Governor Abbott is absolutely correct. Joe Biden has put the interests of the cartels and phony asylum seekers above the good of the country. How will the legal battle play out?

Attached is the link to the letter from Governor Abbott regarding Texas’ Constitutional right to protect its sovereignty:

Governor Abbott Issues Statement On Texas’ Constitutional Right To Self-Defense | Office of the Texas Governor | Greg Abbott.

Some key points:

President Biden has instructed his agencies to ignore federal statutes that mandate the detention of illegal immigrants. The effect is to illegally allow their en masse parole into the United States.

By wasting taxpayer dollars to tear open Texas’s border security infrastructure, President Biden has enticed illegal immigrants away from the 28 legal entry points along this State’s southern border— bridges where nobody drowns—and into the dangerous waters of the Rio Grande.

Under President Biden’s lawless border policies, more than 6 million illegal immigrants have crossed our southern border in just 3 years. That is more than the population of 33 different States in this country. This illegal refusal to protect the States has inflicted unprecedented harm on the People all across the United States.

James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and the other visionaries who wrote the U.S. Constitution foresaw that States should not be left to the mercy of a lawless president who does nothing to stop external threats like cartels smuggling millions of illegal immigrants across the border. That is why the Framers included both Article IV, § 4, which promises that the federal government “shall protect each [State] against invasion,” and Article I, § 10, Clause 3, which acknowledges “the States’ sovereign interest in protecting their borders.” Arizona v. United States, 567 U.S. 387, 419 (2012) (Scalia, J., dissenting).

Here’s the legal question: Does a US president have the Constitutional authority to provide unlimited and unrestricted migration of people claiming asylum above the sovereignty of the nation, no matter what the social and economic costs, and more specifically no matter if the people of a state don’t want this?

3 Likes

From the NY Post:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/biden-s-border-dereliction-forced-gov-abbott-s-hand-and-caused-a-national-crisis/ar-BB1hgie1?ocid=msedgntp&pc=LCTS&cvid=103323e732b242c6914bd615446abdfc&ei=45

The J’Biden regime has made mention of “seizing the Texas National Guard”. Whoever put that notion into blockhead Joey’s speech is a ■■■■■■■ moron.
The States NGs are under the command of the respective Governors and cannot be federalized without his approval.
Fat chance that’ll happen. And Federal troops being brought in to strong arm Abbott and the Texas NG?
That’ll piss off a whole bunch of Texans for sure.
FJB

3 Likes

you say you want a revolution…

1 Like

I said years ago here…the cartel is one of democrats biggest donors.

3 Likes

5v00bm

If Biden does that then he has thrown away any chance of winning in November.

As much as I do not want to see a state ignore a SC ruling, I much more do not want to see any idiotic responses from this or any administration.

The whole idea of using military force is ■■■■■■■ stupid and just creates more division.

3 Likes

I suspect the cartel has their fair share of both dems and republicans in their pockets.

Biden’s handlers thoroughly believe the 2020 “win” will catapult them to victory in 2024. Joey Depends occasionally whispers “I’m the only one that can beat him, did it before and I’ll do it again”.
Well maybe not in so many words, that’s a whole lotta speech for that old turd to say at one time? :rofl:
With that attitude I wouldn’t put it past them to do as they say.

I want a peaceful (peacefully and patriotically?) revolution next November. How can anyone support that person for opening our borders and threatening our states for protecting themselves?

5 Likes

And I hope and feel that would be the reaction of many. If Biden tries that, he has drawn attention to the issue that works least favorably to his election. 70% say he is making a mess of immigration.
Abbott should resist such a move in any way that avoids actual violent conflict. Biden would only hurt himself and we are too close to November for violence.

2 Likes

Six. ■■■■■■■ . Million.

2 Likes

What Abbott has done is up the ante on the Biden Administration and the SCOTUS. The most recent ruling doesn’t address this.

1 Like

The most recent ruling should have foreseen this.

1 Like

Huh?

The court battle is not over, it’s just heating up:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/greg-abbott-throws-down-the-gauntlet-at-biden-over-the-border-war/ss-BB1hf0lE?ocid=msedgntp&pc=LCTS&cvid=0ae8fe2f67814e3aaae20ffe7b356fed&ei=60#image=12

2 Likes

Can I correct a small but significant factoid here…

The Supreme Court did not say they have to remove the razor wire…

It said it can be removed.

There is a difference between can and have to…

And at the moment no one from the border patrol has started cutting it. They know that wire is actually working. The area of that park in Eagle Pass that had been flooded with illegal invaders is now relatively clear.

In short the razor wire is working…that section of the border is not being overrun by illegals.

6 Likes

three words for that “the insurrection act”

“Whenever the President considers that unlawful obstructions, combinations, or assemblages, or rebellion against the authority of the United States, make it impracticable to enforce the laws of the United States in any State by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, he may call into Federal service such of the militia of any State, and use such of the armed forces, as he considers necessary to enforce those laws or to suppress the rebellion.”

Allan

The legal issue will be that of state and national sovereignty vs unlimited migration. Here’s a good read that I found:

https://www.cgai.ca/unwanted_immigration_has_the_concept_of_state_sovereignty_become_obsolete

1 Like