Trump Ignores the Courts

[just bob]

The 3 libs are hacks. Alito and Thomas are. Gorsuch is too but not to the level of the other 5.

This is some common core math here.

 

[BigOrangeMojo]

This is some common core math here.

3+2+1 =6

 

[Orangeburst]

3+2+1 =6

 

[just bob]

3+2+1 =6

Seems more like 3+2+0.5. Roberts seems 0.75 to the left now as well.

 

[LSU-SIU]

What about much? Neither are noble acts. Feds denying common individuals due process rates higher on the Stasi scale. Trump was fortunately capably represented by counsel.

They basically weaponized portions of the federal government in a scam against him, and part of that scam seems to have filtered down to the State level as well.

These people got due process, and to add to it... even though they didn't file a correct Habeas petition in the correct venue... they have been released from U.S. custody.

 

[EasternVol]

They basically weaponized portions of the federal government in a scam against him, and part of that scam seems to have filtered down to the State level as well.

These people got due process, and to add to it... even though they didn't file a correct Habeas petition in the correct venue... they have been released from U.S. custody.

That they got due process is no thanks to the Executive branch of government. Are you sure they've been released? You haven't been getting a lot of facts right on this.

 

[jmacvols1]

time to shut these corrupt judges down



UPDATE: One Republican switched their vote to YEA. It's 219-213

 

[85SugarVol]

We need more justices like her, Kavanaugh, and Roberts and less like the 6 partisan hacks.....

Who knew Rad Kav at the height of his confirmation hysteria would end up being a moderate Justice…

I don’t think Gorsuch is that partisan. I’m sure the Right didn’t perceive his votes on the LGBT front?

 

[jmacvols1]

 

[LSU-SIU]

That they got due process is no thanks to the Executive branch of government. Are you sure they've been released? You haven't been getting a lot of facts right on this.

The government has specified that they are no longer in U.S. custody. Do you have information that this is not true?

Even if they are still in U.S. custody in the U.S. they could still even at this date file a Habeas or any new ones captured could file a Habeas.

You haven't been getting a lot of facts right on this.

I'm not the one with TDS. What facts are you referring to?

I would say I was pretty damn accurate as to what I thought right from the get go.... the court clearly didn't have jurisdiction. Now exactly what have you been right about?

 

[EasternVol]

The government has specified that they are no longer in U.S. custody. Do you have information that this is not true?

Even if they are still in U.S. custody in the U.S. they could still even at this date file a Habeas or any new ones captured could file a Habeas.



I'm not the one with TDS. What facts are you referring to?

I would say I was pretty damn accurate as to what I thought right from the get go.... the court clearly didn't have jurisdiction. Now exactly what have you been right about?

I don't have any information as to their whereabouts. They could have been released or ICE could have lost them for all I know.
You were wrong as to whether the aliens in question had received due process.
I was right in that they were entitled to that due process.

 

[LSU-SIU]

I don't have any information as to their whereabouts. They could have been released or ICE could have lost them for all I know.
You were wrong as to whether the aliens in question had received due process.
I was right in that they were entitled to that due process.

That seems like your opinion. You said I was wrong about a fact.

What due process were they not given they were entitled to? And when was that legal fact adjudicated?

 

[EasternVol]

That seems like your opinion. You said I was wrong about a fact.

What due process were they not given they were entitled to? And when was that legal fact adjudicated?

See the SC directive.

 

[LSU-SIU]

See the SC directive.

What part? I assure you they did not adjudicate the facts other than the self-admitted ones in the filings as the lower court lacks jurisdiction.

Please show me were the government has admitted to not providing due process. What due process are you claiming they were entitled to but didn't receive?

At this point, not only do you not have a fact, you have no information to support your opinion.

Edit: I would also take issue with your stance as to "directive", this appears to imply you believe there is an injunction or similar as to this action (or associated with this action) in some manner. The injunction (whether legal or not was not adjudicated as its moot) was lifted so no there really is no "directive". The lower court lacks jurisdiction, the Supreme court further lacks jurisdiction as to further adjudication at this time because they too lack jurisdiction. Anyone can pipe up their opinion, but opinions really are that opinions without specific orders.... you using "directive" is you believing the Supreme Court did something other than tell the lower court they were acting unlawfully i.e. lack of jurisdiction

What I find interesting, is you talk about dictator, but you didn't care about the dictator in the black robe trying to be a King.

 

[EasternVol]

What part? I assure you they did not adjudicate the facts other than the self-admitted ones in the filings as the lower court lacks jurisdiction.

Please show me were the government has admitted to not providing due process. What due process are you claiming they were entitled to but didn't receive?

At this point, not only do you not have a fact, you have no information to support your opinion.

You continue to bend facts to fit your opinion. The SC directed that the aliens must be given the opportunity to challenge their deportation, which at least some of those sent to El Salvador weren't.

Supreme Court immigration ruling: Due process in theory, deportation in practice

The high court ruled the Trump administration may use a wartime law to deport alleged members of a foreign crime gang, as long as the government’s claim can be challenged.

www.latimes.com

 

[LSU-SIU]

You continue to bend facts to fit your opinion. The SC directed that the aliens must be given the opportunity to challenge their deportation, which at least some of those sent to El Salvador weren't.

Supreme Court immigration ruling: Due process in theory, deportation in practice

The high court ruled the Trump administration may use a wartime law to deport alleged members of a foreign crime gang, as long as the government’s claim can be challenged.

www.latimes.com

That is just an opinion, no the Supreme Court did not direct any such thing... there are no court orders or injunctions. The Supreme Court actually lack jurisdiction to issue any such order at this time.

You claimed it was a fact they did not get due process, what due process did they not receive?

which at least some of those sent to El Salvador weren't.

The lower court nor the Supreme Court came to no such finding as they lack jurisdiction. The government has claimed they Plaintiffs did file a correct Habeas in the correct venue, this was sustained by the Supreme Court.

The SC directed that the aliens must be given the opportunity to challenge their deportation

And this is incorrect, they could have filed a Habeas in the correct court which is what the Supreme Court has said and what the federal government said. Instead of filing in the correct venue, their attorneys that don't care about them went judge shopping i.e. TDS.

You continue to bend facts to fit your opinion.

No, you claimed I had the wrong fact, but all you keep giving me are opinions. If the facts are not admitted by the parties, they are in dispute, since the case will never be adjudicated in this forum... its moot.

 

[EasternVol]

That is just an opinion, no the Supreme Court did not direct any such thing... there are no court orders or injunctions. The Supreme Court actually lack jurisdiction to issue any such order at this time.

You claimed it was a fact they did not get due process, what due process did they not receive?



The lower court nor the Supreme Court came to no such finding as they lack jurisdiction. The government has claimed they Plaintiffs did file a correct Habeas in the correct venue, this was sustained by the Supreme Court.



And this is incorrect, they could have filed a Habeas in the correct court which is what the Supreme Court has said and what the federal government said. Instead of filing in the correct venue, their attorneys that don't care about them went judge shopping i.e. TDS.

Yes that's your story and you're sticking with it, got it.

 

[LSU-SIU]

Yes that's your story and you're sticking with it, got it.

No, you claimed I was wrong about a fact. I asked you what fact I am wrong about, you still haven't provided a fact that I might be wrong about. I have no real facts to what you babbling about because I was not there... so when you say I am wrong about a fact... I need to know what that is.

I don't have a story, the only story I could have at this point is you're a TDS nut.

When you start babbling about "dictator" or similar without any real context, it makes you look like a freaking nut.

 

[Orange_Crush]

What is the due process expectation now? And in what court system can they file in? It's my understanding that immigration law is a completely different system than criminal and civil?

And the SCOTUS has already ruled that the use of the Alien Enemies Act is not judge-reviewable. What is the due process expectation here?

 

[LSU-SIU]

What is the due process expectation now? And in what court system can they file in? It's my understanding that immigration law is a completely different system than criminal and civil?

And the SCOTUS has already ruled that the use of the Alien Enemies Act is not judge-reviewable. What is the due process expectation here?

My take, but we'll have to see is there are probably two paths.

1. file a habeas before ejection
2. try and re-enter the country and challenge via normal immigration law (or similar)

Alien Enemies Act is not judge-reviewable

That is not completely true.

 

[Orange_Crush]

My take, but we'll have to see is there are probably two paths.

1. file a habeas before ejection
2. try and re-enter the country and challenge via normal immigration law (or similar)



That is not completely true.

 

[OrangeTsar]

Regardless of procedural errors in this case, I'm speaking directly to Trump's telegraphing rendition of American citizens being on the table...

Press Secretary Says Trump Wasn’t Joking About Deporting U.S. Citizens

Donald Trump had suggested sending American citizens to prison in El Salvador.

newrepublic.com

Considering his appetite for ignoring the courts, expect the worst case scenario.

Did you whine about Biden ignoring SCOTUS when they tried to block his blatantly unconstitutional forgiveness of student debt?

 

[LSU-SIU]

View attachment 734152

That would be #1 option i.e. habeas in the correct federal district court venue.

#2 would be more akin to an administrative judge. #2 would not be a challenge to AEA though, it would be just a normal immigration process to re-enter.

Even if a mistake is made, there are several avenues for remedy. Go re-enter, maybe even be able to challenge an improper ejection via APA at that point.

 

[whodeycin85]

I don't have any information as to their whereabouts. They could have been released or ICE could have lost them for all I know.
You were wrong as to whether the aliens in question had received due process.
I was right in that they were entitled to that due process.

What does the process for removing illegal immigrants look like to you??? Would there more involved then produce proof your here legally or that you status has not been revoked??

 

[Orange_Crush]

That would be #1 option i.e. habeas in the correct venue.

#2 would be more akin to an administrative judge. #2 would not be a challenge to AEA though, it would be just a normal immigration process to re-enter.

Even if a mistake is made, there are several avenues for remedy.

Sounds like most habeas filings are (a) You can prove a claim to citizenship, (b) You are under aged and being held in an adult detention center, or (c) you have been held for over six months without deportation.

I suspect few of these would affect the AEA activities.