Connect with us


Federal Judge Delivers Blow to Biden Administration’s Border Policies



Screenshot 2020 04 21 12.08.23

The Biden administration faced a significant setback in its attempts to manage the ongoing border crisis as a federal judge blocked a crucial rule introduced in May, rendering certain migrants eligible for asylum if they entered the country unlawfully and bypassed the designated legal pathways, according to reports from Fox News.

Judge Jon Tigar of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California took action following a lawsuit brought forward by left-leaning immigration groups, arguing that the rule lacked both substance and proper procedural measures.

In a major setback for the Biden administration’s handling of the border crisis, a critical rule that served as a linchpin of their border strategy has been blocked. This rule was designed to address the border situation, particularly after the expiration of  Title 42.

Furthermore, the court’s ruling has exposed the administration’s inability to navigate the legal complexities of their border policies effectively, raising serious concerns about their competence in managing the ongoing border challenges. This latest failure further highlights the administration’s lack of a comprehensive and effective approach to border security, leaving the nation vulnerable to continued illegal crossings and a lack of control at the border.

Despite the administration’s claims of success due to a drop in migrant encounters during June, the judge’s dismissal of such assertions suggests that a return to a previous regulatory framework is necessary, indicating the administration’s failure to provide coherent and long-lasting solutions to the border crisis.

In response to the ruling, left-leaning immigration activist groups, such as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), celebrated the decision, deeming the blocked rule as “cruel and ineffective.”

As Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas prepares to testify before the House Judiciary Committee, the administration’s border control efforts face mounting scrutiny.

The ongoing crisis demands swift and comprehensive action, which the Biden administration has yet to demonstrate. As the situation persists, questions arise about President Biden’s capacity to handle the complexities of the border crisis and fulfill his duties as the nation’s leader.

Continue Reading
1 Comment

1 Comment

  1. Debbie tullis

    July 26, 2023 at 9:43 am

    Totally agree with this judge from California biden must be removed he has No thought process much less knows where he is day to day its a sad situation that the democractic party using a feeble man to advance their agenda but like the saying goes what comes around goes around

Leave a Reply

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


BREAKING: Senate votes down both articles of impeachment against Mayorkas in party-line vote




The Senate voted down two articles of impeachment Wednesday which alleged Department of Homeland Security Secretary  Alejandro Mayorkas engaged in the “willful and systemic refusal to comply with the law” regarding the southern border in his capacity as DHS secretary. The second claimed Mayorkas had breached public trust.

What resulted in a party-line vote, began with Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., proposing a point of order declaring the first article unconstitutional, to which the majority of senators agreed following several failed motions by Republicans. The article was deemed unconstitutional by a vote of 51-48, with Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, voting present.

Fox News reports:

Schumer’s point of order was proposed after his request for unanimous consent, which would have provided a set amount of time for debate among the senators, as well as votes on two GOP resolutions and a set amount of agreed upon points of order, was objected to by Sen. Eric Schmitt, R-Mo.

Schmitt stated in his objection that the Senate should conduct a full trial into the impeachment articles against Mayorkas, rather than the debate and points of order suggested by Schumer’s unanimous consent request, which would be followed by a likely successful motion to dismiss the articles. 

Republican senators took issue with Schumer’s point of order, as agreeing to it would effectively kill the first of the two articles. Several GOP lawmakers proposed motions, which took precedence over the point of order, to adjourn or table the point, among other things. But all GOP motions failed. 

After another batch of motions to avoid voting on Schumer’s second point of order, which would deem the second article unconstitutional, the Senate agreed to it. The vote was along party lines 51-49, with Murkowski rejoining the Republicans. 

Continue Reading