The Deportation of Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia

#252
#252
NashVol11 said:
It was all fake, just like the free speech stuff. The ideology is just punishing people you don't like by any means necessary, law doesn't matter in that context
Click to expand...

From the crowd that supports “hate” speech and preaches free speech doesn’t come without consequences. 🤣😂
 
#257
#257
hog88 said:
IMO the administration should ask ES to send him back, once he gets back give him a hearing and let the process play out. Show the evidence of him being a gang member.
Click to expand...

That makes no sense, he's an illegal either way so whether done by deportation or removal is not material at this time. Further, at the beginning I assumed they made an error, they have clarified they haven't so there is no wrong to right.

If he is a gang member he is in the right place, if he isn't a gang member he is in the right place.... the removal has been perfected.

Nobody is pointing out a wrong to right at his point.
 
#258
#258
NashVol11 said:
It was all fake, just like the free speech stuff. The ideology is just punishing people you don't like by any means necessary, law doesn't matter in that context
Click to expand...

I don't think its all fake, just not material or in full context. Its food for bots.

law doesn't matter in that context
Click to expand...

The problem is, you're arguing about how the Law works. I have provided you a ton of information, and the Supreme Court has it right other than the Three Stooges in the opinion on the individual fence jumper case.
 
#259
#259
Vol8188 said:
Not sure a “culture shock” of being returned to your home country should be in any way considered relevant
Click to expand...
So we just send someone who came here as a minor back and don't take into consideration how the culture of the country may effect him?

I get it though, I am a little more liberal on immigration.
 
#261
#261
LSU-SIU said:
That makes no sense, he's an illegal either way so whether done by deportation or removal is not material at this time. Further, at the beginning I assumed they made an error, they have clarified they haven't so there is no wrong to right.

If he is a gang member he is in the right place, if he isn't a gang member he is in the right place.... the removal has been perfected.

Nobody is pointing out a wrong to right at his point.
Click to expand...

It makes perfect sense. Bring him back, or don't bring him back (give him a virtual hearing) but either way lay out the evidence and give the man justice.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UT_Dutchman
#262
#262
Sandman 423 said:
So we just send someone who came here as a minor back and don't take into consideration how the culture of the country may effect him?

I get it though, I am a little more liberal on immigration.
Click to expand...

If they are illegal and have a valid deportation order yeah. Maybe people will stop bringing their kids into the country illegally if they know that's a possibility.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UT_Dutchman and EasternVol
#263
#263
hog88 said:
It makes perfect sense. Bring him back, or don't bring him back (give him a virtual hearing) but either way lay out the evidence and give the man justice.
Click to expand...

Legally and Constitutionally no it doesn't make sense, he has been identified by two processes to be illegal.... he is barred from the country and nobody is claiming he has legal status.

There is no controversy that you are going to solve.

Evidence of what?
 
#264
#264
LSU-SIU said:
That makes no sense, he's an illegal either way so whether done by deportation or removal is not material at this time. Further, at the beginning I assumed they made an error, they have clarified they haven't so there is no wrong to right.

If he is a gang member he is in the right place, if he isn't a gang member he is in the right place.... the removal has been perfected.

Nobody is pointing out a wrong to right at his point.
Click to expand...
I bet you loved Reagan's war on drugs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EasternVol
#265
#265
LSU-SIU said:
Legally and Constitutionally no it doesn't make sense, he has been identified by two processes to be illegal.... he is barred from the country and nobody is claiming he has legal status.

There is no controversy that you are going to solve.
Click to expand...

SCOTUS has said we need to facilitate his return.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NashVol11
#269
#269
hog88 said:
IMO the administration should ask ES to send him back, once he gets back give him a hearing and let the process play out. Show the evidence of him being a gang member.
Click to expand...
There should be 100% agreement on this but some people are too far up Trump's ass
 
#270
#270
hog88 said:
SCOTUS has said we need to facilitate his return.
Click to expand...

As part of the immigration case, but he was removed via AEA. But as specified in the order, the court probably lacks authority. (I wrote earlier with the government's response, they're back at appeals)

Lower court just put facilitate in there and no direction as to what that means, so the government has appealed to the circuit. At some point, they should just ignore the lower court completely.

The application is granted in part and denied in part, subject to the direction of this order. Due to the administrative stay issued by THE CHIEF JUSTICE, the deadline imposed by the District Court has now passed. To that extent, the Government’s emergency application is effectively granted in part and the deadline in the challenged order is no longer effective. The rest of the District Court’s order remains in effect but requires clarification on remand. The order properly requires the Government to “facilitate” Abrego Garcia’s release from custody in El Salvador and to ensure that his case is handled as it would have been had he not been improperly sent to El Salvador. The intended scope of the term “effectuate” in the District Court’s order
is, however, unclear, and may exceed the District Court’s authority. The District Court should clarify its directive, with due regard for the deference owed to the Executive Branch in the conduct of foreign affairs. For its part, the Government should be prepared to share what it can concerning the steps it has taken and the prospect of further steps. The order heretofore entered by THE CHIEF JUSTICEis vacated.
Click to expand...
 
#271
#271
So here's the thing: A US Immigration Judge granted Garcia "withholding of removal" status. This prohibited him from being deported. PERIOD.

Trump's deportation of Garcia, therefore, constitutes a bona fide Constitutional crisis, as the Executive has ignored the Judicial declaration.

The rest of what's been written here is largely noise.

Trump MUST comport with the law, or we will be square in shitville.

If you MAGA chumps want a civil war, continue to support an overt challenge to the Rule of Law.
 
#272
#272
LSU-SIU said:
You must have me confused with someone else, I have wrote many posts on that subject including the Bush family running illegal drugs and arms. Try again.
Click to expand...
It was really more about supporting something that won't ever work. Love the passion on the drug war though.
 
#273
#273
NashVol11 said:
There should be 100% agreement on this but some people are too far up Trump's ass
Click to expand...

If they believe they were correct, they actually have constitutional duty to not bring an illegal into the country especially one they and other countries have designated as a terrorist.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top