Trump Ignores the Courts

[EasternVol]

Due process was being followed by the administration, simply what happened was an activist judge tried to be King. Although, they didn't necessarily address everything, I think what is clear is once these illegals are gone... they're gone.

I would say its a fairly large victory depending if they are going to continue this route for ejection because once they are gone... they're gone. (at least in this context, at this moment)

This particular judge should be probably targeted for impeachment, and the Supreme Court and/or Congress needs to address this national injunction crap.

I see you've been corrected on the due process point.
Impeach the judge? Weren't you complaining about the Democrats stacking the courts with their puppets?

 

[Jxn Vol]

I'd hate to be that gullible but help yourself. My cousins aren't eligible for deportation but thank you for your concern.
Getting frustrated and throwing a tantrum makes you look like a three year old.

Tantrum? You are in retail aren’t you?

How many illegals did you take in? If zero then you are heartless like your daddy DJT

 

[LSU-SIU]

I see you've been corrected on the due process point.
Impeach the judge? Weren't you complaining about the Democrats stacking the courts with their puppets?

No, I was not corrected on any due process point, not with this action.

Impeach the judge? Weren't you complaining about the Democrats stacking the courts with their puppets?

What the judge is doing is mostly regular procedure stuff, he should have at most just put the case on a normal calendar. There isn't anything tricky about this, he is an activist judge.

Weren't you complaining about the Democrats stacking the courts with their puppets?

I can't remember either way whether I made this comment.

Context is important, no? This judge didn't just mess up, he did this on purpose, especially some of the injunction process... this isn't how it works at all.

Here is the kicker. Even if the U.S. doesn't give notice prior to ejection, if the person is illegal there is no court that would have jurisdiction to hear a due process violation because the Habeas would be moot as the person has been released from custody.

In essence, Habeas is only for persons that are in U.S. custody, if the person is no longer in U.S. custody the case would have to be dismissed.

So, even if Habeas was filed in the proper place and if the U.S. still ejected them (if there was no order), no court would have jurisdiction to hear any due process violation as person is no longer in custody of the U.S.

 

[Jxn Vol]

No, I was not corrected on any due process point, not with this action.



What the judge is doing is mostly regular procedure stuff, he should have at most just put the case on a normal calendar. There isn't anything tricky about this, he is an activist judge.



I can't remember either way whether I made this comment.

Context is important, no? This judge didn't just mess up, he did this on purpose, especially some of the injunction process... this isn't how it works at all.

Here is the kicker. Even if the U.S. doesn't give notice prior to ejection, if the person is illegal there is no court that would have jurisdiction to hear a due process violation because the Habeas would be moot as the person has been released from custody.

In essence, Habeas is only for persons that are in U.S. custody, if the person is no longer in U.S. custody the case would have to be dismissed.

So, even if Habeas was filed in the proper place and if the U.S. still ejected them (if there was no order), no court would have jurisdiction to hear any due process violation as person is no longer in custody of the U.S.

So illegal is now illegal again. The country is healing.

 

[LSU-SIU]

So illegal is now illegal again. The country is healing.

Hopefully, they (Supreme Court/Congress) will reign in some of these judges, this one in particular should be targeted. Furthermore, they need to probably get a handle on these nation wide federal injunctions as well.

People have to remember, King George and his redcoats had similar processes the whole time, what is the difference? They were or became corrupt. People act like our system is something new, its not... most it is the same freaking crap... more or less. In this case, nobody has pointed to anything that seems unjust or corrupt to me, they just seem unhappy justice is being done. That isn't to say mistake can't or won't be made, if the administration makes a mistake involving an American... correct the mistake.

 

[LouderVol]

Yes they were, the Supreme Court said the APA crap does not confirm jurisdiction in this instance and the habeas was filed in the wrong venue i.e. lack of jurisdiction. They didn't lack due process at all, they simple didn't file a habeas in the correct venue thereby the lower court has no jurisdiction.

You don't even have a court involved that has jurisdiction to hear whether there was a due process violation.... the lower court lacks jurisdiction.

What wasn't being followed?

You have the cart before the horse.

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.

they weren't being notified. and they weren't being given any time. and they weren't being informed in a manner that would allow to "actually seek habeas relief". because they weren't being allowed to talk to their lawyers BEFORE they were deported.

*edit to add the link to the actual text of the Supreme Court majority who sided with Trump. and even more text. underline is my emphasis.

https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/trump-jgg-order.pdf

”Reply in Support of Application To Vacate 1. “It is well established that the Fifth Amendment entitles aliens to due process of law” in the context of removal proceedings. Renov. Flores, 507 U. S. 292, 306 (1993). So, the detainees are entitled to notice and opportunity to be heard “appropriate to the nature of the case.” Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co., 339 U. S. 306, 313 (1950). More specifically, in this context, AEA 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.

 

[OrangeTsar]

Wrong. Those gang members are terrorists and have been labeled as such.

As for communists- you don’t have to look far. Thousands in our government that are destroying the country from within.

Communists are basically socialists who are impatient

 

[LSU-SIU]

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.

they weren't being notified. and they weren't being given any time. and they weren't being informed in a manner that would allow to "actually seek habeas relief". because they weren't being allowed to talk to their lawyers BEFORE they were deported.

You don't know that, you can suspect that... and at this point no court has jurisdiction, matter of fact... most of this has never been adjudicated as the lower court lack jurisidiction. If the government receives an order on a Habeas in the proper venue they have indicated they would honor it as of two weeks ago.

because they weren't being allowed to talk to their lawyers BEFORE they were deported.

So?

How can you say justice hasn't been served, the Plaintiffs have been released? The whole purpose of Habeas is to challenge their detention, they have been released.

 

[OrangeTsar]

That would be the proper venue in this instance, but in theory the government can move them to any venue they choose, give notice and deport from whatever point that is. However, let's say the government doesn't provide adequate notice, what is the recourse anyway to someone that is not here legally?

At the end of the day, none of these people are saying they are Americans, so there is limited to no recourse (generally speaking) even if the U.S. doesn't give proper notice, imo.

Its a fair ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court i.e. duck the issue(s) for now.... allow the President to do his thing, bring something right and better, and maybe we can take a look at things.

The DC judge is an activist idiot that has no business being on the bench, imo.

I don’t see Boasberg as an idiot. But I do think he made a hasty and sloppy decision as far as ordering flights that were in International airspace to return to the US. When the administration basically exploited his mistake, he let his incredibly oversized ego get in the way and threw the judicial equivalent of a toddler who didn’t get the candy bar he wanted at the checkout line. Since then, he just refuses to accept the L and is becoming increasingly unhinged.

 

[LSU-SIU]

I don’t see Boasberg as an idiot. But I do think he made a hasty and sloppy decision as far as ordering flights that were in International airspace to return to the US. When the administration basically exploited his mistake, he let his incredibly oversized ego get in the way and threw the judicial equivalent of a toddler who didn’t get the candy bar he wanted at the checkout line. Since then, he just refuses to accept the L and is becoming increasingly unhinged.

He's not an idiot, he is an activist idiot...he knows exactly what he was doing.

What he was doing was on purpose, not sloppy.

 

[LouderVol]

You don't know that, you can suspect that... and at this point no court has jurisdiction, matter of fact... most of this has never been adjudicated as the lower court lack jurisidiction. If the government receives an order on a Habeas in the proper venue they have indicated they would honor it as of two weeks ago.



So?

How can you say justice hasn't been served, the Plaintiffs have been released? The whole purpose of Habeas is to challenge their detention, they have been released.

I do know that. The Supreme Court stated it, and the government didn't refute it. If you have a higher standard than what holds up in the Supreme Court you are just being impossible.

agreeing after its made it to the Supreme Court isn't exactly acting in good faith. thats the admin going "oh fuu, we are going to lose this if we don't concede we messed up in the first place regarding this"

 

[Jxn Vol]

Has anyone concerned for these terrorists sent them any money or offered to help. Or are we just wringing hands with faux outrage bc TDS

 

[LSU-SIU]

I do know that. The Supreme Court stated it, and the government didn't refute it. If you have a higher standard than what holds up in the Supreme Court you are just being impossible.

agreeing after its made it to the Supreme Court isn't exactly acting in good faith. thats the admin going "oh fuu, we are going to lose this if we don't concede we messed up in the first place regarding this"

I have no idea what that means.

There simply isn't a court that has jurisdiction once the person has been ejected... due process is a process... this wouldn't be the end of the process if the person is here legally. If they are here illegally they can try and try but its the end of the road once they get ejected, generally speaking or more like it should be.

The U.S. Supreme Court has the ability to review the lower court/appeals court, but the underlying case nobody has jurisdiction to hear once the persons were released. Good faith has nothing to do with it, unless they are identified as an American or similar, imo... but even that is a more politic question. If an American gets caught up in this, than they should make the wrong.. .right.

In the end... they got what they asked for.... release from U.S. custody.

 

[LouderVol]

I have no idea what that means.

There simply isn't a court that has jurisdiction once the person has been ejected... due process is a process... this wouldn't be the end of the process if the person is here legally. If they are here illegally they can try and try but its the end of the road once they get ejected, generally speaking or more like it should be.

The U.S. Supreme Court has the ability to review the lower court/appeals court, but the underlying case nobody has jurisdiction to hear once the persons were released. Good faith has nothing to do with it, unless they are identified as an American or similar, imo... but even that is a more politic question. If an American gets caught up in this, than they should make the wrong.. .right.

In the end... they got what they asked for.... release from U.S. custody.

yeah and the supreme court laid out the process. they have to be notified BEFORE they are "released" into another country. they have to have a chance to go before a court before they are deported. "releasing", aka deporting, them before they go through due process is NOT due process and the supreme court made that clear.

there not being a way for the SC or another court to address the issue AFTER its happened doesn't mean due process was followed. it just means there's no way to fix the wrong. you can't keep letting the admin make the wrong.

 

[LSU-SIU]

yeah and the supreme court laid out the process. they have to be notified BEFORE they are "released" into another country. they have to have a chance to go before a court before they are deported. "releasing", aka deporting, them before they go through due process is NOT due process and the supreme court made that clear.

there not being a way for the SC or another court to address the issue AFTER its happened doesn't mean due process was followed. it just means there's no way to fix the wrong. you can't keep letting the admin make the wrong.

The law wasn't followed in this case, the court doesn't have jurisdiction i.e. unlawful. If the government ejects someone before they receive an order to produce via Habeas than the only court I would imagine would be able to hear about improper process (or review of the determination on re-entry) would be if the individual tried to re-enter the U.S. or challenged via some other process but logically this would be for Americans. You have to understand something here, this is more or less codification of war powers not a normal process that is setup to handle immigration. You're more akin to being at war here.

supreme court made that clear

Its like saying the Supreme Court tells the President you have to give the enemy notice before you bomb them, it doesn't really mean anything. The injunction was lifted for a reason, the lower court doesn't have jurisdiction nor does the U.S. Supreme Court.

The Plaintiffs actually got what they requested in essence, released from U.S. custody. It doesn't matter what the U.S. Supreme Court really says as they are saying they don't really have jurisdiction to fully adjudicate this matter, in this forum and in this condition.

You need to bring a better situation and in a condition that the courts have jurisdiction, they clearly don't here in this case.

I could in theory feel bad for an American or innocent person caught up in this, but nothing as of this date even reflects that in any way.

 

[lawgator1]

I don’t see Boasberg as an idiot. But I do think he made a hasty and sloppy decision as far as ordering flights that were in International airspace to return to the US. When the administration basically exploited his mistake, he let his incredibly oversized ego get in the way and threw the judicial equivalent of a toddler who didn’t get the candy bar he wanted at the checkout line. Since then, he just refuses to accept the L and is becoming increasingly unhinged.

 

[Jxn Vol]

If they came in without due process then I really don’t care if they exit without it.

It’s not like we are locking up US citizens and putting them in jail for years without a trial for walking through unlocked doors of the capital. But those folks are waaay more dangerous than Chilean gang members.

 

[LSU-SIU]

If they came in without due process then I really don’t care if they exit without it.

It’s not like we are locking up US citizens and putting them in jail for years without a trial for walking through unlocked doors of the capital. But those folks are waaay more dangerous than Chilean gang members.

They are simply Pawns of the Week. By the end of the week they will have forgotten about them.

(For the record, I think there are ways to dispute or adjudicate the larger picture (AEA) but someone has to setup a case correctly.... I think in this instance the US Supreme Court really didn't have a choice)

 

[Jxn Vol]

They are simply Pawns of the Week. By the end of the week they will have forgotten about them.

(For the record, I think there are ways to dispute or adjudicate the larger picture (AEA) but someone has to setup a case correctly.... I think in this instance the US Supreme Court really didn't have a choice)

Send them back home and finish the border wall.

Then move on to other things that make the left of center folks pearl clutch.

 

[Orangeslice13]

yeah and the supreme court laid out the process. they have to be notified BEFORE they are "released" into another country. they have to have a chance to go before a court before they are deported. "releasing", aka deporting, them before they go through due process is NOT due process and the supreme court made that clear.

there not being a way for the SC or another court to address the issue AFTER its happened doesn't mean due process was followed. it just means there's no way to fix the wrong. you can't keep letting the admin make the wrong.

It’s my understanding that they are now notified of their ejection. They have an opportunity to state why they should not be expelled. If they don’t fit the category (list of reasons that are acceptable to postpone ejection) then they are ejected and the ruling has been satisfied. I’m getting this from a federal agent I took martial arts with. I have not read up on it. Apparently there are now judges that hear these arguments and that’s all they do to speed the process.


That actually makes sense to me. It operates like traffic court.

 

[jmacvols1]

 

[McDad]

Welp, coincidentally i had to reject a tenant application because they couldn't provide proof of residency, work visa, etc. Sucks, too. Seemed like a good kid...early 20s...Doing his best to translate (barely) for his father who speaks no English. Got the feeling they're renting from a predatory landlord right now. I hope they get their stuff sorted out.

 

[Vol423]

There's another ruling that will soon be overturned.

 

[EasternVol]

Tantrum? You are in retail aren’t you?

How many illegals did you take in? If zero then you are heartless like your daddy DJT

Wrong on all counts, so sad.

 

[OrangeTsar]

So to follow this decision to it’s logical conclusion; the White House must allow access to any and every news outlet that wants it? There are literally hundreds of thousands of such entities that would like such access. I guess we have to let the Knoxville News Sentinel in now too? And Billy Bob‘s podcast? And every high school student newspaper?