Whims of the executive - judge strikes down Trump asylum rule changes

A federal judge on Wednesday struck down most of a Trump administration policy that turned away asylum seekers who claimed to suffer domestic violence or gang violence.

U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan ruled that policies blocking the alleged victims from obtaining “credible fear” of return to their home country — the first step in an asylum claim — violates federal immigration law.

It’s almost like you can’t just change the law with a presidential proclamation…

Another trump loss in court



This so - called judge is obviously a member of the “deep state™” who is attempting to thwart Trump’s plan to make America great again.

1 Like

I know all President’s have their wins and losses in the judiciary, but Trump seems to lose a significant amount more than his predecessors. His administration seems to run afoul of the law more often than not.

Why not. Obama did with his immigration program that wasn’t authorized by law.

Did you happen to notice the name of the judge? Sound familiar? :joy:


Sooner or later Trump is going to learn that he isn’t king.

DACA doesn’t fly in the face of an existing US statute regarding asylum.

Is it the presidents opinion that matter in asylum matters. Nope.


I wouldn’t go that far. However, he apparently believes that lying to the FBI is treason, at least when it comes to Republican, even though the Constitution spells out the definitions of treason as aiding our enemies.

And no, he couldn’t logically have been talking about Turkey because that was not before the judge, had not been proven in court nor plead guilty to.

The judge is an idiot who lets his biases overrule the law, but likely not in on some conspiracy Just an idiot.

He doesn’t think that lying to the FBI is treason, but it is treason to secretly work for a foreign country while acting a National Security Advisor. Now if you are going to hang your hat on …” well he was doing that right up to the inauguration but probably stopped then” then I think that it is likely that you are going to be disappointed.

We all know that is not what the Judge was asking questions about treason for. Yet you continue to repeat it. It is fascinating.

Also, have you considered that the Judge has read all of the findings of Mr. Mueller as they pertain to Mr. Flynn? Completely unredacted. And perhaps it is his knowledge that we do not possess, that informed his line of questioning regarding treason? Or is that something you are unwilling to consider?

1 Like

Mostly I am hanging my hat on that, and on the fact that there was nothing before the judge relating to Turkey and that there has been no plea deal nor court finding regarding that…as well as a Constitutional definition of Treason of which that judge did not appear to be aware.