Trump Ignores the Courts

#1,503
#1,503
PEPPERJAX said:
You need to remember who you are posting with and his stance on illegal immigration. All of the gang members Trump deported had a rough childhood, so it really wasn't their fault they were here illegally in the first place.
Click to expand...
who is going to pick our blueberries?
 
#1,507
#1,507
n_huffhines said:
I just don't think you understand what I'm driving at. My whole point is about the concept of God given rights, and I read this whole response and it doesn't appear to talk about that at all. You're not looking at this from a wrong perspective. I think you are reasoned. But what I'm saying is that it is what it is, from a God-given rights perspective. You cannot say one has no God-given right to be in the US without logically concluding nobody has a God-given right to exist. Governments have to grant that. You don't have to care that freedom of movement is a God-given right, just like speech, the right to own property, etc. Sure, a government can take them all away, but God/nature gave us these freedoms. We limit them all in ways, even the rights we hold most precious. This one is just not precious for some reason.
Click to expand...
Which God?
 
  • Like
Reactions: StarRaider
#1,510
#1,510
Vol423 said:
What? Boasberg was overturned? Shocking!
Click to expand...


justthenews.com

Supreme Court overturns Judge Boasberg, sides with Trump on deporting gang members under 1798 law

The Supreme Court on Monday handed President Donald Trump a major victory by allowing him to invoke the 1798 Alien Enemies Act to deport suspected gang members of Tren de Aragua.
justthenews.com justthenews.com

"The justices slapped down Boasberg, noting the high court had already settled issues over the law in 1948 and limited judges' ability to interfere with the president under the law to a habeas petition.

The gang members' lawyers "challenge the Government’s interpretation of the Act and assert that they do not fall within the category of removable alien enemies. But we do not reach those arguments," the justice ruled.

"Challenges to removal under the AEA, a statute which largely 'preclude judicial review,' Ludecke v. Watkins, 335 U. S. 160, 163−164, (1948), must be brought in habeas," the ruling added.

The justices also poignantly slammed the judge and the lawyers in the case for what is called judge shopping, stating the plaintiffs were being held in a Texas detention center and had no right to have their case heard before Boasberg in Washington, D.C.

"The detainees are confined in Texas, so venue is improper in the District of Columbia," the justices declared."
 
  • Like
Reactions: UT_Dutchman and Orange_Crush
#1,511
#1,511
jmacvols1 said:
justthenews.com

Supreme Court overturns Judge Boasberg, sides with Trump on deporting gang members under 1798 law

The Supreme Court on Monday handed President Donald Trump a major victory by allowing him to invoke the 1798 Alien Enemies Act to deport suspected gang members of Tren de Aragua.
justthenews.com justthenews.com

"The justices slapped down Boasberg, noting the high court had already settled issues over the law in 1948 and limited judges' ability to interfere with the president under the law to a habeas petition.

The gang members' lawyers "challenge the Government’s interpretation of the Act and assert that they do not fall within the category of removable alien enemies. But we do not reach those arguments," the justice ruled.

"Challenges to removal under the AEA, a statute which largely 'preclude judicial review,' Ludecke v. Watkins, 335 U. S. 160, 163−164, (1948), must be brought in habeas," the ruling added.

The justices also poignantly slammed the judge and the lawyers in the case for what is called judge shopping, stating the plaintiffs were being held in a Texas detention center and had no right to have their case heard before Boasberg in Washington, D.C.

"The detainees are confined in Texas, so venue is improper in the District of Columbia," the justices declared."
Click to expand...
@lawgator1
@BowlBrother85
@n_huffhines
@Ashevolle
 
  • Like
Reactions: UT_Dutchman, SpaceCoastVol, WeeohdeeWood and 6 others
#1,512
#1,512
jmacvols1 said:
winning

Click to expand...

Good

"Despite siding with the administration, the court's majority placed limits on how deportations may occur, emphasizing that judicial review is required.

Detainees "must receive notice after the date of this order that they are subject to removal under the Act. The notice must be afforded within a reasonable time and in such a manner as will allow them to actually seek habeas relief in the proper venue before such removal occurs," the majority wrote."
 
  • Like
Reactions: LouderVol, EasternVol, DuckInAPen and 1 other person
#1,515
#1,515
  • Like
Reactions: Orange_Crush
#1,517
#1,517
volfanhill said:
Good

"Despite siding with the administration, the court's majority placed limits on how deportations may occur, emphasizing that judicial review is required.

Detainees "must receive notice after the date of this order that they are subject to removal under the Act. The notice must be afforded within a reasonable time and in such a manner as will allow them to actually seek habeas relief in the proper venue before such removal occurs," the majority wrote."
Click to expand...


Hmmm..

Trump won't like that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volfanhill
#1,520
#1,520
OrangeTsar said:
Is there more than One?
Click to expand...
If one is to debate/discuss, one needs to understand the other's context. I don't think so, but I'm not the one basing my argument on appeals to "God given rights". We need to know which God he's referring to if we are going to either trust or refute these rights.
 
#1,521
#1,521
n_huffhines said:
What a surprise. The Yankees are playing the Knoxville Smokeys and they employ the umpire, too.
Click to expand...

“And they employ the umpire”….does that mean you also oppose people intentionally bringing cases in places like DC where they know their side “employs the umpire”

Or are the known political leanings of judges only bad if it benefits republicans
 
#1,525
#1,525
jmacvols1 said:
justthenews.com

Supreme Court overturns Judge Boasberg, sides with Trump on deporting gang members under 1798 law

The Supreme Court on Monday handed President Donald Trump a major victory by allowing him to invoke the 1798 Alien Enemies Act to deport suspected gang members of Tren de Aragua.
justthenews.com justthenews.com

"The justices slapped down Boasberg, noting the high court had already settled issues over the law in 1948 and limited judges' ability to interfere with the president under the law to a habeas petition.

The gang members' lawyers "challenge the Government’s interpretation of the Act and assert that they do not fall within the category of removable alien enemies. But we do not reach those arguments," the justice ruled.

"Challenges to removal under the AEA, a statute which largely 'preclude judicial review,' Ludecke v. Watkins, 335 U. S. 160, 163−164, (1948), must be brought in habeas," the ruling added.

The justices also poignantly slammed the judge and the lawyers in the case for what is called judge shopping, stating the plaintiffs were being held in a Texas detention center and had no right to have their case heard before Boasberg in Washington, D.C.

"The detainees are confined in Texas, so venue is improper in the District of Columbia," the justices declared."
Click to expand...
What do you know? That’s the exact case that I first cited when this story first broke. I said it precluded judicial review.
 
  • Like
Reactions: StarRaider, McDad, MemphisVol77 and 1 other person
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top