Frosh and Hogan are wrong about lawsuit against President Trump
Feb 22, 2019 | 1:50 PM
California Atty. Gen. Xavier Becerra, accompanied by Gov. Gavin Newsom, said the state would probably sue President Trump over his emergency declaration to fund a wall on the U.S.-Mexico border.
It comes as no great surprise that Maryland Attorney General Brian Frosh and wishy-washy Gov. Larry Hogan jumped on the sue Donald Trump bandwagon with kudos from The Baltimore Sun’s liberal biased Trump-hating editorial board (“Congress won’t save the Constitution from Trump; it’s up to the courts,” Feb. 20). Mr. Frosh has shown consistently that he would never give up an opportunity to take part in a lawsuit against the Trump administration. One would think this is the first time a national emergency has been called by a president. That’s not the case, but the editors failed to mention that fact.
Since Maryland is known as California-of-the-East, in part, due to its high taxes, perpetual monopolization of government by Democrats, and de facto sanctuary policies, not to forget the anti-Trump rhetoric voiced by many Maryland politicians, it is just the common denominator of the various states saddled up to defeat another Trump initiative. Many of us in this true blue state concur with President Trump that there does exist a crisis at the border and unlawful migration like water flows to the least restrictive locations and only a dam can help control the flow or in human terms a wall or barrier.
If the editorial’s claims about apprehensions are down over the years are true, that certainly can be explained by new barriers put in place (for example, the Secure Fence Act of over a decade ago), smarter work by our border control personnel and better technology. However, recent reports in cities like El Paso indicate apprehensions are dramatically up due to the migratory caravans — something new for 21st century America. Unfortunately, the U.S. has not come into that century in terms of its out-of-date birthright citizenship law which is one proverbial carrot for unlawful migration. The migrants are either getting smarter or are being schooled into other approaches to take advantage of our lax enforcement of existing immigration law such as the phony asylum claims that tax our immigration system. Most intelligent folks know that the primary motivation by most migrants is economic which is not a valid claim for asylum.
But how do the editors explain the proliferation of drugs that continue to infest our country? I think the editors don’t give drug smugglers enough credit for being increasingly creative in getting those drugs across the border, especially in unsecured areas. No one believes a wall or barrier is a panacea, but it can help cut the unlawful flow of people and drugs to a trickle which is why the unsecured areas, as treacherous as some may be, are where the border control personnel see the need for effective barriers. Unfortunately, their needs and wants have fallen on deaf ears by the Democrats and the liberal media sitting in their cozy offices and thinking they know better than the boots on the ground.
It just provides more credence to the idea that Democrats really don’t give a hoot about border security.
I am still scratching my head trying to figure out what former Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe has to do with this lawsuit. I guess the editors needed something to try and shore up their feeble arguments, but actually it does nothing more than expose more of their anti-Trump bias. This Marylander is anything but proud of the biased attorney general because most everything he does is politically motivated.
Are the editors going to cry crocodile tears if the Supreme Court decides again against this lawsuit? I won’t. The jury is out. Let’s see what the verdict is.