Hispanic Judge Goes Rogue On Democrats, Approves Trump's Border Wall Construction.
Americans were slightly in shock when a Hispanic judge made a judgment that awarded President
Donald Trump a victory in the case for the construction of the border wall between the
United States and Mexico.
Trump and much of his administration have pushed for the ability to construct a barrier
to prevent or slow the rate of, illegal immigrants from entering the country without following
the current immigration laws.
The federal judge ruled against the group of liberals who claimed that Trump's administrative
team was abusive in their ability to waive requirements of environmental standards in
lieu to build the wall.
The obstruction came from primarily leftist groups hailing from California.
Judge Gonzalo Curiel, who works out of South California, provided Trump just one more victory
in regards to the wall and the groups battling against it are not happy.
Curiel essentially said that Trump's team had acted within their rights they can continue
working on plans for the massive border wall which was a large part of Trump's campaign
trail in 2016.
Many people wanted the wall after being victims of illegal immigrants who commit a crime.
The thought was that America has plenty of its own criminals, so it would only benefit
the country to enforce the current border laws and ensure everyone is on the same page
in regards to the law.
Joe Saunders from the Conservative Tribune wrote more about the judgment that has many
Democrats in an uproar: "Both Congress and the Executive share responsibilities
in protecting the country from terrorists and contraband illegally entering at the borders.
Border barriers, roads, and detection equipment help provide a measure of deterrence against
illegal entries," Curiel wrote.
Congress delegated to its executive counterpart, the responsibility to construct border barriers
as needed in areas of high illegal entry to detect and deter illegal entries.
In an increasingly complex and changing world, this delegation avoids the need for Congress
to pass a new law to authorize the construction of every border project."
Those are pretty definitive statements.
And considering that the opposition, according to ABC News, was built on threats the wall
allegedly poses to endangered species like the Quino checkerspot butterfly, the Riverside
fairy shrimp and the Pacific pocket mouse, they're pretty tough to argue with.
So it was a convincing win.
But what makes it even more satisfying for the Trump side is the judge in the case, Gonzalo
Curiel, is the same judge Trump famously tangled with on the campaign when Curiel was presiding
over a lawsuit filed by students from the now-defunct Trump University."
Curiel's ruling was slightly controversial mainly because he and Trump had a slight clash
in 2016.
Their issue was an accusation that Curiel was biased due to his Mexican background.
That turned into an enormous outrage by many liberals on social media who resorted to labeling
Donald Trump as a racist.
Regardless of the accusations of Curiel's potential to sway judgments based on his heritage,
the clash between Trump and Curiel seemed to dwindle into a nothing-burger, but was
slightly maintained by numerous leftists on social media.
CNN reported more details on the judgment by Curiel:
"The groups had challenged DHS' move to expedite construction of the prototypes and
replacement fencing in San Diego on a number of grounds.
The collection of lawsuits from the environmental advocacy organizations and the state of California
argued that the Trump administration's waiver wasn't allowed by the law that created the
overarching authority and that the authority itself violated the Constitution.
Curiel rejected each argument, saying the law and the nature of the border clearly give
the DHS broad authority to build border barriers.
"Both Congress and the Executive share responsibilities in protecting the country from terrorists
and contraband illegally entering at the borders.
Border barriers, roads, and detection equipment help provide a measure of deterrence against
illegal entries," Curiel wrote.
"With section 102, Congress delegated to its executive counterpart, the responsibility
to construct border barriers as needed in areas of high illegal entry to detect and
deter illegal entries.
In an increasingly complex and changing world, this delegation avoids the need for Congress
to pass a new law to authorize the construction of every border project."
The debate over a proposed border wall between USA and Mexico will carry on for quite a while
as both sides fail to come to an agreement that benefits everyone.
Many Americans want the wall to protect civilians from those who wish to commit a crime, do
harm, or abuse the welfare system which has been very generous and caused a mass amount
of entitlement.
Others negate the concept of the wall because they wish for an open border policy.
Those who wish for the open border policy are often instructed to look at places like
Germany, Sweden, and France to see how their policies have resulted in mass upheavals of
crime and destruction.
What do you think about this?
Please share this news and scroll down to Comment below and don't forget to subscribe
Top Stories Today.
No comments:
Post a Comment