Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor Dissent On Trump Immigration

Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor Dissent On Trump Immigration

Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor Dissent On Trump Immigration

Once again, our Southern border and the problems of mass immigration are in the news. A Supreme Court ruling Wednesday evening allows new Trump Administration directives to continue for the time being. A dissent written by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ruth Bader Ginsburg shows their ignorance of history.

The Trump Administration policy issued in July had said that, in the most basic, immigrants who passed through a country, on the way to the United States, without seeking asylum, could be denied an asylum claim. If one is fleeing a country based on fear of persecution, it seems reasonable to expect that one would claim asylum in the first country one came to. While a judge in California blocked the new immigration rules, different portions of the regulations are being heard in the notorious Ninth Circuit and the Supreme Court of the United States. The Wednesday ruling is only temporary as the case wends its way through various courts.

The Washington Post headline “Supreme Court says Trump administration can begin denying asylum to migrants while legal fight continues” tells us that the Washington Post does not approve. The dissent by Sotomayor and Bader Ginsburg shows that they don’t know United States immigration history.

Here is an ABC video on this confused and confusing subject:

Bias much?

The opening of the Sotomayor dissent from The Washington Post:

No vote was recorded in the asylum case order, but Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ruth Bader Ginsburg noted their disapproval of the court’s action in a strongly worded dissent.

“Once again the Executive Branch has issued a rule that seeks to upend longstanding practices regarding refugees who seek shelter from persecution,” Sotomayor wrote.

That’s why the need to apply for asylum in the first country that they come to, Justice Sotomayor. We don’t know if they are truly seeking shelter from persecution. More from Sotomayor:

“Although this Nation has long kept its doors open to refugees — and although the stakes for asylum seekers could not be higher — the Government implemented its rule without first providing the public notice and inviting the public input generally required by law.”

This dissent from Sotomayor and signed by the notorious RBG shows a clear lack of historical knowledge and current events.

We, as a Country, have long blocked immigration and denied refugees. In 1939, the United States denied entry to 900 Jewish refugees who had a true fear of persecution and death. There have been periods of virtually zero immigration.

The Sotomayor dissent shows a terrifying ignorance of current events. The problems at the Southern border include human sex-trafficking, drugs, disease and violence. Sotomayor and RBG would rather the Border Patrol Agents be overwhelmed than allow reasonable immigration terms to be applied. They would rather crimes be committed against the immigrants, and citizens of our country be endangered, than provide reasonable restrictions.

As the Left, judges and Justices like Sotomayor and Ruth Bader Ginsburg show their ignorance of history and current events, our Southern border continues to be breached and our agents overwhelmed and denigrated.

These rulings will bounce around every court in the land before ending back at the Supreme Court. Let us hope that the Justices will read a history book and review current events before then. The laws of the land shouldn’t be based emotions of two Justices.

Welcome Instapundit Readers

Photo Credit: Sonia Sotomayor and Ruth Bader Ginsburg by Steve Petteway/Public Domain

Written by

7 Comments
  • GWB says:

    it seems reasonable to expect that one would claim asylum in the first country one came to
    Yep. That’s why it’s already part of the international rules on asylum. Has been for a long time, evidently.

    While a judge in California blocked the new immigration rules
    It wasn’t just that he blocked the ‘new’ rules, but that he blocked for the whole country, despite his jurisdiction only covering CA.

    The Wednesday ruling is only temporary
    Sort of. It definitely said “You can’t do that!” to the CA judge, as it pertains to a nationwide injunction.
    (BTW, the 9th Circus already told the judge that. He just went back and did it again. Hopefully he does it one more time, in defiance of SCOTUS – and then some armed marshals come and toss his butt behind bars.)

    a rule that seeks to upend longstanding practices
    No, ignoramus. Note it has always been the international rule.

    the Government implemented its rule without first providing the public notice
    *eyeroll*
    Mainly because it’s already the rule. (But, yes, actually, on this one, also because… Trump. He’s not always a rules-follower.) (And, btw, I think there was plenty of “public input”. Nothing says you have to follow the input from the loudest or most numerous voices.)

    I’m going to bet the parts about how big a meanie Trump is were written by Sotomayor, and the ones on following arcane rules and “past practice” were written by RBG (or her clerks).

  • Harlan says:

    “…a rule that seeks to upend longstanding practices regarding refugees…”

    Yeah, those “longstanding practices” have worked out so well for our country.
    libs are like muslims. Once something is determined in their favor, it must continue in that vein for all eternity.

  • MortMain says:

    Bader-Ginsberg said she misses the good old days… when judges could legislate…

  • MortMain says:

    We can offer asylum to illegal immigrants but not the children in Chicago. When will socialists, liberals and progressives take responsibility for years of failed government welfare policies? When will they apologize for misusing trillions of taxpayer dollars and destroying the family structure in our large cities through morally reprehensible welfare and poverty programs? When will they acknowledge their part in conspiring with public unions against the taxpayers and citizens of this country? When will they repent for the contempt they have shown our law-abiding citizens? I won’t hold my breath.

  • GWB says:

    When will they apologize? Never.
    When will they take responsibility? Probably never.
    When will they stop? When it stops buying them votes that give them perks, privileges, payola and power.

  • Bandit says:

    If it’s good for America they’re against it

  • RebeccaH says:

    Well, Ginsburg is dying, and Sotomayor isn’t the “wise Latina” she imagines herself to be, so why be surprised?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Subscribe
Become a Victory Girl!

Are you interested in writing for Victory Girls? If you’d like to blog about politics and current events from a conservative POV, send us a writing sample here.
Ava Gardner
gisonboat
rovin_readhead
Instagram