happened.
Trump FALSELY claimed ‘Haitians were eating cats and dogs’. Then he blew up at ABC moderators when they pointed out there was no proof of that. Yet we’re supposed to believe yesterday’s decision carried no racial animosity.
and where did TRump get that info? from the FALSELY-created media stories.
False created RIGHTWING news stories.
Those stories were the opposite side of tge media coin from Russia, Russia, Russia. Virtually all news media in this country is junk.
But there was evidence. Trump didn’t make it up. It started elsewhere and there was social media and police investigations.
ABC? and you’re trying to prove a negative?
I swear, leftys just love to say “show me your papers”.
even if there is no proof found, you want to use it as proof of something. something you strongly desire it to prove.
Because for you, if it doesn’t prove it, you might start to question all your decision making and that cannot happen.
But to tie such a story to proof of racism is beyond the pale and is race-baiting.
With such twists, I now know where you stand on all subjects.
Even if what you say is true, Racial animosity has NOTHING to do with deciding a question of law as it relates to immigration.
He will, in about 2.6 years. Have a nice day.
People had the choice between Trump and Harris.
They knew all your claims.
The voted for him anyway.
Why ?
Because you have told so many lies – no one beleives you.
No, Harris lost because Trump lied harder and more often. The lying is not the problem. It’s who lied better.
Harris lost because she was a low IQ unqualified candidate that has gotten to her place in the Democratic Party by being racially qualified, estrogen qualified and riding her HootyHooooo. She didn’t even garner 1% in her own party primaries, she’s an idiot.
And a Drunk!
We are a nation almost equally divided politically by how votes are measured. We govern ourselves by a 2, 4, and 6 years election cycle. Historically we have valued the concept of a cultural melting pot. With concern that the rate of pour helps or hurts the batch. It echos Agamemnon from the Illiad: “What have you done for me lately?”that build and election cycle is juxtaposed against something more like oceanography-the international impulse of “humanitarian” mass migration. I’ll bet Nigel Farage, among others, is going over Mullin v Doe and Mullin v Otro Lado with a fine tooth comb. What we have are two Supreme court textualist decisions that say Article ll is a strong hand on the policy valve that controls the pour. Including reducing the previous pour without judicial review of non constitutional claims. That puts on our backs what happens in the voting booth at midterms, 2028 and beyond.
Ha Ha. A very old 45rpm on my Wurlitzer jukebox reminds me of Tren D’Aragua (and other illegals) in America:
“I’m in with the In crowd, I go where the In crowd goes
I’m in with the In crowd and I know what the In crowd knows
Anytime of the year, don’t you hear? Dressing fine, making time
We breeze up and down the street, we get respect from the people we meet
“They make way day or night, they know the In crowd is out of sight
I’m In with the In crowd…
We make every minute count, our share is always the biggest come out
Other guys imitate us, but the original is still the greatest, In crowd
Any time of the year, don’t you hear? Spendin’ cash, talkin’ trash
I’ll show you a real good time, come on with me
Leave your troubles behind
I don’t care where you’ve been, you ain’t been nowhere
Till you’ve been In”
by Billy Page/’Dobie Gray
prensamercosur.org/2024/07/04/el-tren-de-aragua-la-banda-criminal-venezolana-que-preocupa-a-los-gobiernos-sudamericanos/
https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-highlights-nationwide-crackdown-tren-de-aragua
the old playground threat makes it to the border, “Are you in or are you out?”
“A very old 45rpm…”
Hey, go easy on that “very old” stuff wouldya? I was 14 when “The In Crowd” was on top of the charts. Great song. “Drift Away” was even better – one of my all time favorites. Not just Gray’s version, a St. Louis band named Stanley Steamer from Kenny Rogers’ stable led by Warren Hartman and Holly Vaughn did it even better. I guess that’s sufficient musical trivia from this “very old” guy…
Hate won and as normal Turley is on the side of hate.
Wrong.
The majority read the Constitution and found it in favor of the Trump admin standing.
Want to see hate? Did you see the antifa domestic terrorists who got 30 to 100 years for their display of hate in an attempt to assault and kill LEOs?
How about the Democratic nominee for NY-13, Darializa Avila Chevalier, who post on X, “I forgot to get napkins so I just wiped my hand on the American flag behind me.”
Upstate: I saw that! (from the link I attached to Diogenes)
Also, I think that the intruders who appear on this blog site- just to insult and undermine Turley and others-are attempting to trigger us and create hate. They certainly are not winning with their attempted proselytization.
But we will not harm them. We can just all meet and sit around a campfire at a national park and just throw their words into the flames and shake our heads and laugh. I challenge you and your wife to a marshmallow war. (last year, we spray-painted the jumbo sized ones with fluorescent lime green and had the best free-for-all in the darkness!)
Lin,
Right you are about them not winning.
While they accuse us of hate, I do like to point out how wrong they are and they are the ones filled with hate and rage. Just pointing that out seems to trigger them.
Campfire, throwing their useless words into the flames and laugh, good imagery!
When X / Svelaz / George / Wally / Sally / Esquire / Concerned Citizen / Gigi, etc ad nauseam, goes after others with his comments, he is displaying the behavior of a dog humping a person’s leg. Really creepy. Too bad we can’t spay him/her/it with bear spray
🤣
“I challenge you . . .”
UF: No need to quake in your boots. She has a habit of empty challenges. Remember the last one? A snowball/snow angel challenge.
Are you in or out?
Ha! You’ll be quakin and shakin’ in your boots, Sam! I am faster than a speeding bullet. I’ll make you beg. I’m serious about renting a good site in Nat’l Park, most likely in the fall/autumn and most likely near the Appalachian Trail (the easternmost 1/3 of the U.S. You and your brain would be very welcome. And fun.
(-meaning a GROUP of us commenters, not just you, Don’t let my compliment go to your head. I mentioned this previously to Upstate.)
Out. Not a fan of groups or camping. Thank you, though, for the invitation. (And for the chuckle at your empty boast.)
I was beaten by 3 black teenage males and robbed. I forgive them, too. Ahmed Auberry’s folks forgive, too. I just know it.
This is now a violent foreign country. It simply is. I don’t go out anymore. I put myself on house arrest I guess.
Incredible violence
Meaningless and ignorant are you.
Sally, Can you explain the demonstrated hate you perceive? I detect insincerity is your scheme.
IF you’re sincere, you certainly could come up with one event that clearly demonstrates to all what you say is true. I mean, it’s SO clear to you, the majority will agree, right?.
But, If that’s all you come here to say, you have been tagged with a level 5 TDS comment quarantine.
Hate lost, it’s those who hate America, its Constitution and its tax paying citizens who lost and America and its citizens won! Every American should applaud these decisions.
Excellent point Rick.
Calling something hate does not make it so, and is not a rational argument.
Whenever the Justices make a mistake, why doesn’t Turley just send them an e-mail explaining the mistake to them?
I’m sure they would appreciate his expertise in all things having to do with the Constitution, because God
knows they don’t have any expertise in it themselves.
Because this is a ‘public discourse’, it’s an American! thing.
Justices do get all kinds of opinions from every direction, called “amicus briefs”. Also our thing.
Everyone knows at the moment the SCOTUS majority is following the Constitution as closely as any in the past 60 or so years. (Our thing)
or do you have examples to controvert this?
When conservatives speak of “freedom of religion”, what they really mean is “freedom of Christianity, and to hell with all other religions. “
Wrong again.
As I have stated several times here on the good professor’s blog, I am not religious.
But I do believe in freedom of religion for all. As long as none are trying to deny or suppress others freedom of religion or try to press their religion on others or me.
You know, like those pro-Hamas terrorists who attack Jews.
I have Jewish friends and family (by marriage). I would defend them against the pro-Hamas terrorists.
If some other religion tried to force their religion on me, like Catholics, Mormon, Hindu, or Jehovah’s Witnesses, I would take offense. With exception of the Jehovah’s Witnesses showing up at my door every few years, no one has tried to convert me.
I’m personally thankful that people can find something that fits them personally and helps guide them to deeper understandings.
let people have the freedom to find their own way and it will have deeper meaning and growth for them.
In a sense, the right religion is the one that is right for you.
America has the most religious freedom of ANY country, at ANY time, in all of human history. Divisive leftys hate this one trick.
Which side supports the Constitution more closely? 1st?, 2nd?, EQUAL treatment? (not equitable treatment)
I would say that “The Moral Majority” of old has switched parties and I am now tired of leftys scolding and hating everyone as demonstrated by your unhinged screed. boom.
The majority of these asylum seekers are not fleeing persecution for their political views from their own government. They are fleeing persecution from criminal organizations and economic depression that their own failed government has delivered them to. Neither of those are valid arguments for granting asylum. I believe America is waking up, time will tell.
I heard they are going after the lawyers that make false asylum claims now.
Why would it be OK for Trump to have a copy of Mein Kampf, but it wouldn’t be OK for Obama to keep a copy of the Communist Manifesto?
OK Slowmo
One is a historical recollection and autobiography laying out the foundation and parameters that led Germany towards National Socialism as written by Adolf Hitler. The economic crisis, the fight for superiority across Europe as Britains Navy faltered and oil became King. It is a summation for Hitler’s beliefs and biases, the basis of which led to building the Third Reich of Nazi Germany.
The other is a manifesto cookbook for anarchists on establishing Communism by those that agree with totalitarian ideology.
The first is a Why, the second is a How to…
8Ball: Excellent.
Moreover, the first can be re-titled: Know your enemy.
The second tells you how to become one.
Bazinga Lin!
Gracias
Something much more interesting,
Ex-Disney CEO Bob Iger defends suspending Jimmy Kimmel last year over Charlie Kirk comments and denies it had anything to do with politics or capitulating to the Trump administration.
“That was not the case. We thought it was in bad taste. We just wanted him to acknowledge that… pic.twitter.com/TTEU4R6LD5
— Variety (@Variety) June 24, 2026
Commies love their little red book… Just download the PDF. Everyone should know what the pinkos are scheming anyway.
hasn’t been updated so it’s full of stuff that won’t work anymore or is easily detectable for prosecution. should come with a warning to the reader “Don’t try this at home (country)”.
I love how it’s all so simple for you. The world is in back and white for you, no in-between huh?
Sotomayor should be Ashamed of herself, trying to producie tear jerking analogy that is NOT an analogy at all.. The St Louis Jews were hard working people, many educated, many of means, many with trades etc., who had contributed to Germany and now persecuted, etc. whereas the illegal migrants are not running from someone who wants to kill them.. They are poor and want to be taken care of… It’s a big difference. Obama secretly flew plane loads of Syrians here and put them up in Highrises across Hyattsville. Each family was given a monthly allowance and told Not to work.
Told not to work..??? Let’s see a source on that.
Did they have a green card?
The stinging dissent produced a rare rebuttal from the bench by Alito, who was surprised by the extended comments and said that, if he had not been blindsided, he would have said more, including how “the policy in question was adopted by two very different administrations.”
The Left cares not about immigrants, any more than they care about blacks, Hispanics, disabled, those incarcerated, etc.
When members of the community volunteer their time and talents to medical clinics, homeless centers, schools, prisons, etc, they are almost always religious individuals – they do what they do because it is part of their vocation. What is also noticeable at these centers is that political protestors, activists and virtue signaling types are never found there. Never. As someone who has for years and still volunteers at such places because of my Catholic Faith, it is always the same theme with those who volunteer: they are neither hard core Left nor Right. They are apolitical. They’re just people passionate about walking their talk. We know Justices Kavanaugh and Barrett both were involved in community service in such organizations before they became part of SCOTUS. Now they have to worry about being assassinated in public by the Left instead of serving the poor, the hungry, the orphan. Perhaps Justices Sotomayor, Jackson and Kagan were very active in their local communities in serving the marginalized mano-a-mano, where they got their hands dirty and could smell those whom they were serving. Being part of a lofty committee that promulgated rules doesn’t cut it. Thus we have the circus show of Rosa DeLauro having a meltdown when Markwayne Mullin calls her on her bullchips. Americans should be familiar now with these scripts, and vote accordingly in future elections.
Estovir says: “As someone who has for years..
Estovir is the clown who keeps writing those first person testimonies we see on every blog thread. And they always begin with: “As someone who has for years..
Estovir practices what he preaches. That it bothers you to testify of helping others speaks of your own character, perhaps more so that you intended.
JAFO IS ESTOVIR!
Ahhhh are you upset.
Truth does that to the left.
Estovir, we can’t make authentic progress until we tell the truth. No one is speaking the truth.
🙏 I pray for rescue. Btw, I’m a red blooded American.
I don’t know. I really have mixed feelings about immigration in toto.
The abuse of the system is unabashedly stunning, and I would guess far outweighs its original benevolent purpose.
Think of it. MILLIONS of illegal immigrants here. MILLIONS. Still coming. Still here. Receiving benefits and living with impunity/without consequence for breaking our laws.
Justice Sotomayor is right about one thing. “More people will attempt to cross the border illegally.”
I’m willing to pay more for my tomatoes and strawberries or construction endeavor. I’m willing to support sharing our nation’s wealth with those less fortunate. I am NOT willing to become an enabler for illegal immigration, bringing our nation down to a muted melding with the common denominator of flouting our laws.
Instead of draining OUR resources in education, healthcare, criminal justice, etc.–JUST STAY WHERE YOU ARE. This is no longer the 18th, or 19th, or the 20th century. We already send you food, clothing, shelter, medicine, educators, etc. But we can teach you WHERE YOU ARE. We can help you build your own businesses to utilize your resources; we will pay your for your product. We can work with your government. We can enforce change. We now have United Nations, WF, International Criminal Court (ICC), on and on. No need to come here. Make Your Own Great Nation.
Law School 101: Don’t make a law that you don’t enforce.
We need to overhaul/revamp our entire immigration legislation to fit today’s reality. If SCOTUS can have a “living Constitution,” then we need “living Immigration” laws. And then enforce what we write.
Lin,
Great comment.
But as we have seen, certain admins do not enforce what we write. And we when do, we get domestic terrorist groups attempting to assault, or even murder those who would enforce those very laws.
Lin and Upstate, this article is less radical than me, but more radical than you. The discussion you’re having is worrisome but necessary, unless Trump and Vance can turn things around, and it’s too soon to tell about that.
https://thefederalist.com/2026/06/25/after-250-years-our-american-republic-is-coming-apart/
Trump is the MAIN reason this country is coming apart. And now the Bernie Bros are mimicking Trump’s antics. Like, “Yeah, we’ll get even stupider”.
Diogenes: I read your link. A real thought-provoker, thanks.
Then I scanned down to the bottom and found this:
https://thefederalist.com/2026/06/25/nyc-socialist-leader-is-billionaire-ccp-propagandists-niece/
It doesn’t appear that your feelings on immigration are mixed. The Marxist Democrats have an agenda and that is to change the demographics to influence elections. Think of it. They flood the country with illegals and then want non-citizens counted in the Census to give them more House seats. Then they give the illegals freebies and get them to register Democrat while pushing for non-citizens to qualify for voting in elections. Finally, they tell them that their freebies will be taken away unless they vote Dem. It’s pure evil, unconstitutional, and un-American. The founding fathers would try them for treason.
They are traitors and proud of it. They are also the biggest fools since the antebellum secessionists.
Another wordy legal document that defines loyalty itself is the American Oath of Office.
Trump made a promise to Jesus Christ to NOT violate anyone’s constitutional rights using his job authority. Apparently Trump never physically touched the Bible when making this promise to GOD, but even for atheist politicians the oath of office is legally binding.
Under Section 3 of Article VI, the last part of the oath of office (“so help me GOD) is optional, not required by the government servant. Many constitutional experts believe that the Founding Fathers allowed the religious reference so that foreign style theocrats (believing the church ran the government like some foreign nations) would act American if they made a promise to their GOD to follow the U.S. Constitution. The oath of office was a great counter to foreign style theicracy.
Trump made this promise on his first day of office. No American can have or retain governing authority without agreeing to this employment contract. Since words matter now, maybe Trump should start being more loyal?
What is your point? These Supreme Court cases were found in Trump’s favor meaning he is upholding the Constitution. My conclusion is that his predecessor Joe Biden was acting illegally since the language of the statute was scrutinized by the SCOTUS and favored this administration’s interpretation. Even a kindergartner knows that they are not “in” the house until they go through the door crossing the threshold. Trump is being loyal to the law and keeping his oath to uphold and execute the laws of the nation. Trump is also being loyal to his campaign promises to the American people. Illegal immigration has been called an “80/20” issue with Americans siding with Trump. So again, what is your point other than to make a veiled yet unfounded accusation.
I appears that the Democrats plan has come to fruition. Have the teachers union teach our children not to read and learn the definitions of words. Then as they grow older they can become a Supreme Court Justice. Then the words of the constitution can mean whatever the judges read, or can’t read, into it. Thus accomplishing their goal of ruling based on sympathetic feelings instead of actual written law.
“In their view, “contextual” reading means that you can be “in” the United States without actually being “in” the United States.”
The Left’s rewriting of words (“in,” seriously?!) is comically absurd:
Joe, trying to impress: “I’m in college.”
Susie: “No you’re not. You haven’t even applied.”
Joe: “Well, I’m contextually in college.”
Susie: “Great. Then I’ll contextually sleep with you.”
Sally, calling Tom because she’s late for a business meeting:
Sally: “But I’m in your office.”
Tom: “No you’re not. You’re calling me from your car.”
Sally: “Well, I’m contextually in your office.”
Tom: “Great. Then contextually the contract is yours.”
Leftists are like a never-ending Monty Python skit. Only they want us to take them seriously.
Are you stupid or sumptin, Turley laid out the issues and you think your comment is somehow smarter?
OMG funny
Spot on . The leftist fertilizer gets piled higher and deeper daily. The above comment is the response leftist deserve.
Sam: Good one. made me smile.
-Not to take from your wit, but here’s close to home:
Dom: “Turley is dishonest, naive, and hypocritical.”
Tom: “This is his blog. You are his guest.”
Dom: “He’s fair game. It is fair to criticize him.”
Tom: “But your ‘criticisms’ don’t even ring true. Do you even know what you are talking about?”
Dom: “Doesn’t matter. This is a free blog. So, ‘I’m in.’.”
Lin,
Awesome!
Sam,
Great comparison to Monty Python. But the leftists cannot understand why we are not taking them seriously and laughing at them.