Tuesday Noon ~ thefrontpagecover

~ Featuring ~
    Crisis in Immigration Courts Demands Urgent Action — Here's What to Do
Hans von Spakovsky
President Trump Signs H.R. 1327, The 
September 11th Victim Compensation Fund
by sundance
theconservativetreehouse.com } ~ Earlier this morning President Trump delivered remarks during a rose garden bill signing for H.R. 1327, the Sept. 11th Victim Compensation Fund...Thank you very much. Well, thank you very much, everybody. Please, sit down. Very important day. And we’re gathered this morning at the White House to honor our solemn duty to America’s best, bravest, and finest, who I know so well. In a few moments, I will sign a bipartisan bill to fully reauthorize the 9/11 Victims Compensation Fund. So, the 9/11 Victims Compensation Fund is something you’ve all worked on very hard, and the day has come.Today, we come together as one nation to support our September 11th heroes, to care for their families, and to renew our eternal vow: Never, Ever Forget. Before I go further, this morning we express our deepest sadness and sorrow for the families who lost a precious loved one in the horrific shooting last night in Gilroy, California. While families were spending time together at a local festival, a wicked murderer opened fire and killed three innocent citizens, including a young child. We grieve for their families and we ask that God will comfort them with his overflowing mercy and grace. We’re praying for those who are recovering right now in the hospital. Some very, very serious injuries...  https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2019/07/29/president-trump-signs-h-r-1327-the-september-11th-victim-compensation-fund-video-and-transcript/   
Why Citing Watergate To Pursue Grand Jury 
Records Against Trump Smacks Of Corruption 
By Geoff Shepard
thefederalist.com } ~ Fresh off his committee’s disastrous session with Robert Mueller, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Rep scumbag liar-Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) has announced his intent to obtain... access to the secret grand jury testimony taken during the Mueller investigation. It matters not that Mueller concluded there was insufficient evidence to bring charges against President Trump. He and his two-year investigation are now being disowned by ardent Democrats dead set on impeaching the president. scumbag liar-Nadler’s hope is to uncover some testimony, however remote, that he can claim as the basis for an impeachment initiative. It is settled law, at least within the District of Columbia circuit, that grand jury testimony is to forever remain secret, and cannot be unsealed even by order of a federal judge. DC Circuit judges made this abundantly clear in the recently decided  McKeever case. Their rationale is clear: grand jury testimony is taken without the opportunity for cross-examination or any refutation. It is taken in complete secrecy, untested and unchallenged by anyone outside the confines of the grand jury room, and under the promise that it will never be made public except under limited circumstances not relevant to our discussion. scumbag liar-Nadler knows all this, so he’s either engaged in pure theater, knowing that his demands cannot be met under existing law. Or he believes that Trump is not owed any benefit of allegiance to the rule of law. scumbag liar-Nadler and his supporters cite Watergate as the precedent for transmitting grand jury information to the House Judiciary Committee, and for the specific purpose of helping the committee decide whether to recommend a president’s impeachment. Their reliance on Watergate as a valid precedent, however, is badly misplaced. Yes, Judge John Sirica did rule in 1974 that a secret grand jury report known as the Road Map, since it would lead to information impeaching a president could be transmitted to the House Judiciary Committee, a decision upheld on appeal to the DC Circuit. But documents recently coming to light show that both of those decisions were tainted by judicial and prosecutorial misconduct...  https://thefederalist.com/2019/07/29/citing-watergate-pursue-grand-jury-records-trump-smacks-corruption/?utm_source=The+Federalist+List&utm_campaign=0d039feff2-RSS_The_Federalist_Daily_Updates_w_Transom&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_cfcb868ceb-0d039feff2-83771801   
Sources Say Two Fox Hosts Conspired 
to Get Judge Pirro Suspended
By Tori McNabb  
redrightvideos.com } ~ Et tu, Brute? Very fitting that we just passed the Ides of March. This is the very reason I no longer watch Fox news... It seems that 2 of the hosts on Fox News worked behind the scenes to get Judge Jeanine Pirro suspended for two weeks. Sources say that Bret Baier insisted on the suspension to win favor from the Democrats and NeverTrumper and resident liberal, Shepard Smith, was the second host to push for suspension. Smith has the lowest rating of all of the Fox hosts. Pirro was suspended over remarks she made against terrorist linked worthless-Ilhan Omar and her antisemitic tropes. worthless-Omar has close ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, who created Al Qaeda and Hamas. Last weekend, she and worthless-Rashida Tlaib helped raise funds for terrorist-linked CAIR. The source asked TGP for anonymity to speak freely about the behinds the scenes maneuvers: The original complaint came from Bret Baier’s team. Bret saw an opportunity to make Fox News acceptable enough to the left, so he could get himself a job of hosting the Democratic Debates. Bret supported one of his producers, Hufsa Kamal, in tweeting out a condemnation of Judge Jeanine to  put pressure on Fox News to suspend her show. Hufsa Kamal, a producer of Special Report with Bret Baier, has a history of anti-conservative tweets. Shepard Smith, known as a “never-Trumper”, also played a major role in the Judge’s suspension. “He lobbied 24/7 to suspend her.” Fox News placed Jerry Andrews, a far-left, anti-conservative  as Executive Producer of Justice with Judge Jeanine to “muzzle Judge Jeanine from speaking the truth.” Andrews has a long history of anti-conservative, anti-Trump social media activity. Fox News has made no official statement on Pirro’s future with the cable network, other than to say it would not comment on “internal scheduling matters,” as the network abruptly pulled her regularly scheduled Justice with Judge Jeanine show last Saturday night and has apparently canceled this upcoming Saturday’s show. Anonymous sources have filled in TGP and other outlets reputed backstabbing maneuvering against Pirro...  https://redrightvideos.com/sources-say-two-fox-hosts-conspired-to-get-judge-pirro-suspended/?utm_source=RRV%20newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_content=subscriber_id:253196&utm_campaign=Sources%20Say%20Two%20Fox%20Hosts%20Conspired%20to%20Get%20Judge%20Pirro%20Suspended...  
What's the Deal with the Green New Deal?
by Alex Epstein
prageru.com } ~ There’s been a lot of talk about The Green New Deal. Beyond the headlines, what is it really? Given our energy needs, is it practical?... Can we have an abundance of energy and a clean planet? Alex Epstein, the author of The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels, considers these questions and has thought-provoking answers.  https://www.prageru.com/video/whats-the-deal-with-the-green-new-deal/   
It's No Longer about Equality
By Jeffrey Folks
americanthinker.com } ~ The Squad is offended because someone finally talked back. Even after some foul-mouthed attacks on the president of the United States, the Squad members thought they should be immune to criticism... That's the problem: not the president's pushback, but the Squad's apparent belief that, because it comprises "people of color," those people are immune to the rules that apply to everyone else. That, unfortunately, has been the assumption for too long now. Minorities achieved legal equality in the 1960s, and they proceeded to claim the equivalent of reparations in the form of affirmative action, minority set-asides, preferential admissions based on race, and thousands of informal arrangements in the workplace granting preference in terms of evaluations and workload. As minorities gained these preferences, some became more aggressive. Some version of the Squad's tactic of calling out whites and daring them to talk back became commonplace across society. Many Americans have witnessed blacks stepping to the front of the line and expecting to be served first. Many have seen minorities promoted ahead of more experienced whites with the idea that minorities need to be "represented." But what we see now is different. It is not just society helping out those who have been disadvantaged in the past. It is a form of aggressive prejudice against, disdain for, and potential violence against whites. As I see it, the Squad epitomizes this new stage in race relations. It's fortunate we have a president who recognizes what these women are about and is willing to stand up to them. President Trump's tweet last Monday called the Squad "a very Racist group of troublemakers who are young, inexperienced, and not very smart." Much of what the president tweeted is simply a matter of record: the four members of the Squad — Reps. worthless-Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, commie-Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, worthless-Rashida Tlaib of Michigan, and worthless-Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts — are in fact "young" and "inexperienced." The fact that members of the Squad have repeatedly labeled the president of the United States a "racist" attests to their willingness to play the race card, an action I would call "racist." The group's apparent bias against Israel also appears to be motivated by bias against a particular race or religion. As to their level of intelligence, that is a judgment call. Have they been acting rationally? Have they demonstrated good judgment and thoughtfulness in the past?  It bears repeating: the Squad's behavior seems inappropriate because it appears to reflect disdain for those of a different race. Contempt for others based on race is the definition of racism. As the president pointed out on July 22, the four congresswomen have violated the rules governing behavior of members of Congress, and they should be reprimanded. "The Democratic Congresswomen have been spewing some of the most vile, hateful, and disgusting things ever said by a politician in the House or Senate, & yet they get a free pass," he wrote on July 16...
Crisis in Immigration Courts Demands Urgent Action — Here's What to Do

Hans von Spakovsky

Responding to an unprecedented backlog of nearly 877,000 cases paralyzing our immigration courts, the Trump administration launched a new policy Tuesday that allows immigration officers to deport illegal immigrants before they appear in court.

The move is a step in the right direction, but more action is needed to deal with the immigration crisis on our southern border. We describe some practical steps below that can make a huge difference.

The “expedited removal” authority under federal immigration law that went into effect Tuesday will allow federal Customs and Border Protection officials to deport illegal immigrants who’ve been in the U.S. for less than two years without giving them access to immigration courts.

This fast-tracking of deportations is unquestionably needed, because the current enormous backlog of immigration cases is delaying court hearings for migrants for months or even years.

Illegal immigrants are released to await their court hearings, but many never show up when the hearings are finally held. Instead, they join millions of others who are in the U.S. illegally, often getting jobs and often having children who automatically are U.S. citizens by virtue of being born in America.

The parents then become objects of public sympathy if the government seeks to lawfully deport them, because this would separate them from their U.S.-citizen children.

The American Civil Liberties Union and American Immigration Council said they will file lawsuits to block the expedited deportation policy that began Tuesday, as they once again seek to stop the government from enforcing our immigration laws.

Unfortunately, the fast-track removal the Trump administration has implemented still won’t apply to migrants who seek asylum in the U.S. and express fear of returning home, as long as they pass an initial screening interview for asylum. This is a gigantic loophole that growing numbers of migrants are using to avoid deportation.

The border crisis requires urgent attention. The Department of Homeland Security has apprehended an unprecedented 800,000 illegal immigrants trying to cross into the U.S. just since last October. And that’s just the number we caught.

The backlog of cases clogging immigration courts was 260,000 in 2011 — a serious problem even then, but far below today’s nearly 877,000 cases today.

Judges in the immigration courts make final determinations on everything from asylum claims to deportations.

The immigration courts are not regular federal courts under Article 3 of the Constitution. Rather, they are administrative courts inside the U.S. Department of Justice. The judges are hired by the attorney general and do not have to be confirmed by the Senate.

Soon after President Trump assumed office, he instructed then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions to hire more immigration judges. The Justice Department has done that, but the department still doesn’t have enough judges to deal with the rising tide of illegal immigrants sweeping into the country.

Today our federal district courts have 677 judges handling some 460,000 civil and criminal cases across the country. Yet the Justice Department has only 424 immigration judges to deal with nearly twice as many cases.

Put another way, the average immigration judge has about three times as many pending cases as the average Senate-confirmed federal district court judge. And unlike immigration judges, the average federal district court judge has several law clerks and magistrate judges to help him or her with those cases.

It would be nice if the Justice Department could just hire its way out of this mess, but the problem goes beyond a shortage of judges. Our immigration judges lack the standard tools that other judges have. They labor under administrative rules that hobble their efficiency.

For example, unlike other federal and state judges, immigration judges can neither dismiss a case for failure to state a claim, nor render final judgments at the pleading stage.

So even when immigration judges know that a migrant has no legal right to be in the U.S., they still have to manage the claim, hold a hearing, and can only enter a judgment against the migrant after the entire judicial process has been exhausted.

Experts estimate that if immigration judges could dismiss cases or render judgments at an early stage this would reduce their caseloads by 40 percent to 70 percent. That would be major progress. Congress should act immediately to give immigration judges this ability.

What else can be done?

Consider the Justice Department’s Board of Immigration Appeals. Almost all decisions rendered by the immigration judges are appealed to this board — even in cases where the appeals have absolutely no merit.

This happens because, unlike in our regular court system, appeals in the immigration court systems are virtually free. The American taxpayer subsidizes the appeals, and there are no penalties for filing frivolous appeals.

The filing fee, compared to those charged in state and federal courts, is extremely low. And the board waives the fee in almost half of its cases. Furthermore, migrants don’t have to pay all of the other costs associated with an appeal, such as for copies of the record or the transcript from the immigration court hearing.

Such “no-cost” appeals are almost nonexistent for citizens in state and federal courts in civil matters. Illegal immigrants should operate under the same financial constraints as citizens. We should not be funding their litigation.

In addition, immigration judges don’t have contempt authority. That means they can’t hold attorneys accountable for missing filing deadlines, tardiness or worse.

If this was changed, the immigration judges could levy civil penalties on lawyers and others who violate the court’s procedures and orders. Congress actually authorized the attorney general to give this tool to immigration judges more than two decades ago, but so far no attorney general has issued that regulation. Attorney General William Barr should issue it now.

Following up on the fast-tracked deportations begun Tuesday, the crisis in our immigration courts can be remedied by taking the actions noted above, namely: hiring more judges; revising the procedural rules governing these courts; issuing a regulation on contempt authority; and giving judges the ability to dismiss a case for failure to state a claim and the ability to render a final decision at the pleading stage.

There shouldn’t be a partisan divide about giving immigration judges the same authority and power as all other state and federal judges. That is just common sense, no matter what your views are on immigration policy.

Complaining about the immigration crisis isn’t enough. Elected and appointed federal officials have an obligation to quickly act to solve this crisis, and fixing the immigration courts is a good place to start.  

~The Patriot Post


E-mail me when people leave their comments –

You need to be a member of Tea Party Command Center to add comments!

Join Tea Party Command Center