Turley Explains Which Party Has ‘Upper
Hand’ In Texas-Biden Showdown. It Comes
Down To One Word

Even if the Border Patrol are carrying out unlawful orders? We have had immigration laws on the books for years but The Moron and his lackeys have made up their own rules. And they are NOT to our benefit.

Too bad. Everybody and their leftist brother has been able to “interpret” The Constitution any dang way they feel like and get away with it. Not this time. I stand with Texas.

As Rush used to say, the world is run by the superior use of force. Abbott is right and Biden is wrong, both in the moral and in the Constitutional senses. But it doesn’t matter unless patriots are willing to take a stand and fight. The fight will be huge but it’s coming anyway so we may as well admit it.

Well-armed and trained Texans (and others) will see to it that the invasion stops. I don’t know how long it will take but it IS going to stop.

FTA: “The problem is that federal courts are unlikely to agree that this is the ‘invasion’ referenced in the Constitution. There’s also a reference to ‘imminent danger’ and certainly looking at hundreds of thousands of people crossing, an effectively, open border presents an imminent danger, but the courts are likely to define that in the context of that provision in the context of an invasion by – as with a foreign state. “The courts are likely to say that lax enforcement has been a problem all along, there’s been a problem with people crossing that border, and that this provision was really written at a time when those border states were in constant danger of an actual invasion by a foreign power. So that’s the reason I think Texas will have a hard time threading this needle in federal court. Several problems with Turkey's statements: (1) The framers wrote the Commerce Clause very close to the time when they wrote the Invasion clause. The Commerce Clause refers to Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3 of the U.S. Constitution, which gives Congress the power “to regulate commerce with foreign nations, among states, and with the Indian tribes.” Note the Article 1 specificity in naming "foreign nations." That specific language was absent in Article 1, which is about obtaining the consent of Congress, not consent of the Chief Executive. It doesn't caveat invasion, leaving a plain language interpretation. What court can claim that cartels from foreign nations, heavily armed paramilitary groups that are not under the control of their home nation's armed forces, as the cartels, as well as Central American gangs, like MS-13, do their crimes with near impunity in Mexico and El Salvador, for example. (2) The statement that Article 1 was written at a time when "those border states were in constant danger of an actual invasion by a foreign power," seems odd as the foreign power appears to be either Spain or Mexico. In 1821, Mexico defeated Spain for it to become an independent nation. In 1787, the time when the Constitution was written, "those border states" Turley references, were not yet states of the United States and Spain was no real threat to US sovereignty, as none of our current states on the southern border were US states, so Mexico was no threat to the US and Texas didn't become a Republic until it defeated Santa Ana's Mexican army in 1836, and did't become a state until 1845. While the SCOTUS may reject Texas' arguments, Turley's reasoning is still suspect.

There are TWO massive, Port of entry bridges within ONE mile of Shelby park, with Huge Customs/immigration buildings and hundreds of personnel..there is NO reason anyone should be allowed to unlawfully enter within sight of those two official locations, and then be allowed a much laxer standard of being allowed in than that applied to those that cross lawfully. https://www.google.com/maps/place/Shelby+Park/@28.7022893,-100.5127761,2052m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m6!3m5!1s0x865f8dfc76090fc5:0x25d2493414af76d5!8m2!3d28.7079581!4d-100.5091596!16s%2Fg%2F11tn5jd5cn?entry=ttu

I'm not a Texan, but I seem to recall reading that when Texas joined with the United States, it had a different arrangement than the other states. I know that in Texas, the Texas flag flies at the same height as the American flag, and I understand that Texas can, if and when it chooses, divide itself into as many as 5 states. I would not be surprised to find that Texas has other specific rights and powers that were set forth in the agreement for Texas to join the U.S. Any L-Dotter who is up on the specifics, Please chip in!

FTA: “The courts are likely to say that lax enforcement has been a problem all along, there’s been a problem with people crossing that border,…” Uhm, you might want to rethink that Professor Turley. President Trump had a handle on the border until Biden’s coup. Then everything went to Hades in a hand basket. There is a clear delineation between the two administrations. Does President Trump get no credit for effectively handling the border during his watch? Had Joe left it alone, we would not be at this point today. He has welcomed the invasion, encouraged it, and is fighting to keep the border open with all manner of people from around the world pouring through without the least bit of vetting. Who do we believe? Professor Turley or our eyes? Even the statistics prove that the border was secure as it ever had been during the Trump administration. Are we just supposed to forget that ever happened? Joe Biden created the invasion, he enables it and supports it in violation of his oath of office. Seems pretty cut and dried to me.

Abbott is right! Biden has broken the Compact between the Federal Government and Texas! Texas is therefore free to protect itself despite he protestations of an imbecilic asshat President.

The courts are a big part of the problem.

Sounds like the Courts have gone Leftist ROGUE...Sorry Clowns, your orders are UNCONSTITUTIONAL and will be IGNORED!

Read the article twice but I have missed what the One Word is that this comes down to. Anyone help me?