Connect with us

Politics

Supreme Court’s Immigration Rebuke Suggests Biden’s Border Order Is Unconstitutional

Published

on

Image CreditFDRLST/Canva

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3 on Thursday that U.S. citizens do not have a constitutional right to guarantee their noncitizen spouse admittance into the country, something President Joe Biden tried to cement in his most recent executive order concerning the ongoing border invasion.

American Sandra Muñoz sued the federal government after her husband, Luis Asencio-Cordero, an MS-13 gang member, was denied a visa by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services in 2015 due to “unlawful activity” the immigration officer suspected based on a gang affiliation tattoo he spotted on the El Salvador native during the interview.

Asencio-Cordero, a noncitizen, eventually “disavowed any gang membership” and, with Muñoz’s help, tried to appeal the visa case with the Department of State. The federal agency, however, agreed with USCIS’s decision, effectively asserting (along with the Supreme Court’s judgment Thursday) that a noncitizen like Asencio-Cordero has “no constitutional right to enter the United States.”

Muñoz claimed that this decision abridged her Fifth Amendment “liberty interest” and falsely construed her right to “fundamental right to marriage” as a “right to reside with her noncitizen spouse in the United States.”

The Ninth Circuit initially agreed that the Due Process Clause afforded Muñoz the right to a “facially legitimate and bona fide reason” for her husband’s denial. The high court, however, overturned this judgment.

“Muñoz’s claim to a procedural due process right in someone else’s legal proceeding would have unsettling collateral consequences,” the court wrote. “Her position would usher in a

CLICK HERE to read the rest of this ARTICLE. This post was originally published on another website.

Politics

Joe Rogan Endorses Trump After Discussing ‘Most Compelling Case For Trump You’ll Hear’ With Elon Musk

Published

on

Popular podcaster and comedian Joe Rogan endorsed former President Donald Trump on the night before the election after a conversation with business magnate Elon Musk.

“If it wasn’t for him we’d be f-cked,” Rogan said of Musk in a post on X. “He makes what I think is the most compelling case for Trump you’ll hear, and I agree with him every step of the way.”

“For the record, yes, that’s an endorsement of Trump,” Rogan added.

The endorsement comes after Rogan had both Trump and his running mate, Sen. J.D. Vance of Ohio, on his show for lengthy interviews. He apparently tried to get Vice President Kamala Harris on the show as well, but indicated that her campaign had tried to preemptively neuter the interview by limiting the time and scope.

“I view this election as a turning point, like a fork in the road of destiny that is incredibly important,” Musk said. “You know, I’ve not been politically active until this election. And the reason I’ve been politically active this election is because I think if we don’t, if we don’t elect Trump, I think we will lose, we will lose democracy in this country.”

“What I’m saying is like, this election is the last chance to preserve democracy in America. Mark my words,” he added. “Everything they accuse Trump of, they are guilty of. And if Trump doesn’t win, this will be the last real election in America.”

Rogan and Musk marveled at the many hoaxes levied

CLICK HERE to read the rest of this ARTICLE. This post was originally published on another website.

Continue Reading

Politics

Notorious Wisconsin Election Official Is Ordered To Follow The Law

Published

on

Swing state Wisconsin’s most notorious elections clerk repeatedly failed to follow election integrity laws. Now, on the eve of Election Day, the state’s elections regulator is ordering Green Bay Clerk Celestine Jeffreys to comply. 

The Wisconsin Elections Commission sent a letter to Jeffreys late last week after finally dealing with a complaint filed by the Public Interest Legal Foundation (PILF) on behalf of Green Bay residents. 

According to the complaint, the clerk did not comply with procedures for auditing voters who registered to vote at their polling places on Election Day for 2020, 2021, 2022, and 2023 elections. 

“In short, and as detailed further in the analysis below, the Commission finds that the Complaint did show probable cause to believe that a violation of law or abuse of discretion occurred with relation to Clerk Jeffreys’s procedural actions,” the WEC order states. 

PILF filed the complaint in April, but the commission is just getting around to issuing its decision and order. 

‘A Lack of Awareness’

So will Jeffreys face any discipline? Not so much. 

The commission, just a few days before the election, ordered Jeffreys to take “affirmative steps” to comply with the law as well as the commission’s updated Election Day Registration postcard guidance issued in February 2023. She must also certify to the commission that she has completed the steps required under law “at the earliest time practicable after the November 5, 2024 election, but no later than Monday, February 3, 2025.”

As The Federalist has reported, Jeffreys earlier

CLICK HERE to read the rest of this ARTICLE. This post was originally published on another website.

Continue Reading

Politics

Georgia Supreme Court Rules Democrat-Led County Can’t Accept Thousands Of Late Absentee Ballots

Published

on

The Georgia Supreme Court ruled on Monday that Democrat-run Cobb County cannot accept thousands of absentee ballots that arrive after the Election Day deadline.

Cobb County announced on Thursday that as of Oct. 30, “more than 3,000 absentee ballots requested by last Friday’s deadline had not been mailed.”

Cobb County Board of Elections Chairwoman Tori Silas said that the county was “taking every possible step to get these ballots to the voters who requested them” but that the county was “unprepared for the surge in requests and lacked the necessary equipment to process the ballots quickly.” While absentee ballot requests had “been averaging 440 per day … that number surged to 750 per day” during the final week to request an absentee ballot, the county said.

To remedy the issue, the county announced on Thursday that it would overnight the late ballots for a Friday morning (Nov. 1) delivery with “prepaid express return envelopes to ensure voters can return them by Tuesday’s deadline.”

But on Friday, the ACLU and the Southern Poverty Law Center filed a suit arguing that, despite the county taking steps to get the ballots delivered to voters by Friday, voters would be “disenfranchised.”

Cobb County Judge Robert Flournoy bought the bogus argument, ruling on Friday that the 3,000 or so voters who received a late mail-in ballot could return those ballots before 5 p.m. on Nov. 8 — three full days after Election Day — as long as the ballots were postmarked by 7 p.m. on

CLICK HERE to read the rest of this ARTICLE. This post was originally published on another website.

Continue Reading

Trending