by Cheryl K. Chumley - The Washington Times - Monday, June 25, 2018
ANALYSIS/OPINION:

President Donald Trump tweeted Sunday that those arriving at our nation’s borders without the proper credentials should be immediately deported — immediate, as in do not pass go, do not collect $200, get the heck out of America and go home.

And what’s wrong with that?

After all, if an American citizen tries to, say, board an airplane without the proper credentials, that American citizen is immediately turned away, sent back and told no, no, no, can’t come aboard this time.

There are no airport courts standing at the ready to hear the case.

There are no judges wandering the corridors, waiting with bated breath to be summoned.

If an American citizen traveling abroad tries to saunter back home via say, the same U.S.-Mexico line that’s the source of near-constant inundation now, absent the proper credentials, border control will hold up that American citizen’s crossing. You either have the proper documents, or you don’t. No court trial necessary.

A handful of senators — Republican ones, even — now say more judges are needed at the border to handle the flow of immigrants who’ve been detained under this White House’s “zero tolerance” policy, and to separate the asylum seekers from the others.

But illegal is illegal. That’s not a hard call to make.

So it’s not really more border judges who are needed.

It’s a faster paperwork system for those in other countries who truly need asylum and want to apply in America. Less bureaucracy; faster processing.

But electronic correspondence is fine. Snail mail, even.

That’s snark. But the message is this: There’s no cause for asylum seekers to storm-troop across the border and demand America take care of them before their asylum is granted. They can stay on their side and wait for America to process their applications.

Now how is that a shocking remark?

The American citizen in the example above who’s denied entry at the border due to lack of proper paperwork wouldn’t even be really surprised by the detainment that would follow. Why should he or she? That’s called — listen up, libs — the rule of law.

But Trumpsays this, in a tweet: “We cannot allow all of these people to invade our Country. When somebody comes in, we must immediately, with no Judges or Court Cases, bring them back from where they came. Our system is a mockery to good immigration policy and Law and Order. Most children come without parents…”

And the left acts as if he commanded the Army, Air Force, Navy and Marines to attack toddlers at the border.

“What President Trump has suggested here is both illegal and unconstitutional,” said the American Civil Liberties Union in a quickly issued statement. “Any official who has sworn an oath to uphold the Constitution and laws should disavow it unequivocally.”

That’s a bit backwards, though.

Actually, U.S. officials are supposed to defend this country and this country’s citizens from enemies both foreign and domestic. They’re not in office to protect the illegal first, the citizen second.

All Trump is suggesting is, once again, America First. If American citizens don’t get a free pass on presenting proper credentials, neither should illegals.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news...uestions-seco/