cross-posted from: https://lemmy.zip/post/50264466

Justice Jackson accuses her colleagues of "repeated, gratuitous, and harmful interference."

all 22 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 89 points 1 year ago (8 children)

I don't understand how this makes sense. They had a protected status because their home country was having a crisis. So this would make me think the administration was saying the crisis is over so they should be able to go home.

Yet the administration specifically is referring to Venezuela as under a democratic crisis with large portions of the population experiencing crisis, on all their government websites, like say congress.gov published on September 30, 2025. https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/IF10230 So their own actions don't align with their statements?

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 78 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Ah, you misunderstand. Venezuela is both a stable country that these 300k people can return to and a narco-state run by Tren de Aragua that regularly sends drug shipments into the Caribbean Sea on ordinary fishing boats.

    You just have to develop a knack for holding onto both of these ideas at the same time.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Immigration courts denying asylum claims isn't new. Family friend was denied after he came to America after his brother was murdered by the cartel. I haven't spoken to him in a long time, last I knew they wanted him to to Mexico (???) and reenter on a different visa.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    This article is light on the details And admittedly I’m too lazy to look them up, but a lot of Supreme Court decisions look a lot worse out of context.

    It’s clearly wrong to suddenly end this protection status without finding better solutions for these refugees, and it clearly contradicts the gibberish spewing from the executive branch.

    But it’s the courts job to decide things like “yes the executive branch can make the determination“, or “yes that does not conflict with the constitution or established precedence” without regard to whether that determination is immoral or self-serving. That is the separation of powers we want restored.

    The cynical part of me points out this will make it easier to make their numbers, to brag about all the “dangerous criminals” they’ve deported.

    The even more cynical part of me wonders whether this drug cartel they continually blame even exists ….. and why does that putative cartel seem more trustworthy than my government?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 74 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    This is a rogue Supreme Court

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 23 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Starting a war with Venezuela for literally no fucking reason.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 44 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    They wanted to overturn Roe vs Wade so badly that they installed a court that wants ethnic cleansing.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 44 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    They wanted ethnic cleansing so bad they installed a court that wants to overturn Roe vs Wade

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago
    [–] 9 points 1 year ago

    They sent notices to people from Venezuela saying that they would be deported and barred from enyering the US unless they self-deported. A lot of people had active asylum claims but decided to leave so that they could come back and renew the claims later.

  • source