Asylum seekers must stay in Mexico

WOW, the appellate court upheld President Trumps EO that asylum seekers must wait in Mexico for asylum court hearings. Of course the attack dogs like the ACLU, who used to work for American citizens but now work for illegals, will take it all the way up to the Supreme Court, but in the meantime Mexico will have to bear the brunt of their bad behavior of allowing and assisting the illegal caravans invading our country.

FINALLY a decent ruling from the courts!


Good luck getting Mexico to agree to take them.

Yeah, like each and everyone of them are “bad hombres”. You guys crack me up.

They’re already there.


Mob behavior and “bad hombres” are two different things.

I am taking this as an indicator that public opinion has shifted more than D politicians realize.

Viva Mexico!


This era reminds me so much of the period of American history when we were trying to keep a dirty Irish out.

Damned straight the Mexican government are “bad hombres” they have allowed those caravans and even helped them march straight to our southern border through their country like feces through a goose! :angry: I’m long passed any tolerance for Mexico! Let them suffer some constipation and clog up their country with illegal “asylum” seekers!

Is that just the brown ones or ALL asylum seekers

AdiĂłs Amigo!

How do you believe the ruling of a 3-judge panel reflects public opinion?

The outcome of free and fair elections reveal the will of the people. They voted for a wall.

Which part of anything you just said has to do with the ruling of a 3-judge panel?

Ok. Mexico will get to enjoy the increased diversity and economic gains of taking in illegal immigrant who are the nice ones.

This ruling is just a data point on a growing chart of immigration awareness.

The emphasis will be on reform and a generous legal system respected by all.


The judges’ decision lines up with the way people voted.

Nice non-answer. Try again.

No, it doesn’t. Most voting Americans voted against Trump.

And that’s not even the assertion. The assertion is that this ruling was an indicator of public opinion. Since when do judicial rulings reflect public opinion? They’re supposed to align with the law, not what “public opinion” states, right?

I would prefer that D politicians keep their head in the sand until December 2020.

That way the election mandate will be clear and legislative reform can finally happen.


Strike 2. Try again.

How do you believe the ruling of a 3-judge panel indicates public opinion?