With everyone’s attention focused on the border wall debate (and Syria, to some extent), the Supreme Court ruled against the President’s ban on asylum for migrants crossing the border illegally.
The order was intended to make sure the mass of asylum seekers in the migrant caravans from Central America would be funneled through ports of entry instead of crossing the border illegally and then getting caught. A federal court had blocked the policy shortly after it was put into play on November 9.
The Supreme Court was expected by many to overturn the ruling, but Chief Justice John Roberts sided with the left-leaning justices, tipping the scale to 5-4 in their favor.
This President has never been able to do his job properly thanks to judicial meddling. It’s well within his power to define how the laws are to be executed. That’s the nature of the executive branch of government.
Roberts claimed it was incumbent on the President to make his case to Congress to change the law rather than going through the courts, but this argument misses the whole point of our Constitutional system of government. The legislative branch makes the laws. The executive branch enforces the laws. Just as President Obama chose to not enforce the laws with his DACA proclamation, so too should President Trump be able to enforce the laws at his discretion as long as his interpretation of the laws do not contradict with the laws themselves, which this order did not.
He wasn’t trying to stop the asylum process. That would be abuse of power. He was demanding that the laws, ALL of them, be properly adhered to in order for the asylum process to move forward. Individuals who choose to go through the process at a port of entry are being allowed to do so. Now, thanks to the Supreme Court, it doesn’t matter how they get into the country.
A 7-year-old migrant has already died because her father chose to cross illegally rather than going through a port of entry. How John Roberts thought keeping this trend going was a good idea is inexplicable.