![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i2.wp.com\/thefilipinochronicle.com\/backup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/whatsupatty.jpeg?resize=640%2C426\")
<\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\nWhat is a \u201cgodsend?\u201d Benefit, blessing, manna, windfall, bonus, joy. https:\/\/www.merriam-webster.com\/thesaurus\/godsend<\/a> Can you use \u201cgodsend\u201d in a sentence? \u201cJustice Amy Coney Barrett is a godsend for law-abiding Americans.\u201dBarrett took the constitutional oath before Justice Clarence Thomas at the White House following a 52-48 confirmation vote on October 26, 2020. Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. called Barrett “a woman of unparalleled ability and temperament.” On October 27, 2020, Barrett took the judicial oath before Chief Justice John Roberts. In her remarks after taking the first oath, Barrett said: \u201cI will do my job without any fear or favor, and that I will do so independently of both the political branches and of my own preferences.” If you can show a constitution with the word \u201cabortion\u201d in it, it is fake. [We believe that every human being has a right to do what they want with their own body. That is a God-given right. It is inalienable. Therefore: A woman can have an abortion. A man can masturbate – like the Harvard Law grad CNN legal expert reportedly caught masturbating on zoom. It has been called the \u201czoom dick\u201d scandal. My Zoom stock went up 50 bucks. Pssst. Here is the YouTube link. https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=Wi0p6TMk9OU<\/a> ] So, aliens can take a cue and hire a lawyer who can show that the case falls within the exception. Better still; the alien can hire an experienced and excellent lawyer to assist in filing the petition and preparing for the interview. ATTY. TIPON<\/strong> was a Fulbright and a Smith-Mundt scholar and obtained a Master of Laws degree from Yale Law School. He holds a Bachelor of Laws degree from the University of the Philippines. Admitted to practice: U.S. Supreme Court, U.S. Court of Appeals 9th Circuit, U.S. District Court, N.D. CA, New York State, and the Philippines. He was the Dean and a Professor of Law of the College of Law, Northwestern University in the Philippines. His current practice focuses on immigration law and federal appellate criminal defense. He has written books and legal articles for Thomson-Reuters, the world\u2019s largest law book publishing company. Listen to The Tipon Report which he co-hosts with son Noel, the senior partner of the Bilecki & Tipon Law Firm. It is considered <\/em>the most witty, interesting, and useful radio show in Hawaii. KNDI 1270 AM band every Thursday at 8:00 a.m. <\/em> Tel. (808) 800-7856. Cell Phone (808) 225-2645. E-Mail: filamlaw@yahoo.com. Websites: https:\/\/www.tiponlaw.com<\/a> https:\/\/www.hawaiimmigrationattorney.com\/<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" By Emmanuel S. Tipon What is a \u201cgodsend?\u201d Benefit, blessing, manna, windfall, bonus, joy. https:\/\/www.merriam-webster.com\/thesaurus\/godsend…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":4723,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"spay_email":"","_links_to":"","_links_to_target":""},"categories":[28],"tags":[],"featured_image_urls":{"full":["https:\/\/i2.wp.com\/thefilipinochronicle.com\/backup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/whatsupatty.jpeg?fit=800%2C533",800,533,false],"thumbnail":["https:\/\/i2.wp.com\/thefilipinochronicle.com\/backup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/whatsupatty.jpeg?resize=150%2C150",150,150,true],"medium":["https:\/\/i2.wp.com\/thefilipinochronicle.com\/backup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/whatsupatty.jpeg?fit=300%2C200",300,200,true],"medium_large":["https:\/\/i2.wp.com\/thefilipinochronicle.com\/backup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/whatsupatty.jpeg?fit=640%2C427",640,427,true],"large":["https:\/\/i2.wp.com\/thefilipinochronicle.com\/backup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/whatsupatty.jpeg?fit=640%2C426",640,426,true],"1536x1536":["https:\/\/i2.wp.com\/thefilipinochronicle.com\/backup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/whatsupatty.jpeg?fit=800%2C533",800,533,true],"2048x2048":["https:\/\/i2.wp.com\/thefilipinochronicle.com\/backup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/whatsupatty.jpeg?fit=800%2C533",800,533,true],"ultp_layout_landscape_large":["https:\/\/i2.wp.com\/thefilipinochronicle.com\/backup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/whatsupatty.jpeg?resize=800%2C533",800,533,true],"ultp_layout_landscape":["https:\/\/i2.wp.com\/thefilipinochronicle.com\/backup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/whatsupatty.jpeg?resize=800%2C533",800,533,true],"ultp_layout_portrait":["https:\/\/i2.wp.com\/thefilipinochronicle.com\/backup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/whatsupatty.jpeg?resize=600%2C533",600,533,true],"ultp_layout_square":["https:\/\/i2.wp.com\/thefilipinochronicle.com\/backup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/whatsupatty.jpeg?resize=600%2C533",600,533,true],"covernews-slider-full":["https:\/\/i2.wp.com\/thefilipinochronicle.com\/backup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/whatsupatty.jpeg?resize=800%2C533",800,533,true],"covernews-slider-center":["https:\/\/i2.wp.com\/thefilipinochronicle.com\/backup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/whatsupatty.jpeg?resize=800%2C500",800,500,true],"covernews-featured":["https:\/\/i2.wp.com\/thefilipinochronicle.com\/backup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/whatsupatty.jpeg?fit=800%2C533",800,533,true],"covernews-medium":["https:\/\/i2.wp.com\/thefilipinochronicle.com\/backup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/whatsupatty.jpeg?resize=540%2C285",540,285,true],"covernews-medium-square":["https:\/\/i2.wp.com\/thefilipinochronicle.com\/backup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/whatsupatty.jpeg?resize=375%2C250",375,250,true]},"author_info":{"info":["admin"]},"category_info":"What's up, Attorney?<\/a>","tag_info":"What's up, Attorney?","comment_count":"0","jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i2.wp.com\/thefilipinochronicle.com\/backup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/whatsupatty.jpeg?fit=800%2C533","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/thefilipinochronicle.com\/backup\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4746"}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/thefilipinochronicle.com\/backup\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/thefilipinochronicle.com\/backup\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/thefilipinochronicle.com\/backup\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/thefilipinochronicle.com\/backup\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4746"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"http:\/\/thefilipinochronicle.com\/backup\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4746\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4782,"href":"http:\/\/thefilipinochronicle.com\/backup\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4746\/revisions\/4782"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/thefilipinochronicle.com\/backup\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/4723"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/thefilipinochronicle.com\/backup\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4746"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/thefilipinochronicle.com\/backup\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4746"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/thefilipinochronicle.com\/backup\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4746"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
<\/strong>It is unfortunate that certain senathugs harassed Justice Barrett during the confirmation hearings with insulting questions. One from a subtropical state asked: Have you ever committed sexual assault? Have you ever settled a case of sexual assault? This questioning was in the presence of her children and her husband. What did the senator expect Barrett to answer? What was the purpose in asking sexual assault questions? It was preposterous to even hint that a woman like Justice Barrett would commit sexual assault. Judge Barrett was thoroughly background checked by the FBI before she was even nominated and if she had committed a crime, the FBI would have known it. President Trump would not have nominated her. Binaboy ang babaeng magistrada<\/em>. Those nangbababoy<\/em> should be exiled to a reef in the Babuyan Channel? The \u201cnattering nabobs of negativism\u201d aka Demoncrats are against Justice Barrett because they she is a \u201cconservative\u201d and that she will declare Obamacare unconstitutional in the second case challenging it, California v. Texas<\/em>, and reverse Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973)<\/em> which held that under the 14th Amendment to the Constitution women have a right to personal privacy, which includes the decision to have an abortion. That is not the test of \u201cconservatism\u201d. Chief Justice Roberts, who was a \u201cconservative\u201d kuno<\/em>, upheld the validity of Obamacare, 5-4, when it was first brought to the Supreme Court in National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius<\/em>, 567 U.S. 519 (2012). Roberts reasoned that the individual mandate to buy health insurance was a constitutional exercise of the congressional power to impose a \u201ctax\u201d. Hahahahahahahaha. A law dealing with health care is a \u201ctax\u201d? Not even Obama and his cohorts in Congress in their wildest dreams ever thought of Obamacare as a tax when they enacted it. Justice Barrett criticized Roberts\u2019s decision in a law review article, hence the Demoncrats fear that she will hold Obamacare void in the second Obamacare case before the Supreme Court, California v. Texas<\/em>, which will be heard on November 10.As for abortion, Barrett\u2019s critics argue that she has 7 children (2 of whom were adopted from Haiti) and is a Catholic, and therefore is against abortion. What kind of logic is this? To begin with, there is no constitutional basis for abortion.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Justice Barrett is neither conservative nor liberal. She calls it like she sees it. Chief Justice Roberts at his confirmation hearing said: \u201cJudges are like umpires. Umpires don\u2019t make the rules; they apply them. . . . . it\u2019s my job to call balls and strikes, and not to pitch or bat.\u201d Alas, Roberts did not fulfill his promise. Proof? See Roberts\u2019s decision on Obamacare and DACA. We believe that Justice Barrett will be an honest umpire. She will call a strike a strike and a ball a ball.
LAW ABIDING IMMIGRANTS SHOULD REJOICE<\/strong>
How should law-abiding immigrants receive Justice Barrett? We should welcome her with open arms. We should thank the Almighty Father that He sent her to the Supreme Court.
The best evidence that she is pro-immigrant \u2013 the legal not illegal variety \u2013 is that she and her husband Jessee adopted two black children from Haiti in accordance with the immigration laws. It\u2019s not that they wanted to have a family. They already had biological children of their own. That shows care and compassion.
Justice Barrett\u2019s decisions on immigration issues while she was still a Judge of the Court of Appeals were based on precedent \u2013 she was simply applying prior case law to the facts.
Take the case of an alien challenging the denial by a U.S. consular officer of the alien\u2019s visa application because the alien was inadmissible for trying to smuggle two children to the United States. Barrett upheld the denial citing a Supreme Court decision that Congress \u201cdelegated the power to determine who may enter the country to the Executive Branch, and courts generally have no authority to second-guess the Executive’s decisions. Kleindienst v. Mandel,<\/em> 408 U.S. 753<\/a>, 769-70, 92 S.Ct. 2576, 33 L.Ed.2d 683 (1972). \u2026 the doctrine of consular nonreviewability “bars judicial review of visa decisions made by consular officials abroad.” Matushkina v. Nielsen,<\/em> 877 F.3d 289<\/a>, 294 (7th Cir. 2017). Barrett provided an out – an alien can challenge the denial if the alien can show that the consul\u2019s decision was not \u201cfacially legitimate and bona fide.\u201d Yafai v. Pompeo<\/em>, 912 F.3d 1018 (2019), https:\/\/www.leagle.com\/decision\/infco20190104186<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Where an alien is in removal proceedings and seeks a stay of removal pending the resolution of the alien\u2019s appeal, a panel of judges of which Judge Barrett was a member said that it could not grant a stay because the alien \u201cdemonstrated neither the irreparable harm nor substantial likelihood of success on the merits\u201d required for a stay prescribed in Nken v. Holder, <\/em>556 U.S. 418 (2009). Ramos v Barr<\/em>, No. 19-1728, (CA7 06\/05\/2019). Barrett\u2019s panel suggested the course of action that aliens should take to obtain a stay. We have been successful in obtaining stays for all our clients in removal proceedings because we complied with the traditional four-factor standard specified in Nken v Holder<\/em>. Aliens seeking a stay of removal should hire a skilled lawyer who knows the four-factors and can establish that the alien meets them.
In asylum cases, Barrett pointed out the requirements to be established by an alien to obtain asylum. Credibility of the asylum applicant is the most critical requirement. Alvarenga-Flores v Sessions<\/em>, No. 17-2920 (CA7 08 28 18). Aliens who want to win their asylum cases should hire lawyers who have been successful in winning asylum cases because they know the requirements, they can present credible evidence to establish them, and care enough about the alien to spend time preparing them thoroughly so that they could testify credibly. Call us and we will name a lawyer with a 100% batting average in asylum cases.
Therefore, on immigration law, Justice Barrett is predictable because she applies the law and legal precedents. There are no surprises. She has no racial bias.<\/p>\n\n\n\n