|
|
|
|
|
by mothballed
42 days ago
|
|
The constitutional challenge they speak of was a constitutional challenge by indigenous persons challenging internal immigration checkpoints. And the indigenous won, actually loosening immigration checks, so it's baffling they cited that. The ABA international even did a review of that case and the only relevant portions they mentioned were the loosening of internal immigration checkpoints. >and Mexico’s immigration law uses that to require passports from all foreign nationals entering Mexico. LMAO, this person must have never entered Mexico by land. You literally walk right in, 9 of 10 times. The last time I went even the X-ray machine guy was asleep. They're clearly following the constitution and not whatever hallucinated conclusion there was about the challenge by indigenous that loosened restrictions. One time I showed my passport card, and they thought it was a driver license, lmao. Not that they gave a shit either way. |
|