Should other Red States send their troops to Texas and help defend the southern border from illegals and the Feds?

[SolitarySolace]

thepostmillennial.com/texas-installs-more-razor-wire-on-eagle-pass-border-after-supreme-court-said-biden-could-remove-it

Yes

No

[normalice]

Democrats and Republicans fundamentally disagree on the problem. To democrats it is a humanitarian issue that is long overdue for some updates and good faith efforts to install competent people without a personal bias at the border. Whereas to Republicans its a critical campaign issue that most easily motivates a voting base with no financial incentive to vote republican (and indeed many incentives to vote Democrat) to show up and do it anyway, by waving images of brown people with their hand out in front of their faces until their primate brain takes over and compels them to do whatever they must to prevent it.

So, for democrats any approach that might actually fix the problem is prioritized. Whereas for republicans only efforts to draw attention and exaggerate the problem make any sense, as long as there is no risk of their efforts actually fixing it. Thus, stirring people up about a problem is the thing preventing it from being fixed - by swindling people into voting because of a problem they assure it will remain a problem so that it can be used to swindle people the next time there is a vote.

In that context it makes sense for red states to send troops for the headlines saying they sent troops, and maybe a photo op or whatever. So "should" they? In the context of Republicans being Republicans, yes. But in the context of fixing the problem, no.

[Anonymous]

We are looking at a fundamental moment in American history, thou I think it not as significant as it is about to become. As Abbot not yet being prepared with to start a 2nd/3rd American revolution is nonetheless laying plain before the world and theses increasingly formerly united States the unavoidable conflict which is to come.
A war who's powder is now being stockpiled now.

Even thou there is no room to back down on the subject of the present large scale invasion and colonization of our country due to the existential threat it now poses to our mere existence as a people. Its it unlikely to itself be the final trigger, this is more akin to the nullification crisis of 1833.

Nonetheless this is a threat that is now actively and intentionally supported by the Federal goverment in violation of Article 4 Section 4, and now Article 1 Section 10, clause 3 as well as the 10th Amendment in their effort to defend even its own state owned land and property. Thus proving to an ever larger share of the population the Constitution, and original reason for union is now effectively dead.

Nonetheless the expected imperial response of the same goverment will further define how the coming war will be fought, and who will fight it. Even thou it is unlikely to start over this particular affair which will instead serve to cement the need for independence. As well as illustrate the tools required to do that.

[rigmarole]

Biden has violated his constitutional duties to defend the United States of America, thus with a cowardly lawless federal government, the responsibility falls to the states. All border states that have ratified the Constitution should take immediate action to defend the border from invasion. All non border states should assist border states if requested. Iron Eagle...

[jshm2]

Don't go full retard.

There is nothing to defend as it's the courts and not Texas who decides what is "illegal".

Abbot just wants to fuck around and do nothing. While blaming his incompetence on "illegals".

If he spent even half that time actually doing his job, Texas would improve overnight.

[monorprise]

Actually its the elected Government that decides what is "illegal" their hand picked courts simply get to review the work of the executive in each case of law.

To grant any one man or group of men the power to dictate what is the law is to abolish said law in favor of them. That is why there is a law making and enforcing process which requires Constitutional agreement in cooperation at each step of the way.

How a State fits into this process with their own independent legislative, executive, and judicial systems, is as a whole the same as how the other federal branches fit in , in accordance to their role in the process.

The Federal goverment cannot without the legislator's consent simply commandeer and command State land & property as 5 injustices proposed to do. This is Article 1 Section 8 clause 17, as such State law still applies there.

The legal theory that they can simply nullify state law when it conflicts with their agenda in a particular location defeats the entire propose of Article 1 Section 8 Clause 17 districts. Why did we bother even creating ANY federal districts if Washington could simply?

The propose was quite explicitly to create a space where State laws did not apply.

If the feds want to enforce immigration law, they are free to do so against the individuals invading our country. If they want a zone where State laws don't apply they need to ask for it from the State legislator. Not simply cease a State park and tell the state their laws don't apply anymore there.

[abc3643]

That's illegal and unconstitutional on so many levels.

[abc3643]

I mean, really, this is a stupid question that illustrates a fundamental failure in either your personality, intelligence, or the civics education in our high schools. (You graduated, right? I am beginning to have my doubts about that.)

Feel free to study the US Constitution and the United States Code.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text

And learn some history while you are at it.

>>> Be better than the person who wrote this stupid (trolling?) question.

[AngryCarl]

You don't get to decide who's legal and who isn't.

[monorprise]

@angrycarl
The State of Texas simply said nobody is allowed in its own State park. The fact that said park happened to be on the Rio grand at a NON-PORT of entry where nobody under federal law can cross the border is technically illrelevent.

Texas isn't even bothering to enforce Federal immigration law they are enforcing State trespassing laws which apply to EVERYONE.

[purplepoppy]

Have you considered laying a mine field.

[milyjohn]

Yes, and then send the bill to Joey the clown.

[OtterMan68]

if TX pays for it