Some wins - and a loss - on immigration case law | Hour 2

What's going on. Thank you so much for listening to this podcast. It is heard live every day from noon to three on WBT Radio in Charlotte. And if you want exclusive content like invitations to events, the weekly live stream, my daily show prep with all of the links, become a patron, go to thepetcleanershow dot com. Make sure you hit the subscribe button. Get every episode for free right to your smartphone or tablet. And again, thank you so much for your support. Some good news and. One piece of not so great news regarding immigration enforcement. We have some developments. Aside from the Supreme Court rulings which I went over in the last hour, we have this story from the Associated Press. I'm going to give you the one setback for the Trump administration, and then I'm going to give you two positive developments so you don't think all is lost. Like put down the black pill. The parties aren't the same. By the way, if yesterday's election results in the Democrat primary up in New York City hasn't disabused you of this idea that both parties are the same, I don't know what. I don't know what else to tell you. You've got communists that are winning in the Democrat primaries with the explicit goal of taking over the Democrat Party. If you think that's the same as the Republican Party, then you are you are not living in Realville. Okay, so put the black pill down. Okay. So here is the story from the Associated Press. A judge this week Tuesday, barred the federal government from making arrests at immigration courts because why would you arrest an illegal alien at an immigration court? I mean, that's just it's got nothing to do. With immigration, right. This was a Biden appointee, because, of course, US District Judge Casey Pits of Hell of San Francisco. Sorry, of well okay, yeah, well yeah, okay. Kind of. The order puts an end to a practice that took hold shortly after President Donald Trump took office last year. The Trump Administration's reversal of long standing policy against arrests at immigration court resulted quote not from merely unreasoned decision making, but a complete lack of decision making, according to the judge, definitely seems like an impartial arbitered right, yeah, yeah, yeah. It does not seem to be like a like a lawyer activist with a wardrobe change. Here that they changed the policy. It's because so what has been happening. What's been happening, And I've been reading these stories off and on for the last year or so where people go in for their immigration proceeding and they have their case dropped right the they're here in the country illegally and the government is you know, trying to make the case through the immigration cord as to why they shouldn't be here in all of this, but they're here illegally, and so what the government has been doing is dropping the cases and then picking up the person and deporting them. And so this has got the left all outraged because they see voters being transported you know, out of the country and or okay, well future voters, let's say, although in some jurisdictions they can vote. And so this has prompted their cries of lack of due process, right because again, when you flood the country with ten tony million illegal aliens, you overwhelm. The systems and stuff. And so the administration has been trying to you know, speed up the deportations knowing that they are on a clock because at some point when Trump leaves office, if there is a Democrat that wins back the White House, then the deportations will in all likelihoods stop, right, and the border will get reopened, and we're going to have even more people coming into the country because this is now existential for the Democrat Party. They have to have more people come in, preferably from countries that hate Western civilization, so they can then give them amnesty and they will vote for Democrats. That's the idea. And by the way, that's not me making this up. This is the Democrats plan. They called it the replacement strategy. That's what they called it. Twenty years ago, they celebrated that America would no longer be a white majorit already country, and when that happens, they will have so many people of brown and black skin and that this is why they were saying demographics is destiny really to share or wrote a whole book about it, right, And they thought this was going to give them a permanent majority in perpetuity, right like, that was the idea. So the administration has been trying to speed up the deportations, so this is obviously going to slow it down. Authorities failed to address the chilling effect of arrests on whether people attend court hearings. This is the argument from the plaintiffs. They say, look, you're telling people to go to the immigration court for their hearings, and if you're going to then drop their case and then deport them, they're not going to come to the hearings. And I understand. That that that's logical, right, and the administration, I'm sure know this as well. So that would be an incentive to go onto the CBP one app which has been reconfigured to help you go back to your home country. You can even get money to do so. They'll give you money towards the airfare, they'll give you a relocation fee. Right, because it's cheaper to give you a check for like fifteen hundred dollars or something and you self deport you do it on your own. Then it would be to go try to pick you up, put you in a holding cell, put you through the court process. Right. The ruling is the second setback for court house arrests since May, when a federal judge in New York barred them at immigration courts. That order applied only to New York as a jurisdiction. This decision out of San Francisco is a nationwide injunction. Once again, these lower courts thinking that they are governing the entire because they know what's best. James Percival, the US Homeland Security Department's General counsel, So the lawyer, criticized the ruling as an exercise in judicial overreach. Quote. When a judge sentences a defendant, the defendant is taken into custody. If an alien is ordered removed by an immigration judge, the same thing should happen a district judge ordering otherwise. Is naked judicial activism in service of an anti American open borders agenda. End quote. After Trump took office, hearings across the country often ended with cases being dismissed by the government, setting the stage for plain clothes agents to make arrests in hallways and coordination with attorneys from the Department of Homeland Security. Okay, so you have two different potential avenues here, right, But either way, the person who is at the hearing the defendant. They are an illegal alien. That's why they're at the proceeding, and the law allows for their deportation. And once again to my Democrat friends who prefer the Calvin Bull approach where you just make up all the rules. As you go. If you don't like the law, if you want to give everybody amnesty when they come in, if you can get across the border, then you're allowed to stay right. If that's what you want the law to be, then write that law. But you haven't written that law. Change the law. If you don't like the current law, then change it. But they're not doing that. They haven't done that even when they had the power to do so, when they had the House, Senate, and the White House, they still didn't do this, Which makes you wonder why might not be too popular of a thing to do? All right, For over a year now, you've heard me talking about Create a Video. Great local company in mint Hill that has helped more than two million families preserve their memories by turning old photos via chest tapes, film reels, and slides into lasting keepsakes. Now creative videos helping families and groups create brand new memories while they're traveling. Introducing group travel videos perfect for family reunions, church mission trips, group vacations, destination weddings, student trips, senior adult groups, sports teams. I mean, really, any gathering of people that you care about that's traveling together. Group Travel Videos gives your traveling pack a private app where everyone can share photos during the trip, send messages, share schedules and important documents, even a traveler safety locator feature that works only during the trip, and family members and friends back home can follow along and enjoy the experience in real time. No social media, no ads, It's totally private. No emails, phone numbers, account setups or hassles. With group travel Videos, you'll capture today's moments on your special trip while they're happening. Then after the trip we're gathering, they'll professionally turn your shared moments into a beautiful storytelling video that your whole group can stream and download and treasure for years. Check out Group travel Videos dot com. That's Group travel Videos dot com. Or call seven oh four eight four six seventy eight seventy extension two O six. And when you do that, ask for Katie. But Pete, can I just email? Well, yes you can. You can email Katie Katie at group travel videos dot com. Group travel videos from old memories to new adventures, preserving life's moments for a lifetime. Okay, so I went over the. First setback for the Trump administration although I suspect that'll probably get overturned as it makes its way up, maybe all the way to the Supreme Court. We shall see. Then there are two positive developments when it comes to immigration enforcement. So I understand what the the left is doing with the stall strategy, as I outlined a couple of minutes ago. Right, they want a delay, delayed delay. But what they are also doing in the meantime at the same time is they are allowing there to build there to be built up case law, precedent cause for action in future cases. Like they are erecting guardrails around all of these policy questions and laws because they keep trying to do things. They keep winning at the lower court levels, but then they get smacked down when they go all the way to the Supreme Court. In so much as anybody follows the law in the future, there is precedent. Now, there are rulings, there are guard rails. So here's one. A federal appeals court on Tuesday ruled in favor of the Trump administration's efforts to fast track deportations for undocumented immigrants across the country through an expedited process that's typically reserved for individuals who recently crossed the southern border. The Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued a two to one ruling, So this may go to the Supreme Court as well. But I mean the District court in DC two to one ruled this way, overturning a lower court decision blocking the efforts last year. So there is a this is according to the Hill dot Com, there is an advocacy group called Make the Roads, New York. Make the Roads Like I'm not sure, there's no comma in there, so it's just like, is it like make the Roads New York? Is that is that like a directive, like a demand make the Roads New York, or like make the Roads New York, So like New York would control all the roads or something? Or is it like the New York chapter of Make the Roads. I don't know, okay, but make the Roads New York sued the Office of the Secretary for the Department of Homeland Security after DHS expanded the expedited Removal policy and they made it applicable to all immigrants who could not prove that they have been residing in the country for more than two years. So draconian, right, So they're saying, you have not been here. You cannot prove that you have been here for longer than two years, and so you got to go. And we're following the policy that applies, like if we catch you at the border, we can just send you right back across the border expedited removal. We caught you in Texas and boom, you go right back. And so we're going to do that nationwide, and we're going to do it for anybody that can't prove that they have been here for longer than two years. Like I would argue you should do it for everybody, right, Like that's the law, but so draconian they're giving them a two year window. The group said the administration's actions had violated due process rights outlined in the Constitution. However, judges Justin Walker and Naomi Raw, both Trump appointees, Well there you go, upheld the legality of the administration's efforts, citing case law that says due process requires an opportunity to be heard at a meaningful time and in a meaningful manner, And they said quote at most, the District Court's findings show that Congress's expedited screening system operates quickly and with practical constraints. Features the statute itself contemplates, they do not show that the challenged directives deprive aliens of a meaningful opportunity to be heard. Right, so the law provides for the due process. The due process is actually occurring, and so we reject this claim. Rau also added that the executive branch retains the sole and unreviewable discretion to determine which undocumented immigrants are subject to expedited removal, and says Congress explicitly barred courts from reviewing those decisions. This is called judicial review. And as the Supreme Court just ruled in the in the case before it, and that the result was or the ruling was released this morning covered it in the last hour, the Supreme Court says, like in this law, the law says, this is not up for judicial review. The decisions made by the executive branch are the executive branch's decisions. Congress gave that power to the executive branch once again, Calvin Ball Democrats. If you don't like it, don't just make up new rules. You have to change the rules. You have to change the law. That's the process. Because if everybody just starts playing Calvin ball, then we don't have rule of law any longer, and then you have anarchy. You have tyranny, but you don't have rule of law. So that was one win. So let's take the win, conservatives and rule of law fans. Let's take the win. And then there is another case on a big fat fine that was handed down to an immigration attorney for alleged false asylum claims. I'll tell you about that in a minute. Another piece of good news on the immigration enforcement front, this from ABC News. Immigration and Customs Enforcement on Tuesday announced that it is looking to find an immigration attorney who allegedly filed false asylum claims. This is the first time that the agency has filed such a claim. Homeland Security Investigations, which is the investigative arm of the Department of Homeland Security, announced five notices of intent to slap fines on a lawyer named the gnawd Dota mean I think is how he pronounces that? Who they say. Filed thirty two immigration cases in which he filed sixty four fraudulent documents. So thirty two cases, sixty four fraudulent documents seems like what two documents per case? That's what it seems like the math works out on that one. Dotamanani faces a quarter of a million dollar fine for what DHS says is a pattern of filing allegedly false asylum claims. He allegedly filed the identical or nearly identical in language and substance, containing the same or nearly the same factual narrative and supporting details regarding the alleged persecution. Okay, so what does this mean? Well, as I read it as part of the asylum claim, right, because if you're seeking asylum, you have to be in fear of your life if you were to be sent back to your home country. So you got to come up with some sort of a story as to why that would be true. So I don't know if he actually used somebody's legitimate fear, their real story. Maybe he made up a story, Maybe they made up a story, maybe he used AI. I don't know, but it seems like they create he hated some sort of a story and then replicated it in all of these different cases, in thirty two cases, which then you would have to wonder, well, if it was an actual, real asylum claim, which one was the real claim? If you've got thirty two claims and they all read the same. Which one of those thirty two people is the actual one in fear for their life? See, so there's a victim because now a person who is actually Again I'm assuming that the narrative that was crafted here was legitimate. It may not have been. But if it was, and he just took it and copied it and then applied it to thirty one other cases, the victim there is the actual person in fear for their life if they are to be deported. But now the court won't know which one is real because you you've got thirty two. You've got thirty one fakes and one real. So which one is the real one? If there is a real one. See, this is these types of let me say it this way, this way of thinking, this examination of the other side of the ledger, as I call it, This is never accounted for in the debate about illegal immigration. Right the people such as myself who are opposed to illegal immigration, we are always cast as the immoral one, as the the morally inferior, ethically inferior, the less caring, the less empathetic or sympathetic by people that say no, we should allow this to continue as is, and there is never on their part any examination of the other side of the ledger, because there is another side. There are victims in the current system, well in the system before Trump shut it all downright, people, millions of people are victimized. They're held hostage, they're murdered, they're sexually assaulted, they're sold into slavery, they are extorted. Right. This happens to so many people over the years that have been flooding in illegally because you've created an illicit market, and then you turn your eyes away from all the devastation, all the human. Told, the personal cost. You turn away from it, and you never take an accounting of what your preferred method has wrought because that's going to mess up your virtue signal, I get it. The action against this lawyer dot am Mono nominee comes after DHS's top lawyer last month directed Ice to go after lawyers who filed fraudulent asylum claims in immigration court. DHS has never sought to punish lawyers who have allegedly filed fraudulent claims before. ABC News. That's their line. Now, a journalist might ask something like why not, why well, why haven't lawyers ever been held accountable for filing false asylum claims? I don't know the answer to that, but that's why I would ask the question. But I approach these stories from a different perspective. This is why when people say I just want objective journalism, right, I might ask that question, whereas just coincidentally, like every single reporter at ABC does it because they're coming at it from a different subjective point of view. They just pointing out that this has never been done before, with the implication being that this is wrong, it's wrong to do it now because it's never been done before, rather than asking why wasn't it ever done before? Why would you allow lawyers as officers of the court to lie to the court, Because that's a desparrable offense. You do that sort of thing, you get into trouble. You're an officer of the court, You're not allowed to lie to the court. Filing a false immigration claim violates anti fraud statutes, although he calls them statues. That's according to the DHS General Counsel James Percival, and those who file them should be held accountable. According to a memo that was reviewed by ABC News, quote fraudulent asylum claims threaten the safety of Americans by overwhelming our burdened immigration system and delaying the removal of dangerous criminal aliens. By holding Dot a Monomene accountable, we are sending a message to other immigration attorneys who engage in fraud across the country that your days of abusing and defrauding our immigration system are over. Good, good, and this guy should be disbarred, absolutely disbarred. How can a court ever trust this guy again with a record like this? If true? Okay, so two wins on the immigration enforcement front. Oh but wait, there's more. Here's another immigration win. This comes from the North Carolina General Assembly. They overrode one of Governor Josh Stein's veto's regarding immigration. They overrode three others as well, total of four veto overrides. I will tell you what they are. Lisa on the text line wants to know where the lawyer Dona Monomenally is from. And I don't. I do not know. If I had to guess with a name like the gnawed Dotamani, I'm guessing India or a neighboring country. Don't know, Kevin says, regarding that lawyer and his all of his fake asylum claim stories that he submitted to the court. Pete, think how much work it is to think up thirty two different fake stories. I'd probably do some cutting and paste in two if I was in his shoes. Yeah, but you're not allowed to lie to the court. That's the like I get it. I mean, if we're just like submitting, you know, papers to the professor, that's one thing, but this. Is the court. Andrew palmerans at Carolinajournal dot com reporting on the four over rides that the General Assembly did the House did yesterday. They overrode Governor Josh Stein's vetos on four Republican backed measures, clearing a backlog of long stalled measures that had been on the House calendar for months. The votes hand GOP legislative leaders a major win over the Democrat governor. The overrides all passed by a vote of seventy one to forty seven. And that is the exact numbered. Well, they needed seventy two, but there were two members who were not present. Actually there were more than that. I think there was a Republican missing as well. There were two Democrats missing. Actually one of them is not a Democrat. Anymore. One of them is an independent. Uh huh. Carla Cunningham, former Democrat primaried right by her own along with Shelley Willingham, a Democrat also primaried by his own party. Both of them were defeated in their primaries by Governor Josh Stein's backed opponents because they had previously broken with their party on key votes. Now they did not vote in this override vote. They just didn't show up. They just were not there. This is what they call up in Raleigh taking a walk. So if you just leave and you're not there, then the number that the House needs they need seventy two. In a full house, they need seventy two votes to override a veto. But if you don't have all of the one hundred and twenty members there, then that two thirds number drops to seventy one in this case, and that's what they got, seventy one votes. So of course Democrats were outraged. How dare you Republicans. They were yelling and screaming at the at the speaker Deston Hall, you know, for having these votes when these members weren't present, And Hall told them like, I could have just called for these votes whenever, which is the way it has been done. When Deston Hall became the Speaker of the House, one of the first things, if not the first thing that he did, was to publish a calendar, and he told everybody, here are all the days that we're in session, and here are the days we're going to vote. So everybody knew, everybody knew when votes might occur, and it just so happened that two of these these democrats that you guys targeted in your own party for defeat because they were not leftist enough, they just happened to not be here. Don't know if that was part of a plan, probably, but that's how they got the votes. So one of. The bills that they overrode the veto on the North Carolina Border Protection Act. It requires state law enforcement agencies to comply with federal immigration detainers and cooperate with ICE when a person in custody is believed to be in the country illegally. It also targets local governments with so called sanctuary policies by holding them accountable for refusing to follow state immigration enforcement laws. How outrageous, just absolutely outrageous. How dare you tell us at the local level that we have to comply with the law. We're working on nullification here Republicans. Three other bills that got overridden, all related to DEI. One restricts state agencies and local governments from using public funds to promote, fund, implement, or maintain DEI initiatives. Another one applies those similar restrictions to K twelve education, and the third one applies the same restrictions to the colleges and universities. They did not take up the constitutional carry bill. That VETO is still sitting there and apparently two Republicans, Ted Davis and William Brisson, they refuse to vote for it, so that's just still VETO. All right, that'll do it for this episode. Thank you so much for listening. I could not do the show without your support and the support of the businesses that advertise on the podcast, so if you'd like, please support them too and tell them you heard it here. You can also become a patron at my Patreon page or go to thepetecallanershow dot com. Again, thank you so much for listening, and don't break anything while I'm gone.