Trump Ignores the Courts

#2,052
#2,052
hog88 said:
Why?
Click to expand...
One example: Some nations require you to be a citizen to own real property. It would be a bit crummy to a US citizen to make them lose their inheritance when their property owning foreign-citizen parent died.
 
#2,053
#2,053
Ritzwatch said:
One example: Some nations require you to be a citizen to own real property. It would be a bit crummy to a US citizen to make them lose their inheritance when their property owning foreign-citizen parent died.
Click to expand...

**** happens to good people, No damn exceptions.
 
#2,057
#2,057
Trump got smacked down for violating a free press, and if you're worried that he might not get away with it, don't worry, he's already testing other loopholes. Trump must defeat the constitution at all costs. How can he be the GOAT if he's not more powerful than the law?

www.ap.org

AP wins reinstatement to White House events after judge rules government can’t bar its journalists | The Associated Press

A federal judge ordered the White House on Tuesday to restore The Associated Press’ full access to cover presidential events, affirming on First Amendment
www.ap.org www.ap.org
 
  • Like
Reactions: Septic, EasternVol, BeardedVol and 1 other person
#2,059
#2,059
hog88 said:
I 100% agree but it needs to be done by constitutional amendment
Click to expand...
We have to qualify and provide legitimate citizenship of those that would be allowed to vote on said amendment. Until there is proof of voting eligibility, we will never pass another amendment in this country.... good or bad. That and the tribalism has to come to an end and I don't see that happening anytime soon.
 
#2,060
#2,060
Orange_Crush said:
My research of the case you posted indicated that ICE has detained almost 2000 US citizens in the past 15 years or so. It's nothing new. It's been happening, and it seems that there is a system of protection wrapped around it.

I'm not sure of LSU's full argument, but the ADMIN's argument per this El Salvador case has been that their hands are tied b/c it's an ES citizen in ES. Personally, I think you're blowing this "US citizen" fear-mongering out of proportion. We've seen nothing to indicate that random US citizens can/will be shipped off to foreign countries with no due process or ability to bring them back if (God forbid) it ever did happen.

And FTR, not even the Trump admin has said that they can "deport as they want". They have been investigating every legal method available. Stop and think... EVERY LEGAL method available.

Even your fears per US citizens. The admin made the stupid comment that they are what...? Researching the legality.
Click to expand...
what could be the possible legality or rationale behind DEPORTING a citizen? except for extradition what legality does the government have in removing a citizen from the US at all? or better yet, what legality SHOULD it have?

the issue is before the US government wasn't using AEA to summarily remove people, immigrants or citizens, from the US. so those 2000 had to have a court date, and appeal, before a US citizen could be removed. now under AEA, they don't get either of those, unless they are able to get a judge to order a stay before the government can whisk them into a black SUV and dump them on an international flight, and just say "its too late now".

I have been blasting the same thing on repeat this whole time. Its not what is being done (deporting) that is the issue, its HOW (AEA) its being done. previously any branch of the government unilaterally extending its power used to be an issue for the right, now they are just more big government Democrats.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DuckInAPen and EasternVol
#2,061
#2,061
LouderVol said:
what could be the possible legality or rationale behind DEPORTING a citizen? except for extradition what legality does the government have in removing a citizen from the US at all? or better yet, what legality SHOULD it have?

the issue is before the US government wasn't using AEA to summarily remove people, immigrants or citizens, from the US. so those 2000 had to have a court date, and appeal, before a US citizen could be removed. now under AEA, they don't get either of those, unless they are able to get a judge to order a stay before the government can whisk them into a black SUV and dump them on an international flight, and just say "its too late now".

I have been blasting the same thing on repeat this whole time. Its not what is being done (deporting) that is the issue, its HOW (AEA) its being done. previously any branch of the government unilaterally extending its power used to be an issue for the right, now they are just more big government Democrats.
Click to expand...
I don't think they are looking to "deport", technically. I think they are looking into the legality of having leased prisons in other countries for convicted US criminals. i.e. the point that these two gangs explode in prisons, so the DoJ doesn't want to imprison illegal gang members in US prison systems. Similarly, I think the thought is, "Can we send citizen gang members to foreign prison systems?" But the point is, they have said that they are investigating the legality of it, which is indicative of them wanting to stay within the law.

So, you're referring to due process?
 
#2,062
#2,062
Orange_Crush said:
I don't think they are looking to "deport", technically. I think they are looking into the legality of having leased prisons in other countries for convicted US criminals. i.e. the point that these two gangs explode in prisons, so the DoJ doesn't want to imprison illegal gang members in US prison systems. Similarly, I think the thought is, "Can we send citizen gang members to foreign prison systems?" But the point is, they have said that they are investigating the legality of it, which is indicative of them wanting to stay within the law.

So, you're referring to due process?
Click to expand...
the admin having A process, doesn't mean its automatically "due" process.

due process for a US citizen, and according to the Supreme Court, immigrants, extends far beyond just having a lawyer legally allowed to get in front of a judge after the penalty is carried out.

even for immigrants they have to be notified about why and when they are being removed via AEA (1), have representation(2), representation has to have the physical ability to show up to the court (3), representation has to be heard at the court (4), only after all of that can a judge order removal (5), the order of that judge actually be carried out (6). previously none of that was part of the government's "process", so no it wasn't due process.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DuckInAPen and EasternVol
#2,063
#2,063
LouderVol said:
the admin having A process, doesn't mean its automatically "due" process.

due process for a US citizen, and according to the Supreme Court, immigrants, extends far beyond just having a lawyer legally allowed to get in front of a judge after the penalty is carried out.

even for immigrants they have to be notified about why and when they are being removed via AEA (1), have representation(2), representation has to have the physical ability to show up to the court (3), representation has to be heard at the court (4), only after all of that can a judge order removal (5), the order of that judge actually be carried out (6). previously none of that was part of the government's "process", so no it wasn't due process.
Click to expand...
But it is now?

There were US citizens irreversibly deported via AEA before SCOTUS ruled on AEA judicial review? The admin is ignoring SCOTUS per AEA now? Your fearmongering is all about that slippery slope fallacy as far as I can tell.
 
#2,064
#2,064
Orange_Crush said:
But it is now?

There were US citizens irreversibly deported via AEA before SCOTUS ruled on AEA judicial review? The admin is ignoring SCOTUS per AEA now? Your fearmongering is all about that slippery slope fallacy as far as I can tell.
Click to expand...
well so far the language has gone from:

they aren't going to deport everyone, they are just going to focus on the bad guys.
then it was they are going to deport everyone.
Then when they couldn't deport everyone they dug up a 200 year old law that has been used in war less than 10 times in history to suddenly remove thousands, if not millions of people, without anything resembling due process. without being at war.
then it was so what they deported someone to the wrong place.
then the Supreme Court has to get involved to completely reshape how the admin is using AEA, telling them have been using it wrong and have to change.
then Trump comes out and says they are considering how they can apply AEA to citizens.
then citizens start getting detained by ICE.

I am not sure at what point you will admit its gone from a "fallacy" to facts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MercyPercy, DuckInAPen and Septic
#2,065
#2,065
LouderVol said:
well so far the language has gone from:

they aren't going to deport everyone, they are just going to focus on the bad guys.
then it was they are going to deport everyone.
Then when they couldn't deport everyone they dug up a 200 year old law that has been used in war less than 10 times in history to suddenly remove thousands, if not millions of people, without anything resembling due process. without being at war.
then it was so what they deported someone to the wrong place.
then the Supreme Court has to get involved to completely reshape how the admin is using AEA, telling them have been using it wrong and have to change.
then Trump comes out and says they are considering how they can apply AEA to citizens.
then citizens start getting detained by ICE.

I am not sure at what point you will admit its gone from a "fallacy" to facts.
Click to expand...
Looks like the system at work.

Also, I see you are still misrepresenting the AEA, even after it's been pointed out repeatedly. Not a good look.

An Act Respecting Alien Enemies

SECTION 1. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That whenever there shall be a declared war between the United States and any foreign nation or government, or any invasion or predatory incursion shall be perpetrated, attempted, or threatened against the territory of the United States, by any foreign nation or government, and the President of the United States shall make public proclamation of the event, all natives, citizens, denizens, or subjects of the hostile nation or government, being males of the age of fourteen years and upwards, who shall be within the United States, and not actually naturalized, shall be liable to be apprehended, restrained, secured and removed, as alien enemies.
Click to expand...

I'll also remind you that there is official Congressional correspondence to the DHS secretary that Venezuela purposefully off-shored their TDA gang problem to the US and refused to accept them back. So, it likely falls under the predatory incursion via foreign nation/state.




Can you quote where Trump said he's looking to see how he can apply the AEA to US citizens?




And for the record, you literally just described a slippery slope fallacy.
 
#2,066
#2,066
For those aliens sent to El Salvador, what is the USG's agreement with El Salvador? Are they to hold the prisoners per a set schedule, at our pleasure, at their pleasure, or something else? What happens to the prisoners when their terms are up?
 
#2,067
#2,067
EasternVol said:
For those aliens sent to El Salvador, what is the USG's agreement with El Salvador? Are they to hold the prisoners per a set schedule, at our pleasure, at their pleasure, or something else? What happens to the prisoners when their terms are up?
Click to expand...
People don’t really come out of that place. At least for the Salvadorans, it’s more concentration camp than prison.

I’m not sure about the people we are sending there, but I’m betting the administration doesn’t really care either way.
 
#2,070
#2,070
EasternVol said:
For those aliens sent to El Salvador, what is the USG's agreement with El Salvador? Are they to hold the prisoners per a set schedule, at our pleasure, at their pleasure, or something else? What happens to the prisoners when their terms are up?
Click to expand...

You can argue whether our deportation procedures are right or not and I think that we may have violated our procedures with Garcia.

However, we really don't have grounds to tell another country how to manage their own citizens. (Granted, it hasn't stopped us in the past with trying to do it).

The big issue around Garcia is the government messed up in deporting him but he is still a citizen of El Salvador so trying to get him back is going to be difficult, if not impossible. Now that he is back in his home country, they have jurisdiction over him.

It is definitely a legal conundrum.
 
#2,071
#2,071
volbound1700 said:
You can argue whether our deportation procedures are right or not and I think that we may have violated our procedures with Garcia.

However, we really don't have grounds to tell another country how to manage their own citizens. (Granted, it hasn't stopped us in the past with trying to do it).

The big issue around Garcia is the government messed up in deporting him but he is still a citizen of El Salvador so trying to get him back is going to be difficult, if not impossible. Now that he is back in his home country, they have jurisdiction over him.

It is definitely a legal conundrum.
Click to expand...

How did the government mess up?

He was determined to be an illegal through the immigration process, he had a valid deportation order which was stayed. As part of the AEA process he was again determined to being an illegal and a gang member, he was removed. There would be no reason to want him back as he is clearly illegal and nobody is claiming otherwise, the one issue could have been through the immigration process where to send him... but all of that was on borrowed time as well.

The government didn't mess up, it looks like a very successful removal.
 
#2,073
#2,073
LSU-SIU said:
How did the government mess up?

He was determined to be an illegal through the immigration process, he had a valid deportation order which was stayed. As part of the AEA process he was again determined to being an illegal and a gang member, he was removed. There would be no reason to want him back as he is clearly illegal and nobody is claiming otherwise, the one issue could have been through the immigration process where to send him... but all of that was on borrowed time as well.

The government didn't mess up, it looks like a very successful removal.
Click to expand...

Why not read the unanimous Supreme Court decision:



Basically the deportation was in violation of chapter 8, section 1226 of the United States Code. All Feds had to do was cite to a warrant (or in the case of Dept of Homeland Security reasons, cite to how Garcia was a current threat to the USA to require deportation). Neither has been provided yet.
 
#2,074
#2,074
volbound1700 said:
Why not read the unanimous Supreme Court decision:



Basically the deportation was in violation of chapter 8, section 1226 of the United States Code. All Feds had to do was cite to a warrant (or in the case of Dept of Homeland Security reasons, cite to how Garcia was a current threat to the USA to require deportation). Neither has been provided yet.
Click to expand...


A warrant would require a finding of probable cause by a judge, which has not occurred. The failure to provide any rationale, even under seal, is what is causing skepticism that it even exists.

It may well exist and he may be a very bad guy who should in fact be deported. The problem with the absence of due process here is that no judicial authority has ever reviewed it to ensure it is sufficient to justify deportation, under whatever standard applies.

The more that Trump et al protest that they don't need to make such a showing and that we ought to just take their word on it, the more it looks like their judgment on this may well have been wrong -- perhaps very wrong -- and they just don't want to have to face any music over it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EasternVol
#2,075
#2,075
volbound1700 said:
Why not read the unanimous Supreme Court decision:



Basically the deportation was in violation of chapter 8, section 1226 of the United States Code. All Feds had to do was cite to a warrant (or in the case of Dept of Homeland Security reasons, cite to how Garcia was a current threat to the USA to require deportation). Neither has been provided yet.
Click to expand...
No, they took the facts as the U.S. said during initial filings of the case i.e. they made a mistake. Please see comments by Miller in which they have clarified that no mistake was made. They are talking about immigration process, not the AEA. He was removed via AEA not immigration law.

The court has jurisdiction via the immigration process and there was a stay in the place, the problem being he was deported via AEA.
All Feds had to do was cite to a warrant (or in the case of Dept of Homeland Security reasons, cite to how Garcia was a current threat to the USA to require deportation).
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
The subject was deported via AEA, the subject was not detained via criminal process, see AEA.

He was legally deported via AEA, his status was previously determined by immigration law to be an illegal and he had a valid deportation order which was stayed.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top