Supreme Court Allows Feds to Cut Razor Wire on Texas Border While Lawsuit Continues Through the Courts
Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Barrett voted to vacate the injunction that prevented the border patrol from cutting the wire installed by Texas.
In a 5-4 vote, the Supreme Court permitted the feds to cut the razor wire on the Texas-Mexico border as the lawsuit over the wire continues through the courts:
The application to vacate injunction presented to Justice Alito and by him referred to the Court is granted. The December 19, 2023 order of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, case No. 23-50869, is vacated.
Justice Thomas, Justice Alito, Justice Gorsuch, and Justice Kavanaugh would deny the application to vacate injunction.
The justices did not explain why they vacated the injunction.
Texas installed the razor wire because Biden’s administration is not doing anything to secure the border.
The feds started cutting the wire to allow the migrants to cross.
Texas sued the Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, and U.S. Border Patrol, claiming “the Border Patrol illegally destroyed state property.”
In October, Judge Alia Moses of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas ordered the Biden Administration to stop cutting the razor wire installed on the Texas border to deter illegal migrant crossings except in medical emergencies.
Moses said the order would stay in place “until the parties have an opportunity to present evidence at a preliminary injunction hearing before the Court.”
In November, Moses finished considering the state’s motion and ruled against it. She criticized the Biden administration for its carelessness with the border but gave it permission to cut the razor wire “pending the outcome of the state’s lawsuit filed in October.”
Texas appealed.
In December, the 5th Circuit temporarily blocked border agents from cutting the razor wire as the DOJ’s lawsuit against Texas continues through the courts:
“Concluding that the district court legally erred with respect to sovereign immunity and that Texas has otherwise satisfied the factors under Nken v. Holder, 556 U.S. 418, 434 (2009), we GRANT Texas’s request for an injunction pending appeal,” the judges wrote.
“Accordingly, Defendants are ENJOINED during the pendency of this appeal from damaging, destroying, or otherwise interfering with Texas’s c-wire fence in the vicinity of Eagle Pass, Texas, as indicated in Texas’s complaint. As the parties have agreed, Defendants are permitted to cut or move the c-wire if necessary to address any medical emergency as specified in the TRO.”
The Supreme Court granted Biden’s emergency appeal and allow the agents to cut the wire as litigation continues.
The case itself has not reached the Supreme Court.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
In the spirit of the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions it’s time for Texas to block the central tyranny’s agents from dismantling the border security the state has erected. The lawless majority in this decision ignores the fact that states have an equal duty to defend the lives, liberty, and property of their citizens—especially when the central government fails in this duty (failing to faithfully enforce existing immigration law when not actively engaging in undermining such law). Let’s have the ”constitutional crisis” right now! Traitors and/or cowards in black robes aren’t the final word. Only determined state resistance can thwart a lawless central government.
This ^^^^^^
I found the immunity comment interesting…
“Concluding that the district court legally erred with respect to sovereign immunity and that Texas has otherwise satisfied the factors under Nken v. Holder, 556 U.S. 418, 434 (2009), we GRANT Texas’s request for an injunction pending appeal,”
The states have even MORE of a duty to do that. The police powers rest with the state, not the feral government.
The. tension arises from Congress’s enumerated power to enact a uniform law of naturalization, which the courts have construed to grant federal supremacy over immigration. Fifty years ago, the cases prevented states and localities from conducting raids on migrant worker facilities to enforce immigration law, but the INS and later ICE and Border Patrol did so, for the most part. Biden’s failure to faithfully execute the law has created this constitutional crisis.
States have the enumerated power to repel invasion. Invasion≠immigration. The Texas governor, chief executive of the state being entered unlawfully has declared it an invasion.
He has a better case for that then the federal government has for immigration- which by definition, is something done legally. The federal government and the President of the United States do not have the power to refuse to enforce immigration laws. In fact, we have article 2 section 3: he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed. SO why isn’t POTUS faithfully executing the law?
Because the Democrats and Rinos don’t give a @#$%.
That is bullshit, and you know it. You are a damned liar.
Wow, that was one of the most a**hol-ish bits of pedantry you’ve ever spewed. And it’s wrong, at that. Regular immigration is something that, by definition, is done through the legally enacted system.
Illegal immigration is not. And mass illegal immigration is invasion.
No, GWB, Gospace claimed that the definition of “immigration” requires that it be legal. And that makes him/her a fucking liar. So is anyone else who makes that asinine claim. Immigration is a physical act, not a legal one; it does not depend in any way on whether it is legal or illegal.
Which was a bullshit decision made in an era when originalism and textualism weren’t even on the agenda, and courts made up whatever sh*t they felt like. That decision is no more legitimate than Wickard.
The fact is that immigration is not among Congress’s enumerated powers, which is a problem for honest and thorough originalists. I don’t know how to solve that problem, but closing ones eyes to it and pretending that it doesn’t exist isn’t a solution.
Securing the borders and integrity of a nation IS, however, a specific responsibility of Congress. And that includes not allowing thousands of illegal immigrants into the country with no control or determination as to who they are.
No amount of legal sophistry will change that.
Is it? I don’t see that anywhere in the constitution’s text, other than the provision “To provide for calling forth the Militia to […] repel Invasions”. Securing the borders and national integrity seems more like the president’s responsibility.
That’s circular reasoning. They’re only illegal because they’re violating immigration laws that Congress was never authorized to make in the first place.
The problem is not the Feds. It’s the Feds spineless workers who do what they are ordered even if the destruction of the country occurs.
What information does Obama and, more importantly, the “deep state,” have that they could potentially use to manipulate John Roberts?
Push the issue, Texas. Arrest the Feds.
At least fix the razor wire faster than the federales can cut it. Randomly fire bullets in the direction of Mexico while this occurs.
I’d be happy with a “shoot on sight” requirement. Let’s get this resolved as quickly as possible.
If more states and local governments pushed back against federal overreach, they would think twice about opening the doors to military age male invaders.
Cmon…its not like people are crawling through razor wire. They just go around to an open spot on the porous border.
They literally can do that
Supreme Court is a**hole.
No Congress are the assholes for not holding Presidents accountable for faithfully executing the laws that congress passes. That’s their job and they’ve been failing for decades.
Both sides of the political coin benefit from illegal invasion. Cheaper labor costs for Republican donors, and more voters for Democrats. All supported and encouraged by the Chamber of Commerce, NGOs and churches.
Yes, I don’t mean to absolve them. Between the Dems and Chamber of Commerce Republicans, we are in a bad position.
I knew Barrett would be a left winged wonder, which for the most part she has been
Once Diane Finestein sang her praises at the confirmation.
We already knew Roberts is a coward
Benedict Roberts is a plain, old traitor.
Amy Phoney Barrett’s first act as SCOTUS justice was to recuse herself from the all-important (and simple open and shut) PA mail-in ballot case, so she let the court come to a tie in the easiest case in the world and left PA with the craziest, most destructive election cheating mechanism there could be.
Well, Barrett was Trump’s choice for the Supreme Court, so she has that going for her
So many great nominees and cabinet appointments. I SO look forward to more. Maybe he will bring Fauci out of
confinementretirement.I suspect he learned his lesson.
Well, Trump was filling the RBG vancancy, after all.
I think the bodes poorly for President Trump and his case against his being kicked off the ballots
More so, his immunity case
Not sure I agree with you on that….
Unfortunately, this decision is supportable by much precedent establishing federal supremacy over immigration, as I discuss above. Robert’s and Barrett didn’t have the guts to hold that in the gross absence of the feds enforcing those laws, the states have the right to do so.
That’s because Congress didn’t give the states that authority when they decided it was their purview.
Congress doesn’t have to give that authority to the states. It’s inherent in their sovereignty AND it’s written into the Constitution (repelling invasion).
Remember, the states are NOT mere administrative divisions of the national government.
“Remember, the states are NOT mere administrative divisions of the national government.”
Constitutionally, you are right. The reality is something quite different.
Tell me again why they call me governor instead of branch manager.
–GOV. BEN NELSON (NE)
So many millions , so many, they don’t care that they have murdered , robbed , raped American citizens by the thousands
They bring disease, overwhelm our medical institutions, children are literally catching and dying of diseases long thought eliminated in the US.
Please, please, Abbott, don’t allow this, arrest the Feds, let’s get this civil war going!
Gonzo, I cannot believe ANYONE downvoted you on this! Shameful!
Because Gonzo’s “woo let’s goooo civil war!” is a load of bullshit. He’s not doing anything himself. He wants others to get it going. Can you imagine the shitstorm if a sitting governor started a civil war? Abbott would be in prison in about thirty seconds and on trial for treason 30 seconds after that.
Whenever I see some jackass in the comments cheering on a civil war I think it’s even money he’s a fed. So yeah, downvote. And Gonzo, if you’re reading this… you first, buddy. Grab your rifle and go storm something.
He’s a she.
It appears that Texas will be forced to vacate the border and just accept all of the illegals.
Only if Abbott wimps out
Come on guys… the SCOTUS 5 are saving the Constitution. You know… that living document that is being slowly bled to death.
Because they’re treasonous retards.
This is INSANE. The Founders would have dealt with these idiots, who have absolutely no respect for the concept of the nation-state or sovereignty, very, very harshly.
No, I don’t agree.
It’s totally obvious to me that the Justices ruled in this fashion because they don’t believe that Washington DC and its suburbs yet enjoy sufficient immigrant diversity.
Let’s make sure Governor Abbott remedies that by adding a few new routes to his bus line.
For at least few months, send all the buses to Washington, DC.
Let’s build a tent city outside Roberts house. I’ll even help erect the tents.
Correct. I’ll make donations to run buses to Alexandria, Fairfax, Arlington, London, and Prince William counties of Virginia. Add me n Montgomery, Prince George’s, Howard, Anne Arundel, Calvert, and Charles counties in Maryland.
Five Thousand bus runs would be a good start, but not enough.
The founders would have been astonished at the entire idea that there are restrictions on immigration. They would have wondered where in the constitution Congress found the authority to make such laws, and why it would want to anyway. They would have been even more astonished at being told by you that without such restrictions there can be no nation-state or sovereignty, considering that they thought they had both things with no immigration laws at all.
I know the difference between immigration and invasion.
1. I don’t think you do.
2. In any case, what’s that got to do with the price of fish? The topic right here is Primordial’s claim that “the founders would have dealt with these idiots”. The founders would not have even understood the issue, because they never contemplated the existence of federal laws restricting immigration.
I think you’re full of it, Milhouse. The Founders didn’t address it because they still had an entire continent to conquer. I think they understood very well what happens when foreigners start moving into your land – because they had seen it happen throughout history in Europe and the Levant.
I think you’re jumping in with the “no borders” folks’ argument on this because it appeals to your pedantry. Splitting hairs is sometimes just a very wrong thing to do.
They understood and welcomed it. They thought it was a great thing. They did not anticipate Congress ever having occasion to restrict it; if they had, they’d have given it the authority to do so.
LOL.
You really think that the Founders didn’t understand immigration and invasion and the difference? Too funny … and really silly. The Founders were well aware of history – especially Rome and the Greeks and England – and understood full well what immigration is, how it relates to national sovereignty, what happens when the population flow into a country by aliens is unregulated and the like and what invasion is.
The numbers, back then, on people even able to come to America, were miniscule, at best, especially compared to the land, which seemed endless. The great bulk of the world still wasn’t even aware of The New World, at the time, let alone ready to jump on an airplane and fly over here. Immigration flows were from a few places only. That was even true up to the late 1960s, when the commie dems decided that we had to start letting the third world in in droves, because there were too many white people – white Christians – in America … namely, the people who actually built the country.
The Constitution gives Congress the power over naturalization. People can only come here to immigrate – to live here – if they are part of he naturalization process. Congress has control over that. Period.
You have a truly silly idea of what the Founders knew and thought. The Founders were very sophisticated men who understood and appreciated the concept of national sovereignty and the importance of the concept of citizenship. You seem to have little regard for either.
“The founders would not have even understood the issue” … That’s just crazy talk. I mean, really …
You’re either utterly deranged, or a damned liar.
Of course the founders understood both immigration and invasion. I never suggested otherwise. Those were both things that happened regularly in their time, and many of them were themselves immigrants.
What was completely foreign to them was laws restricting immigration. That was simply not a thing in their day, and they did not give Congress the power to make any such laws. I doubt they contemplated states making such laws either, but if they had been asked about it they would probably have said that it was the states’ business.
The population flow into America was unregulated, and they did not see any problem with this.
The number of immigrants was far from minuscule. Every single American, except for taxed Indians, was either an immigrant or the child or grandchild of one. Immigration was very much on their mind, just not making laws about it. The great bulk of the world was certainly aware of The New World, and large numbers were ready to jump on a ship to sail here.
Yes, the Constitution gives Congress the power over naturalization. But your next statement, “People can only come here to immigrate – to live here – if they are part of he naturalization process”, is so bizarre that you can’t possibly believe it. It was true then and remains true today that huge numbers of people immigrate without any intention of naturalizing. Even for those who do intend to naturalize when they become eligible for it, their immigration is not part of that process.
Of course the founders were sophisticated, and understood the concepts of sovereignty and citizenship. What they did not understand was the idea of restricting immigration. That was completely outside their experience and horizon, and they did not authorize Congress to do it. If and when we restore the constitution to its proper place, and we have started taking the enumerated powers doctrine seriously, we will have to deal with that, probably with an amendment adding immigration to Article 2 section 8.
LOL.
I never suggested otherwise.
Hogwash.
“The population flow into America was unregulated, and they did not see any problem with this.”
People routed their sewage into handy streams, and they didn’t see any problem with that, either. It’s the unscaleability that bites you.
GWB, are you alleging that I ever claimed the founders did not understand the concepts of immigration and of invasion?! How could you allege such a thing? Show me where I made such a claim. You can’t, because I never did. So you’re lying too. Stop it.
I always get a chuckle when somebody thinks they know what dead people are thinking
Especially when it’s coming from a registered Democrat.
What’s that got to do with anything. Most Republicans who live in Democrat areas are registered Democrats. It’s only common sense.
Of course, the founders also didn’t envision that their descendants would establish a cradle to grave welfare state, which warps the entire issue. They would have been aghast.
Indeed. So that is the problem that needs to be fixed.
Time for a Berlin Airlift using Texas based airlines with ten flights a day from the Texas Valley to NYC, LAX, ORD and DCA.
And ASE, HYA, MVY…
Do not forget Midway!
I fear this country is already lost.
Look around you in any city of any size. Observe the behavior of a lot of people. They’re sloppy, dress, their course language, their inability to express themselves, and most of the younger people not knowing a thing about their history because they haven’t been taught anything. This country has been lost for a long time.
I think you are each using “lost” with a different meaning.
I meant it has lost its way but is also lost because our unity has been destroyed.
Four more years of the dotard’s residency in the White House geriatric ward, and, the damage done to the U.S. and the world will be irreparable.
Which is what the Davos set is counting on. Then they can swoop in and save us all.
It’s not a final resolution, but it creates the concern that this Court is pushing harder then the Taney court.
Vanessa
@Nessakins_
Texas should just keep putting up barriers. If Biden can ignore SCOTUS rulings, then so can the state of Texas. New rules.
Quote
Greg Price
@greg_price11
·
1h
BREAKING: The Supreme Court just ruled 5-4 that the Biden admin can remove physical barriers Texas put at their border to stop the invasion.
Barrett and Roberts voted with the libs.
They’ll just get a court to order Texas to stop. And no, Biden has never defied a court order.
Student loan debt forgiveness?
What about it? Cite the court order, and show how he defied it.
SCOTUS said that it would take an act of Congress to forgive student debt, and according to bloomberg yesterday, Biden forgave $70,000,000 in student loan debt
Nonresponsive. Since you come up with this pathetic attempt to change the subject, that proves you cannot come up with even one court order that Biden has ever defied. Because there are no such orders.
As a completely separate matter, you’re also wrong about the current debt relief measures contradicting that supreme court decision. All the relief being announced now is pursuant to existing programs, which are already law. But that has nothing to do with the topic, which is obedience to court orders. The Biden administration, like the Trump administration before it, has been 100% obedient to all court orders, whether it likes them or not.
I’ve been saying since the day that Trump nominated her, that Barrett is a snake in the grass!!
This is one time I won’t slam Trump for not knowing how to pick allies.
When it comes to SCOTUS, Republican presidents — for my entire lifetime — have batted no better than .500, often worse.
Rest assured, if Trump is elected, there will be many, many more Barretts.in the Federal Judiciary.
Preferable to many more second Justice Jacksons, who couldn’t hold a candle to the first (albeit an FDR appointee).
Really?
Let’s enumerate since your dementia is in full bloom.
Sonia Sotomayor
Elena Kagan
Ketanji Brown Jackson
Anthony Kennedy
David Souter
Stephen Breyer
Just to name a few.
I would take 9 Barrett’s compared to any of the above.
But I didn’t expect you to know that, or because anyone on my list is white, and you hate whites.
The Biden admin has dug a hole here. Gonna be a lot tougher to sell folks on the scam that the border is ‘secure’ when they sought a CT order allowing them to remove the barriers/wire TX put up.
Now some will.say the Biden admin doesn’t care how it looks. Maybe they don’t, they sure don’t seem to. However couple this with d/prog Mayors of ‘sanctuary cities’ begging for help and the Citizens, some of them anyway, raising all sorts of Cain once the impact of these stupid policies begins to be felt locally. Add in the steady drip of local news reports of problems stemming from letting these illegal into the US. Add in some legacy media, primarily Fox, covering the border. Then add all the new media. The story is out for anyone with any sense to view and that toothpaste can’t be put back into the tube. The question is will this be enough to change voters minds or will some allow distaste for DJT’s sometimes abrasive communication style to overdue the real crisis?
I think Biden’s recent mumbles indicate that the Dems realize they’re losing the public on immigration.
“Gonna be a lot tougher to sell folks on the scam that the border is ‘secure’ when they sought a CT order allowing them to remove the barriers/wire TX put up.”
That horse already sailed when Immigration welded gates open that Arizona had welded shut.
C’mon man!! The border is as leakproof as Biden’s bladder!
Or his anus. Gives a whole new meaning to shit bag.
The border is secure — securely wide open.
Several comment makers have brought up the idea of arresting the federales. My question is this: who would be responsible for making those arrests? Would it be the sheriffs? They seem to wield a lot of power.
Indeed, it would be the sheriffs.
“The law enforcement powers held by the sheriff supersede those of any agent, officer, elected official or employee from any level of government when in the jurisdiction of the county.”
That is not true. Of course some sheriff’s club would say it, but it’s still not true. Counties do not exist except as creations of the state, and they have no powers not derived from state law. Thus their officers cannot be superior to state officers. And since federal law is the supreme law of the land, and overrides all state laws and constitutions, it follows that the powers of federal officers, when they are enforcing valid federal laws, supersede those of state and county officers.
(Note that word “valid”; most federal laws are invalid, but the place to argue about that is in federal court, and right now the federal courts don’t accept that those laws are invalid. Let’s hope that changes.)
The office of Sheriff is kinda unique, at least in many Southern States. In Bama I seem to recall that only the elected County Coroner may arrest a Sheriff, no other State, local LEO may do so.
Now that’s a very American weirdness, IMO. 🙂
“My job description includeswhat?!”
You sure love this “supremacy” stuff. It seems you would roll over if the UN declared they were sovereign.
Also, jurisdictional disputes have been well-known for a long time. In some states, the state patrol cannot act except at a specific crime scene, on certain crimes, or on the interstates. Everything else is outside their jurisdiction. I’m fairly positive Texas was one of those states (at least when I grew up there).
Let’s hope that changes.
And, there’s your problem. You’re so beholden to the system that you can only hope to make changes. The DoI says there’s another way, if it comes to that.
“Beholden to the system!”
Milhouse believes he is the system. Leak Eagles like Milhouse believes that no one has powers or privileges, or freedom for that matter, unless the government grants them that freedom.
I believe that the citizens of. The United States are a free people, and will willingly grant some oversight and privilege to government officials until such time that those officials claim unlimited ability to trample the rights of people. Once that occurs, there is no law, no bureaucrat, no diktat, that can overcome the power of free people to throw off the chains of tyrants.
We are getting close to that point. I hope people like Milhouse and his ilk understands that we can only be pushed so far.
Be sure. I am not calling for a civil war. I am calling on tyrants and their supporters to use restraint.
The Constitution only has the power We The People give it.
Once we remove consent, all bets are off.
Scotus is too big for its britches. WAY past time to bring it down many notches.
Too many women on that bench. Too much feelings and little common sense.
I said it. I meant it.
Roberts is who we knew he was. But, Barrett’s behavior on this subject shouldn’t be surprising to anyone either. Prior to her confirmation hearing beginning, the media tried to make an issue out of Barrett’s membership in ‘Praise of People,’ the charismatic Catholic group. Many on the right reflexively defended the group…probably not fully understanding it. While there are significant theologically conservative tenets that underpin Praise of People, they also have a PRONOUNCED progressive streak, particularly when it comes to how it sees the role of government.
It’s a VERY pro-immigrant (legal or not) organization, even more so than the mainstream Catholic Church. Some of the loudest pro-illegal immigration voices in the Catholic Church are also very active in Praise of People. I suspect she’s further to the left on this issue than even Roberts is. Everyone I’ve met who’s associated with the group (and I’ve met many), could be described as an immigrant activist.
This is totally contemptible farce.
Illegal aliens are invading the country, enabled and coddled by the vile Dhimmi-crats. “Catch-and-release” of aliens into the interior of the country, after being handed an unenforceable command to appear in immigration court at some distant future date, is an outrageous and indefensible policy. Abuse of the asylum process, also enabled by the Dhimmi-crats, is rampant.
Meanwhile, any attempt by states to impose even a scintilla of border protection and enforcement — in the face of the President’s and the federal government’s manifest dereliction of their Constitutional obligations — is hamstrung by the federal courts.
Law and order cannot survive in such a crazy environment as this.
“The justices did not explain why they vacated the injunction.”
They were threatened with a likely repeat of angry mobs at their homes threatening the safety of them and their families while the DOJ ignores the requirement to defend scotus justices from angry mobs.
They were threatened. It’s just that simple.
Send the buses to their houses. They want them…let them have them.
Nice kids you got there Amy. It would be a shame if a whirlwind happened to them.
Signed
Chuck Schumer.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/01/wayne-root-i-say-loud-what-others-only/
It’s now time for a constitutional crises. Texas ignores the order and goes after anyone cutting the wire and indicts those two for everything under the sun.
Let the BP go on strike! It’s not like it would make much difference; in fact, it sounds like the security of the border would increase.
Matbe:
https://www.infowars.com/posts/this-is-not-over-gov-abbott-vows-to-defend-texas-sovereignty-after-us-supreme-court-sanctions-invasion/
Well, I know one fence that will be defended. Mine.
I think we need to declare a DMZ, where anyone crossing is subject to lethal force. Call it 50 yards of anti-personnel mines, with a bunch of warning signs.
“ENTER AT YOUR OWN RISK.”
That should keep the Feds busy digging up the mines instead of wasting their time processing illegals into legals.
Ummm, no process will ever make those military age male invaders legal.
Openly flaunting Federal Law instead of upholding it? Well now, the rot is deeper than we could ever imagine. Only one solution, Texas should [continue to] ignore any unlawful ruling and protect its border…the fact it happens to coincide with America’s southern border is of no consequence. Try taking your neighbors fence down, see what happens.
No quarter given.
s/flaunting/flouting
Six in one hand, half a dozen in the other.
Flaunting. Open defiance
Flouting. Open disregard.
You are not as brilliant as you believe yourself to be. You must be very difficult to live and work with.
No. Flaunting does not mean defiance. It means showing something off. You can flout a rule, but you can’t flaunt it. You can even flaunt your flouting of the rule, but they remain two completely different things.
To paraphrase Andrew Jackson (IIRC): ‘The court has made it’s decision. Let it now enforce it.’
In the meantime, Texas needs to tell the Disunited States to go piss up a rope.
Jackson never said that, and never defied a Supreme Court order.
well, …ever hear of the ‘Trail of Tears’? That was Jackson defying a SCOTUS opinion not to move Indians west of the Mississippi River
Nope.
The Indian Removal.Act of 1830 and the ratification of the Treaty of New Echota made the process ‘lawful’.
The historical fallacy of ‘they have made.their decision, now let them enforce it’ is bunk. The actual case at issue was Worcester v Georgia which centered not on removal but the issue of Worcester being imprisoned by the Cherokee.
And Jackson was not a party to the case, and was not given any orders that he could have defied. It was Georgia that was defying the court; Jackson had nothing to do with it. We’ll never know for sure what he would have done had the court requested him to enforce its decision on Georgia, but it seems likely that he would have done it. But the situation never came up.
So the Supreme Beings are joining the invasion force command. Betting they will also join the Marxists keeping Trump at bay
Politics abhors a vacuum. When biden refuses to secure the border, the cartel moves in and takes over control.
Reporter To KJP: Explain Why Mayorkas Says Border Is Secure But Biden Says It Isn’t
Word salad ensues…
https://twitter.com/JacquiHeinrich/status/1748476109618819151
🚨Just talked with POTUS:
HEINRICH: What do you say to Republicans who are trying to impeach Mayorkas?
BIDEN: I don’t get it.
HEINRICH: Do you think its unconstitutional? (NO ANSWER)
HEINRICH: Do you think the border is secure?
BIDEN: NO ITS NOT.