President Donald Trump was handed another victory by a federal judge in Maryland. Judge Roger Titus ruled against a challenge proposed to battle against Trump and his interest in ending the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). The President would like to stop the program to become tough on the immigration policies and enforce current laws. That does not mean people who are already here will be deported, that just means they will not likely honor any future incidents that would normally be covered under DACA rules.

President Trump has faced an outlandish backlash from Democrats in his desire to end DACA. Numerous people have protested, but have not fully understood what it meant to end DACA. Many people assume that means mass deportation, but that has not been suggested. President Trump provided Democrats with a six month period to create a workable solution to dissolving DACA, but Democrats have come up empty.

Americans would like to protect the borders and enforce the current laws while working diligently to maintain peace, prosperity, and a prosperous America for all who work hard.

The Hill reported more information on Judge Roger Titus’ ruling in favor of Trump:

“A federal judge in Maryland on Monday dismissed a challenge to President Trump‘s decision to end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). 

“This Court does not like the outcome of this case, but is constrained by its constitutionally limited role to the result that it has reached,” Judge Roger Titus said in his opinion. “Hopefully, the Congress and the President will finally get their job done.”

“An overwhelming percentage of Americans support protections for ‘Dreamers,’ yet it is not the province of the judiciary to provide legislative or executive actions when those entrusted with those responsibilities fail to act,” Titus continued. 

The Obama-era program permits immigrants brought to the U.S. illegally as children to stay in the country without fear of deportation.

The Trump administration moved to end DACA last year and allowed lawmakers on Capitol Hill six months to come up with a permanent fix for the program, with the deadline expiring on Monday.

Dreamers and immigrant rights groups across the country have legally challenged the move to end DACA. 

The deadline, however, was essentially negated after the Supreme Court declined to hear arguments on the legal fight surrounding the program.”

Americans became extremely irritated every time an illegal alien committed a crime. The murder of Kate Steinle was seemingly the last straw as her killer walked free. There have been numerous violent crimes committed by illegal immigrants, and it’s reported that nearly half of the illegal aliens arrested by ICE, on the West Coast, were in or related to a gang and the violent acts and crimes committed by such gangs.

President Trump had once taken a stand against gang members, targeting the MS-13 gang, which has a reputation for committing violent acts of crime. The President took some heat when he spoke out against the members of the gang when he suggested that law enforcement doesn’t need to be so nice when escorting the gang members to the back of a police vehicle.

Dreamers and immigrant groups continue to protest the end of DACA, even though many of them are in their 30’s by now and they are no longer children.

Trump seems diligent in ending chain migration. He also seems more interested in having more immigrants come to America who has something to offer the country. It is in the best interest of America that our immigrants come ready to work and be productive. The more productive we are, the better we will become, and the less welfare we need to pay to those who might be abusing the system.

Ending DACA would be smart because it will no longer make people feel entitled and could increase the number of people who follow the law regarding immigration. That would be good because we are supposed to follow the law anyway, but it almost seems like we’ve been unable to fully enforce it the way it should be done.

Expect more challenges and for Trump to continue Tweeting about the Democrats who failed to present a working solution to the DACA decision making process.

Democrats spent six months trying to figure it out and came up with a nothing burger.


gun ban vote

Late Saturday, gun owners in scored a legislative victory at the state level, defeating a measure to ban the sale of AR-15 rifles in the state of Florida.

Initially, it looked as if the measure passed on a voice vote in the Florida stat senate, but a roll call vote showed it being narrowly defeated.

The AR-15 was the gun used to kill 17 in the Parkland school shooting, prompting a call from some to ban the particular model, arguing it is too effective in mass shooting situations. Gun rights supporters argue the AR-15 is no more dangerous than any other long gun, but is unfairly targeted because it looks like a military-style weapon.

The Daily Mail has more.

The Florida state senate briefly approved a two-year freeze on the sale of AR-15 rifles on Saturday, before overturning the measure 15 minutes after the initial vote.

The vote to pass the bill came on an unrecorded voice vote, in which lawmakers shouted ‘yea’ or ‘nay’.

Senate President Joe Negron, a Republican, ruled that the amendment passed on the voice vote, the Tampa Bay Times reported.

The measure then failed 21-17 on a recorded vote minutes later.

The no votes were all cast by Republicans, while two Republicans joined 15 Democrats on the yea votes.

The surprise vote came on an amendment to bill SB 7026, which would inject millions of dollars into mental health and school safety programs, as well as impose new limits on gun access for the first time in three decades in Florida.

Lawmakers debated the bill passionately on a rare weekend session, just weeks after the massacre that left 17 dead at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland.

Senator David Simmons, a Republican who opposes the ban, defended the need for civilians in a constitutional republic to keep and bear arms.

‘Our founding fathers weren’t talking about hunting, and they weren’t talking about protecting themselves from the thief down the street who might break in,’ he said, adding that citizens need guns to protect themselves from a tyrannical government.

Simmons cited Adolph Hitler’s seizure of guns from German citizens as an example of the potential negative consequences of gun control measures.

Democrat Senator Kevin Rader, who is Jewish and represents Parkland, called the analogy ‘absolutely unfair’ and said he supported the ban on sales of AR-15s.

He recalled the evening he spent with parents waiting for victims to be identified.

Post your thoughts in the comments section below on the Florida gun ban vote over the AR-15. In addition, share this on social media.

Just In: Federal Court Just Gave Trump The Biggest Win Of His Presidency

A promise was made to the American people by President Trump during his campaign that if elected, he would do something about the immigration issues in our country. Trump had the brilliant idea of building a border wall between the United States and Mexico. A wall would obviously help to slow down the influx of illegal aliens from Mexico into the United States.

Unfortunately, Congressional Democrats have zero interest in any of it, and they have been fighting Trump tooth and nail at every single turn when it comes to the border wall.

President Trump received a huge victory in terms of the border wall this past Tuesday.

Washington Times reported:

A federal court cleared the way Tuesday for President Trump to build his border wall, ruling the administration has the power to waive a series of environmental laws to speed up construction.

The state of California and environmental groups had been counting on the lawsuit to derail the border wall, and the judge’s ruling to the contrary is a major boost to Mr. Trump.

“It is not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices,” he wrote in a 101-page ruling.

There is something even more interesting about this ruling. The judge who made the ruling is the very same judge who President Trump made accusations against for being biased during the 2016 presidential campaign.

Fox News reported:

Had Curiel ruled against Trump, he could have undermined the construction of barriers on unfenced portions of the border.

The Trump administration was sued back in September as part of its effort to block any construction of the border wall.

Curiel is the federal judge who then-candidate Donald Trump once accused of being biased against him – due to Curiel’s Mexican ancestry – during the campaign.

Curiel, whose parents emigrated from Mexico, was attacked by Trump in 2016. Trump said the judge held “tremendous hostility” against him in a lawsuit involving Trump University because of Curiel’s Mexican descent.

It’s clear that this isn’t about the Trump University case. This judge could still be biased… most federal judges are. But, Curiel did make the right decision here and there was no bias.

The wall will be erected, that you can be sure of. President Trump will be going back to check up on the prototypes of the wall very soon.

Roll Call reported that President Trump will be making his way to California next month on a trip across the country. He will be making eight stops to visit different prototypes for his United States-Mexico border wall. The Trump administration has requested that Congress give $18 billion to fund the wall. President Trump’s immigration reform ideas include a proposed trust fund of $25 billion which includes construction of the wall.


Sarah Palin believes god intervened in the US election and helped Donald Trump win

Divine providence played a huge role in this election. I will boldly proclaim that. I saw it first-hand. I was there on the campaign trail,’ says the Republican politician.
God intervened in the US election and Trump’s victory was partially prompted by people praying to God that US citizens would “wake up”.
Ms Palin, who was one of the first well-known Republicans to endorse the billionaire tycoon, said she saw the role “divine providence” had played while she was out on the campaign trail.
The former Alaskan Governor said people were desperate for a change after descending down “the wrong road”.
When pressed about whether she thought divine providence had a role to play in Mr Trump’s shock victory in an interview, she claimed she had seen it “first-hand”.
“No doubt, divine providence played a huge role in this election,” she told listeners on Breitbart News Daily’s radio show. “I will boldly proclaim that. I saw it first-hand. I was there on the campaign trail. I saw how things were changing.”
“I saw more and more people’s eyes open, and I think so much of that was based on the church in general, those people of faith who were praying to God that people would wake up.”
“Remember, our Founders dedicated this land, this new country that would be America, this idea of America, dedicated it to God. If I were President, I’d re-dedicate us to God”
“Prayer warriors across the country, people who perhaps had never expressed their faith in a higher being before, knew that Jeez, we got to be on our knees asking for a change here, because we’re going down the wrong road,” she later added. “I was so grateful to see so many people step up in that realm”.
This is by no means the first time Ms Palin, who has previously called herself a “Bible-believing Christian”, has suggested God has a role to play in presidential election outcomes. When she was the Republican nominee for Vice President back in 2008 she said she was confident God would do “the right thing for America” and John Cain would beat Barack Obama. In this case her prognosis was, of course, wrong and Mr Obama became the first African-American President.
“We found our revolutionary Donald Trump, he’s our messenger. Donald Trump heard the voice of the people and allowed the people to expose what needed exposing,” Ms Palin said.

BREAKING! Huge Christian WIN In Mississippi! Libs Aren’t Going To Like THIS!

Religious liberty is a fundamental right of every American citizen. Liberals, of course, want to strip that right away from Christians – all in the name of inclusivity.

People of faith in the state of Mississippi now have a victory to rejoice in after a state legislation passed allowing businesses to refuse service in any capacity if it violates their conscience.

The law was originally passed by Republican Governor Phil Bryant back in April 2016. The ACLU, however, sued the state, calling the move discriminatory.

The case ultimately went to the Supreme Court, which decided to pass on it. The decision was praised by many conservatives, including Kevin Theriot of the Alliance Defending Freedom. In his words:

“Those who haven’t been and won’t be harmed by this law shouldn’t be allowed to restrict the freedom for others.”

Theriot went on to say that the law ensures that Mississippians “don’t live in fear of losing their careers or their businesses simply for affirming marriage as a husband-wife union.”

As you can probably guess, liberals had their usual hissy fit. New York Governor Andrew Cuomo responded with the usual liberal tantrum and prohibited NY state employees from traveling to Mississipi.

We have heard these cases before of Christian bakeries being persecuted for choosing not to custom-bake a wedding cake. The biggest problem of all this is that liberals are too selective with their outrage. They’re all too happy to target these Christian bakers but are silent when people of minority faiths do the same.

Conservative activist Steven Crowder proved this point by going undercover as a gay man requesting a gay wedding cake at a Muslim bakery. The owner refused. The response from liberals? Crickets.

Remember, it’s only when Christians do it that liberals come out with the torches and pitchforks.

Will the left’s own double standard eventually come back to bite them in the butt?