Avatar feed
Responses: 4
Lt Col Charlie Brown
5
5
0
And this is yet another stone paver on the road to hell.
(5)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
PO2 Marco Monsalve
3
3
0
Just talked with an old time friend with the Border Patrol. He has been told that this does not change the criminal check aspects of asylum cases and sent this : "Every individual who applies for asylum will be subject to a series of background/security checks. Depending on the results of these mandatory checks, you may not be eligible for a final grant of asylum. Your application may be referred to Immigration Court for removal proceedings." He says the Judges use the same information and that the determinations at the point being discussed are about "credible fear" if returned to the originating country. Interestingly enough they are already getting blow back from Progressives about the fact this will most likely not allow asylum seekers time to get attorneys. Just another point of view.
(3)
Comment
(0)
SFC Senior Civil Engineer/Annuitant
SFC (Join to see)
2 y
There are always pluses and minuses. I guess at the end of day I view this as having historically been a judge's job to make determinations that may have legal ramifications. By education and experience these judges are qualified to do this job. What are the qualification going to be for these officers? Well I sucked up to some of these politicians? Officers also don’t have the independence judges usually do. It’s been my experience officers usually do what they’re told to do.
(1)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
CPT Jack Durish
2
2
0
Do you remember when Nancy Pelosi was once asked to provide the Constitutional basis for a piece of legislation she was pressing and she laughed? I suspect that President Biden might just respond similarly
(2)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

close