Square Corners and Suicide Pacts

by Douglas Mercer

IN GERMANY the National Socialists invested huge amounts of effort to change the orientation of the law, to move it away from the rights of the individual to the preservation of the race. They called this vital law.

America has done the opposite. Here the individual and his supposed dignity and rights are at the center of the legal universe.

And to make matters much, much worse, it’s individuals from all over the world, provided they can set foot on our no-longer-sacred soil.

Vital law is now a dead letter. Because they want us dead.

* * *

Sarah Paoletti, a law professor at the University of Pennsylvania and director of the “Transnational Legal Clinic,” wrote: “All immigrants, regardless of their legal status within the country, are entitled to equal access to the courts and the right to petition before the courts if their rights have been violated or are being threatened in any way. US federal and state law does not grant the right to sue or the right to defend oneself in court based on citizenship status.”

In Zadvydas v. Davis, Justice Stephen Breyer (raised in San Francisco in a “middle class Jewish family”) wrote that “once an alien enters the country, the legal circumstance change, for the Due Process Clause applies to all ‘persons’ within the United States, including aliens, whether their presence is lawful, unlawful, temporary, or permanent.”

This is semantic skidding where words are labile, they slide and they slip, and the meaning of the word “persons” takes on a universal character.

And they told us with a straight face that the constitution was not a suicide pact.

* * *

When it comes to illegal immigrants the word “illegal” is the tip off, the tip off that, even by the rules we’re ostensibly under today, they have no rights that we must respect. They certainly, under no circumstances, should be allowed to use the law that they have shown no respect for as tool for their benefit. They have shown no respect for our law, and our law should show no respect for them. Self-respecting people know this intuitively. Unfortunately self-respecting people today are in short supply.

Whatever laws we have can only apply to the people who have a right to them — that is, actual citizens. Anyone else we can treat any way we like, returning the favor to them when they violate our sovereignty. After all, if they don’t like it they can always leave; no one will stop them. I’d say that no one invited them but that, of course, is not true at all.

One of the most insufferable things you read about is when illegal invaders use our own laws against us. Or, more properly, when internal traitors and collaborators use the law against us on behalf of the illegals. The job of the illegals in this regard is to show up at the press conferences looking suitably dewy eyed and vulnerable, preferably with a wet-nosed kid in tow to elicit sympathy from moronic dupes.

Curl up and die is what they should be told to do, and quickly too, but “our” system will coddle them inordinately. Coddle them as a means to our demise.

Our judges do worse than bend over backwards for these interlopers; they bend our country over so it can be metaphorically sodomized by the rest of the world. And all the while these immoral wretches pose as moral beacons.

This is why the Supreme Court said back in the 1980s that the offspring of illegals have a “right” to attend public school; why they have a “right” to be seen in a emergency room; and why in California they have a “right” to a health care plan.

But in point of fact, they have no rights we must respect.

We should stop respecting them.

* * *

MALDEF’s Twitter account bills the group as “The Latino Legal Voice for Civil Rights In America” but of course they mean the voice for “Latino” rights, and Latino rights alone. MALDEF stands for “Mexican American Legal Defense And Educational Fund.”

As for who funds it, the group was founded in 1968 and got a cool 2.2 million dollars (which was real money back then) from the Ford Foundation to kickstart it. Henry Ford was admirable on the Jews, but Jews and unspeakably cowardly weenies apparently took control of his money about five minutes after his eyes closed for the last time.

Of course MALDEF was modeled on the NAACP, both being whiny organizations created by Jews that got enough clueless White people to feel sorry for them that they surrendered their country without an official shot being fired.

Jack Greenberg (“born into a Jewish family in Brooklyn, New York”) once bragged he founded MALDEF. In so many words he said some stupid Mexicans who didn’t know Marbury from Madison asked him to come in, dress up in a suit, walk into Court, and stick more thumbs in the White man’s eyes.

Thank you, senor.

MALDEF President Thomas A. Saenz issued the following statements in response to the passing of Jack Greenberg, a crusading civil rights attorney who served as the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund’s Director-Counsel from 1961 to 1984, and was instrumental in helping establish MALDEF (Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund).

Greenberg didn’t mention anything about being “instrumental” in the founding of MALDEF. He flat out said he founded it. A generation from now they’ll be saying Greenberg? Greenberg? Oh yeah, he just consulted for us a couple of times.

“MALDEF mourns the loss of civil rights hero Jack Greenberg. Our organizational debt to Greenberg is incalculable,” said Thomas A. Saenz, MALDEF president and general counsel. “His understanding of the nation’s need for an organization like MALDEF, and his generous introduction and recommendation to the Ford Foundation made it possible for MALDEF to open its doors 48 years ago. Of course, his contribution to MALDEF’s founding is just one of many, many accomplishments and services that define the truly iconic civil rights career of Jack Greenberg. The nation has lost an extraordinary champion of justice.”“Jack Greenberg was an inspired and effective advocate for the civil rights of African Americans, Latinos and indeed, all Americans,” said Vilma S. Martinez, who served as MALDEF president and general counsel from 1973 to 1982. “For me, he was a wonderful mentor and friend.”

Well, shiver me timbers. Surprise, surprise, surprise. The eternal Jew is behind it all. Has this theory ever failed? Can it ever fail?

No, it cannot.

The eternal Jew is behind it all. It didn’t happen but if it did can anyone blame them for sending them up the smokestack?

MALDEF set up a litigation project on behalf of illegal alien children who had sensibly been barred from entering public school. In an intellectual travesty called Pyler v. Doe the Supreme Court unreally held that these children had the “inalienable right” to rub elbows with our children in the classrooms we pay for as they are allegedly “protected by the due process clause of the 14th Amendment.” Can’t understand that chop logic? Neither can I. But lesson learned; you start out giving rights to Negroes and soon all the world piles in.

In 1987 MALDEF filed a class action suit against the state of Texas for discrimination against (you guessed it) Mexicans due to alleged “inadequate funding for colleges.” Which reminds me that Spanish can’t be that hard to learn if Mexicans know it (or maybe they don’t know it, since real Spaniards say the brown babblers are pretty hard to understand even for them).

Before that, MALDEF, in tandem with the ACLU (that is, ACL Jew) sued Los Angles County, accusing them of arranging voting districts to “frustrate Hispanic political power” (so much for civic nationalism, eh?)

The state of Arizona, seeing that the federal government wanted to flood their fair state with racial aliens, passed a stellar law called SB1070 which made it much easier for law enforcement to quickly identify who belongs here and who should be sent out on their ear. MALDEF, which had a vested interest in flooding the state with racial aliens (their kith and kin), strongly opposed this measure and “challenged the constitutionality” of the law. When the law is used to defends lawlessness, heaven help us all. Or, even worse, when the law itself caters to lawlessness all hope of help is gone.

On October 27, 2010, MALDEF achieved another victory in Gonzalez v. State of Arizona, striking down an Arizona law that restricted voter registration by requiring proof of American citizenship. MALDEF had challenged the 2004 law, also known as Proposition 200, on grounds that it was unconstitutional and in violation of federal law because it forced voters to meet onerous new identification requirements at the polls and imposed unnecessary paperwork requirements on those seeking to register to vote.

Just so you know, they define “onerous” as anything that might reveal that some brown squatters are here and are ready to cast their vote for a left wing stooge as they’ve been told, a left wing stooge who in turn will allow in more brown squatters as they’ve been told to do by Jews. This cycle repeats itself ad infinitum.

MALDEF has sued over DACA, has sued Exxon Mobil for “DACA discrimination,” and sent a strong letter of warning to the government over supposed “Covid discrimination” (what else?). They sued the Trump Administration over “intentional cruelty” in a Georgia detention center (this one makes no sense, as they have no rights that we must respect).

MALDEF has continually advocated for an ‘earned legalization.’ Immigrants who demonstrate that they pay taxes, have a job, and pass a security test should be able to qualify for legal status.

If you go MALDEF’s Web site you’ll see mostly-White “Latina” Eva Longoria with her perennial resting bitch face spouting about the “constitutional rights of Latinos living in America.”

Ah, the Constitution in all its supposed glory — the framers certainly framed a weapon for our race’s enemies.

* * *

Marriage is supposed to be a racial sacrament, but in America it’s often the tip of the spear for immigration scams such as that committed by White-hater Ilhan Omar marrying her brother to bring in a another nail for our country’s coffin. In most cases simply outlawing interracial marriage would solve the problem — but as it is, marriage is just a another link in the chain of our destruction.

A national civil rights advocacy group is suing …on behalf of US citizens denied government stimulus payments because they are married to undocumented immigrants.

If they marry an illegal they’re illegal too, and they have to go. It should be a law.

The Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, is alleging that a provision in the $2.2 trillion stimulus package known as the CARES Act that denies the benefit to mixed-status families in unconstitutional.

Anything mixed is anathema; that’s the idea that will cure our ills; that’s the only idea that can save us. And that’s exactly why those who hate us and are trying to kill us want to suppress it.

The lawsuit filed by MALDEF said that the CARES Act “discriminates against mixed-status couples because it treats them differently.” Of course it does. Why should it not? MALDEF claims that this perfectly sane and reasonable discrimination violates the Fifth Amendment and its “guarantees of equal protection and due process.”

When it comes to our demise they have an Amendment for everything, don’t they?

The lawsuit alleges that by denying the benefit, the federal government is humiliating the plaintiffs and the children of mixed-status couples by treating them adversely as compared to other families.

Humiliate them is the least of what we should do; we should hound and harry them until they are well out of our jurisdiction. Marry an illegal non-White invader and you have committed a high crime against your people.

One plaintiff is named Christina Segundo Hernandez, of Fort Worth. Despite the likely illegal invader name she is the “legal” one (God help us). She is married to a fellow brown invader who is here illegally. They have four children. Ticking time bombs, all four, ready to explode in our faces.

The Center For American Progress states that there are 2.7 million Texans who have at least one “undocumented” family member.

The family, and marriage, used to be sacraments. Now they are links in a chain, forcing us to our own destruction.

* * *

This is why paper foundings are bad. You commit eternal laws to paper, time moves on, people come and go, words change, and next thing you know those supposed eternal laws have had the rug pulled out from under them.

I assume when the framers put a call for a census in the Constitution they thought they were just doing busy work. Now it’s been turned into a cudgel to destroy our race.

Article I, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution mandates that an apportionment of representatives among the states must be carried out every 10 years.

The exact and seemingly anodyne language is as follows: “Representatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned among the several states according to their respective numbers.”

Number, number, numbers. It all comes down to numbers in the end. It’s where strength lies.

The road to Hell is paved with innocent intentions.

Let a Jew feast on the carcass of words and soon it will mean anything he wants it to mean.

It’s a bad thing, but strictly speaking “numbers” means just that: how many there are. A direct descendant of the Mayflower voyagers is one, Jaime the border hopper is one. Nothing to see there, right?

Which is why you should always be careful what you say. Hyenas and jackals are listening intently.

California Attorney General Xavier Becerra filed a federal lawsuit against the Trump administration over the President’s attempt to keep undocumented immigrants from being counted in the 2020 Census.

There you have it.

“The law requires that everyone in America, whether citizen or not, be counted,” Becerra said in a virtual news conference Tuesday morning. “Not even the president of the United States can sidestep the US Constitution.”

The US Constitution is not worth the paper it is written on; it is sidestepped every day; time to send it up the smokestack.

Donald Trump had previously issued a memorandum ordering undocumented immigrants not be counted when it comes to determining states’ congressional seats.

Constitution, memorandums. Words, words, words.

Nothing more.

“His primary objective is to rip political power away from jurisdictions that have many immigrants to those locations that don’t,” said Feuer. “We are going to do our job in court. This latest move by the president is blatantly unconstitutional. Every person regardless of immigration status counts.”

Right now, California has more than two million undocumented immigrants and 53 seats in Congress. Experts warn if those people are not counted, California could lose one or two seats at the Capitol. A low census count would also cost the state federal funding.

Immigrants equal power and money.

“It would try to prevent California from having its full representation in Congress, and it would try to deny Californians their taxpayer money that they contribute to the U.S. Treasury coming back to their communities,” Becerra asserted.

Yes indeed it would. Glossed over in this is that Becerra thinks it perfectly natural that these invaders are invading and squatting on the remains of America. They are just his source of power, his constituency, his life blood. Jesse Unruh did not get it quite right when he said that money was the mother’s milk of politics. Now illegal aliens are.

Born in Sacramento, California Becerra is the son of Maria Teresa and Manuel Guerrero Becerra. His father was born in the US and raised in Tijuana, Mexico. His mother was from Guadalajara.

Not a Mayflower descendant.

The American Civil Liberties Union, New York Civil Liberties Union, ACLU of Texas, and Arnold & Porter filed a federal lawsuit today on behalf of immigrants’ rights groups challenging President Trump’s new order seeking to block people who are undocumented from being counted in the US census. Plaintiffs are the New York Immigration Coalition, Make the Road New York, CASA, American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, ADC Research Institute, and FIEL Houston.

A rogue’s gallery of aliens.

They say that their actions on behalf of foreigners challenges President Trump’s “lawless attempt” to exclude undocumented immigrants from the ‘persons’ who must be counted in the census for purposes of apportioning congressional seats to states.

Oh yes, the law is there to protect the illegal.

The constitutional mandate is clear — every person counts in the census. Undocumented immigrants are people — and nothing President Trump does or says changes that fact,” said Dale Ho, director of the ACLU’s Voting Rights Project, who successfully argued the U.S. Supreme Court case blocking the Trump administration from placing a citizenship question on the 2020 census in its attempt to intimidate immigrant communities from participating. “Trump tried once to weaponize the census against immigrant communities, and failed. He will fail again.

He did fail. His measly little memorandum was no match for the arrayed might of the Jews, for the inherited weight of a society saturated in anti-White policy.

The memorandum, the lawsuit notes, “is a discriminatory attack on immigrants and immigrant communities, and particularly immigrant communities of color. It is intended to… send the message that they do not count.

“Trump’s outrageous memo is an attempt to erase immigrants,” said Theo Oshiro, deputy director of Make the Road New York. “Today, we are sending a clear message: All communities will be counted. We will keep organizing and fighting to ensure our communities receive the representation and resources that we deserve. We urge the court to stop this reckless memo in its tracks.”

The lawsuit notes that “every decennial census in our nation’s history has included every person who lives in the United States, regardless of citizenship or immigration status, for purposes of apportioning congressional representation. Defendant Trump’s new ‘policy’ set forth in the memorandum therefore not only violates the plain and unequivocal text of Section 2 of the Fourteenth Amendment and related Supreme Court precedent, it also departs from hundreds of years of consistent census practice.”

Again, the inherited weight. Common sense would tell you that only citizens, and perhaps legal green card holders, and the odd diplomat or two, might count, then again they might not. But to think the framers intended to count the entire mass of people on the land is absurd, they didn’t even let one Negro count as a whole person. But of course that misses the point. They’ve long since jumped the rails on all of that.

“Mark my words — we already beat Trump’s effort to suppress immigrants from the census, and we’ll do it again. Sadly, it’s not a surprise that he is still trying to suppress the count and rig the census for partisan gain by cheating big, immigrant rich states like New York of federal resources and representation,” said Steve Choi, executive director of the New York Immigration Coalition. “This effort to erase undocumented immigrant New Yorkers entirely from the census is blatantly unconstitutional and illegal, and we refuse to be rendered invisible. We’ve fought the Trump administration at the Supreme Court and won once already, and we have no doubt that we will win again. The census count is too critical to New York’s recovery from this pandemic over the next 10 years.”

Rig and suppress is rich from them. The law is now a gigantic tissue of White-hating lore which has insinuated itself into every nook of our lives.

“We want to make sure that President Trump can’t erase this country’s millions of hard-working immigrants and cripple the regions that have welcomed them as neighbors,” said CASA Executive Director Gustavo Torres. “The census — and our fight — is about ensuring that our communities are fully represented in this country. We won before the Supreme Court when Trump tried to add a citizenship question to the census and we will win again to ensure a complete count in 2020.”

“Trump’s memo is yet another attack on immigrants and communities of color. His administration tells us time and time again — they do not see us all as equal persons. And we will not stand for that. We are working for an America where all humans are treated with dignity and respect. This is another battle we will fight if we need to,” said Samer Khalaf, national president of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee.

“We condemn the administration for making this unprecedented move that will ultimately hurt all communities in the U.S. We as immigrants are a vital part of our communities. We as immigrants live in the shadows because of unjust immigration laws that refuse to accept us as full citizens of this country. We as immigrants will no longer stay silent when faced with these injustices. We want to be taken into account not only on the census but at the decision-making table in Congress. We are proud to join in this lawsuit because we cannot have taxation without representation. We are human beings who are a vital part of the fabric of America and we must be treated as such,” said César Espinosa, executive director of FIEL Houston.

“Trump’s latest move to undermine the census is nothing more than a racist and anti-democratic Hail Mary. The last time we sued him and won, his administration had to admit in court repeatedly that the Constitution requires a count of all people, regardless of immigration status. Now Trump is once again demonizing immigrants in a cynical ploy to deceive the public and squeeze resources and political power from states like New York. He fell flat before and will fall even harder this time, because everyone counts, and everyone must be counted,” said NYCLU Executive Director Donna Lieberman.

Torres, Choi, Khalaf, Espinosa, Lieberman. Not a John Smith nor a John Bull among them.

The lawsuit, New York Immigration Coalition v. Trump, was filed in US District Court in the Southern District of New York.

Filed in the heart of Hymie Town.

So you can clearly see this matters to them a lot. Trump put a flimsy stop sign on the road to our perdition and they came out like wounded banshees wailing at the top of their lungs that White genocide would not stop, would never stop. They know it’s the whole ball game.

Just use the word “replacement” and find out their interest in this subject.

* * *

Regarding the the Covid hoax they are true to their word and never let a fake crisis go to waste. In Tacoma at the Northwest Detention Center some illegal aliens are housed on our dime. What they are doing that far north is anyone’s guess but I’m sure they didn’t slip in from Canada. It didn’t take long for the ACLU of Washington to sue the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement on behalf of these guests of the government. They claim that due to the aliens’ age and underlying medical conditions, some “public health experts” have determined that they are “at an increased risk for infection from COVID 19.”

Well, if that’s so, quarantine them in trash sacks until they can be shipped back where they belong; of course that won’t happen; they’re sick as dogs and will never be deported — and soon they’ll be dumped on our health care system, clotting and clogging up our emergency rooms while some White Americans will suffer or die, far behind them in line and also robbed of the resources that might have been used to save them.

The filing in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington includes testimony from leading public health experts Dr. Marc Stern, Dr. Robert Greifinger, and Dr. Jonathan Golob about the public health crisis caused by COVID-19, and the danger posed by the continued detention of people at high risk of illness or death from COVID-19.

Stern? Greifinger? Golob? They couldn’t find Dr. Jewy Jewstein to share some thoughts with us?

The ACLU’s National Prison Project and Immigrants’ Rights Project, together with NWIRP, are litigating the case.

Of course they are. These new reports are really little more than glorified copy and paste jobs.

Eunice Cho, senior staff attorney at the ACLU’s National Prison Project, issued the following statement: “Immigrant detention centers are institutions that uniquely heighten the danger of disease transmission. In normal circumstances, ICE has proven time and again that it is unable to protect the health and safety of detained people.”

Matt Adams, Legal Director for NWIRP, issued the following statement: “ICE has the responsibility to protect the safety of all who are in immigration detention. As a first step, it should immediately release our clients who have already been identified by the federal government as being most at risk because of this epidemic. If it waits to react to worst case scenarios once they take hold, it will already be too late.”

ICE has the responsibility to fumigate them while they hold them and then get them the Hell out; a solution that is both frightening and elegant in its simplicity.

* * *

The federal government sets unreasonable bonds for detained immigrants, including asylum seekers, by failing to consider immigrants’ financial resources or ability to pay, according to a class action lawsuit filed today.

So?

Once again the ACLU, this time the one of Southern California, was at it, filing a ludicrous suit that would make the government apply standards similar to other criminal cases when it sets bonds for aliens.

That is they seek to transfer the rights of citizens to foreigners just like they want to transfer the country.

“Poverty or lack of financial resources should not deprive a person of his or her freedom while in civil immigration proceedings,” said Michael Kaufman, a staff attorney with ACLU SoCal. “Such detention violates the due process and equal protection guarantees of the Fifth Amendment, the Eighth Amendment’s Excessive Bail Clause and immigration laws.”

The Fifth and the Eighth! Why not all of them?

In all other cases the government is enjoined by law to consider the financial wherewithal of the defendant when setting bail, which is bad enough. But in immigration cases (currently, but beware when Jews are on the prowl) this is not so. This makes sense given that nearly all if not all of them are trying to game the system. They should just have the standard bail for illegal non-White invaders be the current national debt — then, when they can’t cough that up, give them a helicopter ride home or somewhere between here and there.

Leak word of that policy and that’ll stop the flow for sure.

The Department of Homeland Security and immigration judges, however, are not required to consider an immigrant’s financial situation or resources when setting bond for individuals facing deportation or seeking asylum, and routinely do not do so. “At a time when state and federal criminal justice systems are moving to reform the fees and financial constraints that unfairly affect low-income individuals, the federal government’s immigration detention practices continue to deprive some immigrants of their liberty because they are poor,” said Michael Tan, staff attorney with the ACLU Immigrants’ Rights Project.

Boo hoo.

And deprive them of their liberty? They mean their liberty to leech off us and prey on us.

But they have no right to this — they have no rights that we must respect.

Cesar Matias, 37, is among those challenging the current bond policy. A native of Honduras, Matias is seeking asylum. He has spent four years locked up in a Santa Ana immigration jail because he lacks the money to post a $3,000 bond. Like Matias, dozens if not hundreds of immigrants in Southern California remain detained, without hope of release, solely because they are too poor to post bond.

Four years of three hots and a cot. Costly, that.

The lawsuit was filed in federal court by ACLU SoCal, the ACLU Immigrants’ Rights Project, and pro bono attorneys Matthew Sloan, Douglas Smith, Grayce Frink, Devon Hein, Winston Hsiao and Matthew Delgado.

We should send all of them somewhere, too.

* * *

In immigration cases the Federal Government has routinely retained the prerogative of withholding documents from “defendants.” As sure as Juan and Maria jump the border, this was deemed “cruel and unfair” by the ACLU who (wait for it) filed a lawsuit against it in Boston. Prima facie, of course, illegal aliens don’t have a right to anything; that’s just an axiom that doesn’t need any corollaries. To think that they could even have standing to have suits filed on their behalf itself beggars belief. The mistake in these cases is setting up a judicial process for this in the first place. If necessary I could prove that I’m a citizen in two minutes; presumably any citizen could as well; anyone who can’t should set the blades of the helicopter whirring. And citizenship should be based on race, just as the authors of the Contitution intended.

Another thing the government has done is begin to use cell phone data in immigration enforcement. Of course “non-profits” have filed suits against this sane and reasonable practice. The Jews and their allies seek to force the government to release the records about how they have purchased cell phone location data in enforcing and securing our border. They are up in arms that the government has bought access to commercial databases that track phone locations and have in turned used this to detect people entering our country illegally.

Bravo I say. All is fair in love and war — love of our own people; and war against them.

According to the Wall Street Journal the government has specifically employed this method in the zones of the desert that border Mexico. That is, right in the heart of the battlefield.

* * *

All of this came to head on April 29, 2021 when Supreme Court Justice Gorsuch (that steely constitutional textualist trumpeted by Trump flacks) handed down a monumentally stupid ruling.

No one ever had any reason to know it but apparently there is an informal judicial doctrine called the Square Corners Doctrine.

The Square Corners Doctrine specifies that in dealing with its citizens the government must round square corners. In this doctrine “rounding square corners” is the precise opposite of cutting corners. That is, when dealing with its citizens, the government must go the extra mile to give them the benefit of the doubt, must be meticulously scrupulous in extending them every last one of their rights, must exhaust all possibilities that would benefit the citizen, must do all things humanly possible to see things from their point of view, and in dealing with them via the law must cross every “t” and dot every last “i.”

The wisdom of applying this to non-White aliens is surely dubious.

The “square corners” doctrine of fairness and due process Gorsuch cited was penned by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, who laid out in a 1920 decision the rules the government must follow. In subsequent years, lower courts invoked similar language to describe government obligations to citizens.

Of course sagacious or not, Holmes was referring to citizens — at the time, a designation legally delimited to Whites (though certain pretended “amendments” contradicted that law, nevertheless it was still in force in the 1950s). But as sure as four bazillion Nigerians are playing our system like a pachinko machine, now the “square corners doctrine” has been squarely applied to illegal invaders. Bending over backwards for them for another helping of legal ritual sodomy, of course.

The issue in question was the picayune one of a “notice to appear.” Our gurus on the Court took a goodly amount of their time determining whether or not foreign excrescences have, or have not, the right to an overarching single notice, or if we can send those notices out in dribs and drabs.

Should we say Mother may I? Or pretty please?

Trust me, even this would not satisfy these barracudas of the bar.

Nothing ever will save the White man as long as he is prostrate.

So this brand new legal nicety is just another way for the historical American Nation to hamstring itself, to handcuff itself. To refuse to take its own side in the matter.

On April 29, 2021 the Supreme Court sided with an undocumented Guatemalan immigrant seeking to challenge his removal from the US by immigration authorities. In a 6-3 decision authored by Justice Neil Gorsuch, the court said the Justice Department was violating federal law by not providing immigrants it seeks to deport with a single, comprehensive ‘notice to appear’ with details on the charges and scheduled court appearance.

Can we get you anything else, Juan? Cookies? Cream? Our tax money? We want to make sure your stay here is as comfortable and painless as possible.

“If men must turn square corners when they deal with the government, it cannot be too much to expect the government to turn square corners when it deals with them,” Gorsuch wrote in an opinion joined by a remarkable alignment of justices — Clarence Thomas, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Amy Coney Barrett.

The two Jews, the wetback, and the one with the two tar monsters she adopted were to be expected; Thomas is inexplicable.

Agusto Niz-Chavez, who brought the case, illegally crossed the southern U.S. border in 2005 and eventually settled in Detroit, Mich. In 2013, the government initiated removal proceedings against him — first sending a notice of the charges and later sending a second notice with the date and time of his court appearance.

Nope, not good enough. Got to do more, White man, to make room for the invader.

Did no one notice that this sombrero-wearer has been in this country for 16, count them, 16 years? And we’re niggling about a failure to serve him notice “properly”?

A country unprepared to defend itself deserves to perish. Let’s not go down with it.

The timing of the multiple notices was at the heart of the case. Under federal law, an immigrant can only appeal a removal order if they’ve been in the US continuously for at least 10 years, and the same law says that the clock stops once a notice to appear is issued.

Ten years? You outlast us for ten years and we extend you the hand of courtesy?

Niz-Chavez argued the multiple notices he received did not constitute a single notice to appear as required by law.

God damn you, Niz-Chavez. God damn you and your kind.

“At one level today’s dispute may seem semantic, focused on a single word, a small one at that. But words are how the law constrains power. In this case the laws terms ensure that, when the federal government seeks a procedural advantage against an individual it will supply him with a single and comprehensively statement of the nature of the proceedings against him.” Gorsuch wrote.

Clearly the open-borders screw-the-White man Ruling Class has found its man. Populism! MAGA!

Just a small word, he said. But when Jews feast on the carcass of words, they feast on it to our demise.

* * *

When John Randolph was asked what he thought about the Constitution he said it depends. That in one sense it was the greatest charter of human liberty ever conceived by the mind of man. But in another sense it was the perfect document of tyranny. That is, it depends on who’s enforcing it.

And that’s not us, you can be sure of that. And it hasn’t been for decades upon decades.

It’s been said more than once that the Constitution is not a suicide pact. But that’s wrong. When it comes to defending the White race, the bought politicians of this country will make sure that every corner is squared. They will do everything in their power not to defend the race — and hound to death any who do try to defend it.

And in our name commit ritual suicide.

* * *

Source: Author