SCOTUS Rules for Trump in Immigration Fight

SCOTUS Rules for Trump in Immigration Fight

( – One of President Trump’s previously-blocked immigration policies could potentially deny legal permanent residency to immigrants who seemed likely to depend on government assistance after entering America.

The contention revolved around the idea of an immigrant being a “public charge” because they might rely on public assistance. Previously, an immigrant was assessed around their dependency on cash benefits.

The Trump administration wanted to expand the definition of “public charge” to include programs like Medicaid, SNAP, and federal housing assistance. The injunction against this policy was filed by various nonprofit organizations and the states of New York, Vermont, and Connecticut.

The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Trump administration in a 5-4 vote to lift the injunction put in place by the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals in New York. The ruling was split along ideological lines with conservative judges voting for and the liberal judges voting against the rule.

Critics say that this law is a sort of “wealth test” that would bar more non-white immigrants from coming to the US. The Trump administration claims that the law is meant to prevent freeloaders from entering the country just to take advantage of our resources.

The SCOTUS ruling will allow the administration to enforce the new rule, while its legal challenges wind their way through the lower courts.

Copyright 2020,


  1. WE, AMERICA, is not and can not become a welfare State for immigrants either legal or illegal entering this country. We have enough citizens that have to depend on Federal and State aid to survive as it is.

  2. Vote TRUMP 2020 – it is the ONLY WAY to KEEP AMERICA GREAT AGAIN- we HAVE TO HAVE * COMMON SENSE* SUPREME COURT JUDGES !!! We can’t function as a society without COMMON SENSE – there are NO CHOICES in the WHOLE Democrap bunch- NOT A SINGLE candidate with COMMON SENSE—WAKE UP —ALL AMERICANS . Do you want OUR country to look and BE LIKE New York and California- TAXED TO DEATH , LAWLESSNESS and WITH NO WAY TO PROTECT YOURSELF OR YOUR FAMILY – if this is the life you want and it’s NOT A JOKE – then vote for a Socialist Leftist Radical . God gave us ALL common sense you just got to look for it K A G A – vote Trump 2020

  3. How much more socialistic giveaway BULLS**T do we need to hear form AOC. Really, her 15 minutes of fame are long over. Get rid of this brainless ugly twit ASAP. Actually she’ll hopefully get rid of herself. The real injustice, all the money she sucked from the taxpayers being in congress, doing absolutely ZIPPO and while screwing her constituents ( remember the Amazon deal – poof 25,000 jobs lost ). God help us if she continues her useless rants and wastes more time and taxpayers money. At least she’s in New York and not California, we have too damned many thieving, lying anti American ‘do nothing for the voters’ liberal leeches. The following liberals: ‘nasty’ nancy ‘pigliosi’, good ole ‘fart’ faced dianne feinstein, and last but surely not least, gavin ‘giveaway everything plus the store for free’ newsom have done a damned fine job of destroying San Francisco, the one time shining jewel of California that’s now one huge overpriced and overrated S**T Pit. They’re doing the same to all of California with their socialistic agenda. Sometimes I wonder what’s wrong with the voters here, haven’t they had enough high prices and demise and destruction that always follows socialism, are they a bunch of stupid, clueless masochistic moron’s or have they been smokin’ the wrong kind of weed? Inquiring minds need, want and demand to know to why this socialistic BULLS **T festers like an open boil or carbuncle on our butts and goes on and on and on like the Energizer Bunny.

  4. I agree with the president. Other countries (ex. our neighbor Canada) have monetary rules to prevent freeloaders. I don’t see why the USA should be any different. If we weren’t giving foreign aid to multiple countries maybe we could afford something different.

Comments are closed.