Even rapists and arsonists aren’t exempt.
Earlier this year, the Trump administration tried to cut off hundreds of millions in funding for groups providing free lawyers for illegal aliens facing deportation. Cutting the funding resulted in an extended legal battle with the nonprofits providing the lawfare at taxpayer expense.
But even as that battle was underway, states continued pouring millions into providing legal aid to not just illegal aliens, but to illegal alien criminals. That was exposed when California’s Gov. Gavin Newsom, looking to bolster his reputation ahead of a potential presidential campaign, added a signing statement to funding for the Equal Access Fund barring access to illegal alien criminals who had been, in his words, “convicted of serious or violent” crimes.
The restriction on aiding not just criminals, but the worst of the worst, shouldn’t have been controversial, but the state’s lawfare nonprofits quickly protested using the familiar arguments that refusing to fund aid for murderers, rapists and muggers would create a “chilling effect” on illegal alien communities and that it was too much of a “burden” to ask of legal aid orgs to figure out whether their clients had been convicted of horrifying crimes.
Democrats, who had plowed in an added $20 million to legal funds for illegal aliens, protested.
Even before Trump took office, $8 million in EAF money had been spent aiding illegal aliens and based on the outrage over the ban on aid for those convicted of serious and violent crimes, it seems likely that a significant portion of those resources were used to protect illegal alien criminals who had committed violent crimes and were being protected so they could prey on Californians. Legal aid groups defending illegals clamored that it was vital to keep violent criminals “united with their families” in California. And that is what has been happening.
Hamid Yazdan Panah, the Iranian director of Immigrant Defense Advocates, claimed that “California reaps the benefits of keeping households together and having a strong immigrant workforce that has work permits.”
Especially when that workforce consists of violent criminals.
(It is important to note that even Newsom’s restriction on providing free legal aid to violent illegal alien criminals resisting deportation only applies to those already previously convicted of certain crimes and not to the current illegal alien offenders who were detained after committing a crime.)
Beyond the state level, California cities and counties have spent millions on illegal alien lawfare including the LA Justice Fund in Los Angeles, which claims to have allocated around $10 million over its lifespan, multimillion funds at the municipal level in LA, $1.3 million in Alameda County, $1.75 million in San Mateo County and a much more sizable basket of cash in San Francisco, boosted by funding from private foundations for city legal services.
California is not alone in putting millions of dollars at the disposal of nonprofits protecting illegal alien criminals. And, surprisingly, it’s not even the biggest funder of such destructive efforts. --->READ MORE HERE
As soon as President Trump swept into power a second time, riding a wave of popular support for border security and deportation of illegal aliens, a legion of activists was deployed across the country.
Organized into innumerable groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union, the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund and the ominous-sounding Make the Road New York, the anti-borders mission was urgent: Mr. Trump must be stopped through all-out lawfare in the courts.
The lawsuits came as fast as the executive orders.
A common theme in these lawsuits soon became apparent. Infused with disdain for Mr. Trump and opposition to his agenda, the lawyers bringing the lawsuits again and again ignored the president’s hefty power, under statutes and the Constitution, to suspend, block or otherwise shut down the entry of illegal aliens into the country.
Mr. Trump can’t rule, this studied omission fairly shouted. Instead, U.S. District Courts, interpreting statutes without reference to this background of presidential power, were to tie Mr. Trump up in knots and run the country their way.
Examples abound. When Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem canceled a late Biden extension of temporary protected status for citizens of Venezuela, activists sued, claiming that the statute did not allow her to reconsider a prior extension.
Ms. Noem did not act only under the statute, however; she was also following an express directive by Mr. Trump, acting under his inherent constitutional authority. That made her the president’s agent, and it made her action a presidential action. It’s boilerplate law that no court can enjoin the action of a president.
When these matters were pointed out to the Supreme Court, the court stayed, or suspended, the injunction that the lower court had quickly granted, allowing the end of temporary protected status for Venezuelans to be carried out while the case proceeded.
A similar example involves mass parole. The Biden administration had granted parole to more than half a million aliens from four countries. They had only to sign up on a government app and show up at ports of entry to be given automatic parole and go wherever they wanted in America.
Not surprisingly, Mr. Trump terminated these unlawful grants of parole. When activists sued, a district court enjoined that action, concluding that the parole statute did not allow the termination. --->READ MORE HERE
If you like what you see, please "Like" and/or Follow us on FACEBOOK here, GETTR here, and TWITTER here.
No comments:
Post a Comment