AOC, Dems Attack SCOTUS Decision Against Welfare-Dependent Immigrants

‘Under the “public charge” rule, this corrupt Administration will cheat children out of health and nutrition benefits…’

(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) Open-borders advocates in Congress tweeted their unhinged reactions after efforts to weaponize the courts against President Donald Trump’s immigration policy were dealt another crippling blow on Monday.

The U.S. Supreme Court rejected an injunction imposed by activist lower-court judges to prevent the president from implementing his “public charge” policy, which would deny green cards to immigrants who are likely to create a financial burden for taxpayers to shoulder.

Left-wing magazine Newsweek compiled several of the outraged posts from Democrats in response to the high court’s decision. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio–Cortez, D-NY, let the charge, decrying the policy as a “wealth test” and a “cover charge.”

Many so-called “sanctuary states,” which refuse to cooperate with federal authorities on enforcement of immigration policy, also stand to gain in political power and federal funding by importing more dependent non-citizens.

Thus, states like California and New York are not only pledging that illegal immigrants may be eligible for existing social welfare and public benefits, but also proposing that they be covered under costly Medicare for All health plans and other socialist-influenced handouts, such as free college tuition.

Those would dramatically raise the costs for taxpaying citizens, while also diminishing the benefits for American citizens in need of them.

Predictably, the Left sought every angle of attack except for a reasoned criticism of salient points based on their merit.

Failed presidential candidate Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-Calif., wasted no time in his pivot to name-calling rhetoric invoking Nazism—a tactic so lazy that the Internet age has even given it a name: Godwin’s law.

Not to be outdone, Ocasio–Cortez’s fellow ‘Squad‘ member, Rep. Ayanna Pressley, D-Mass., defaulted to her standard go-to deflection by playing the race card.

As the Democratic presidential primary recently proved by swiftly eliminating all of its candidates of color, those on the Left can also be racist, elitist and anti-Semitic.

But—their abortion views notwithstanding—few Democrats could tolerate the fact that Trump’s public-charge rule targets the most vulnerable population of all: children.

Because they have no financial means of their own, these underage youth—regardless of their origin and legal status—are therefore entitled to support from the American taxpayer, reasoned Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md.—and don’t forget the parents who brought them.

By contrast, President Barack Obama made the controversial decision to enact an executive decision not to enforce immigration law for unaccompanied minors or childhood arrivals. Leftist courts have since broadened those protections to include any family unit that contains minors, insisting that the families be held no longer than 20 days in detention before being released into the U.S.

Meanwhile, the courts have sought to impose injunctions on Trump’s efforts to retract Obama’s DACA fiat, ruling that the current president’s executive action can’t undo the previous president’s.

Trump has argued that such policies, by encouraging migrant children to make the dangerous trek, pose considerable risk to the children’s welfare—while also incentivizing criminals south of the border to kidnap women and children in order to fraudulently benefit from the “catch-and-release” loopholes.

With the Democrats’ strongest arguments against the policy having already been staked out, Rep. Mark Pocan, D-Wisc., a co-chair of the far-left Congressional Progressive Caucus, fell back on synthesizing his colleagues’ statements with an ad-hominem attack on the Trump administration that distilled criticisms to their core substance: