Trump Ignores the Courts

#2,179
#2,179
Ritzwatch said:
Article says mom was deported, and she wanted to take her 2 year old, whom I presume she had legal custody over (it is not reported), with her.

Seems the two year old wasn’t “deported” without due process, the child was taken out of country by her mother when the mother was deported. The government does appear to have facilitated that at her request.

Keeping a child with her mother rather than separating the two seems the right thing to do, unless there is more to the story as reported.
Click to expand...
There most certainly is more which is widely reported. The father, a US citizen also with custody, attempted to file to stop it from happening but the kid was deported before he could even try to take meaningful legal action.

That's why you're entitled to due process and court proceedings BEFORE deportation occurs. Otherwise it's just rendition.

How can you say a deportation that takes place without access to legal counsel, the courts, or intervention of the US citizen father doesn't violate due process? What exactly do you think due process is?
 
  • Like
Reactions: n_huffhines
#2,180
#2,180
LOL at all the "Due Process" people who didn't care about the previous admin shi***** on the laws while recruiting 20 million illegals to ruin the country who are also now upset with arresting judges after being quiet while the previous admin sent the FBI to Trump's house to ransack Melania's underwear drawer and arrested Trump. I would love for you to see how stupid you look, but you're too stupid to see it. lmao
 
  • Like
Reactions: WeeohdeeWood, whodeycin85 and SpaceCoastVol
#2,181
#2,181
just bob said:
LOL at all the "Due Process" people who didn't care about the previous admin shi***** on the laws while recruiting 20 million illegals to ruin the country who are also now upset with arresting judges after being quiet while the previous admin sent the FBI to Trump's house to ransack Melania's underwear drawer and arrested Trump. I would love for you to see how stupid you look, but you're too stupid to see it. lmao
Click to expand...
Tolerated due process. Legal jargon only applies when it’s a reverse UNO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: whodeycin85 and just bob
#2,183
#2,183
Ashevolle said:
There most certainly is more which is widely reported. The father, a US citizen also with custody, attempted to file to stop it from happening but the kid was deported before he could even try to take meaningful legal action.
That's why you're entitled to due process and court proceedings BEFORE deportation occurs. Otherwise it's just rendition.

How can you say a deportation that takes place without access to legal counsel, the courts, or intervention of the US citizen father doesn't violate due process? What exactly do you think due process is?
Click to expand...
Due process is following the law and procedures for a specific government action.

What law or process, specifically, do you contend was not followed here?

I am wrong in my understanding that the mom had the authority to take her child out of the US?

I will be out of cell range for the next few hours, but I am interested in your reply. I will get back with you when I have service.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MemphisVol77, Orangeslice13, whodeycin85 and 1 other person
#2,186
#2,186
Ashevolle said:
There most certainly is more which is widely reported. The father, a US citizen also with custody, attempted to file to stop it from happening but the kid was deported before he could even try to take meaningful legal action.

That's why you're entitled to due process and court proceedings BEFORE deportation occurs. Otherwise it's just rendition.

How can you say a deportation that takes place without access to legal counsel, the courts, or intervention of the US citizen father doesn't violate due process? What exactly do you think due process is?
Click to expand...
If the father has custody why was the child in care of the mother...?
Edit..

The father didn't have custody and didn't seek custody till after she was detained and in the air...another false narrative shot down
 
  • Like
Reactions: MemphisVol77 and Orangeslice13
#2,187
#2,187
whodeycin85 said:
If the father has custody why was the child in care of the mother...?
Edit..

The father didn't have custody and didn't seek custody till after she was detained and in the air...another false narrative shot down
Click to expand...
Guy has a kid with an illegal alien. Leaves custody with her. It's Trump's fault his kid is in Mexico Honduras right now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MemphisVol77, Orangeslice13 and whodeycin85
#2,192
#2,192
Ashevolle said:
There most certainly is more which is widely reported. The father, a US citizen also with custody, attempted to file to stop it from happening but the kid was deported before he could even try to take meaningful legal action.

That's why you're entitled to due process and court proceedings BEFORE deportation occurs. Otherwise it's just rendition.

How can you say a deportation that takes place without access to legal counsel, the courts, or intervention of the US citizen father doesn't violate due process? What exactly do you think due process is?
Click to expand...
The kid wasn't deported. To keep claiming it was is disingenuous when tying it to an argument about due process.

And it looks like everyone got the process due them. It just sounds like the judge is unhappy that it all played out outside of his jurisdiction.

Points being:

The judge/court tried contacting the mother AFTER she was already on the flight.

The mother (with legal US custody) was given the choice of taking the kid with her or not. She wrote a letter confirming that she was choosing to take the daughter (as opposed to the gov't deporting the daughter, by the way).

The judge is not contesting that the mother had the right to take the daughter with her. just that HE DOESN'T know for sure that that was her choice.

The gov't has shown the letter confirming her wishes.

It sounds like the process was followed duly; the loud mouthed judge just needed to get all the facts before blasting the media.

www.nbcnews.com

2-year-old U.S. citizen apparently deported 'with no meaningful process,' judge says

The child's mother was being deported and wanted to take the girl, U.S. lawyers said. When the judge asked to speak to her, they were already in the air.
www.nbcnews.com www.nbcnews.com



“The Government contends that this is all okay because the mother wishes that the child be deported with her,” Doughty wrote. “But the Court doesn’t know that.”


The Louisiana court called a government lawyer at 12:19 p.m. local time to speak with the child’s mother, while the plane was in the air, and was called back at 1:06 p.m. and told that mother and child were already in Honduras, Doughty wrote.
Click to expand...

Lawyers for the government said that the child's mother has legal custody of the child and that she indicated in a letter she would take her daughter to Honduras.

The letter, in Spanish, reads, "I will take my daughter ... with me to Honduras."


An image of the handwritten letter is dated Thursday at 6:23 p.m., when the woman and child were in ICE custody and before they were deported Friday.
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: whodeycin85
#2,199
#2,199
evillawyer said:
They better have something more than this

Click to expand...

That is an incredibly disingenuous description of the claims.

The judge became angry that they were there. Tried to stop them from doing their job by misrepresenting the law. Thought she got all of them out of the hallway and into the chief judge's office. Double checked that she'd cleared them out of the hallway. Postponed his case without participation from or notification to the prosecutor on the case. Walked him out of a juror exit that isn't supposed to be used by defendants.

She cleared the agents. Postponed the case so that he could leave before the agents came back. Personally escorted him out of the courtroom in such a way that he had a better chance of leaving unnoticed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: whodeycin85
#2,200
#2,200
Orange_Crush said:
That is an incredibly disingenuous description of the claims.

The judge became angry that they were there. Tried to stop them from doing their job by misrepresenting the law. Thought she got all of them out of the hallway and into the chief judge's office. Double checked that she'd cleared them out of the hallway. Postponed his case without participation from or notification to the prosecutor on the case. Walked him out of a juror exit that isn't supposed to be used by defendants.

She cleared the agents. Postponed the case so that he could leave before the agents came back. Personally escorted him out of the courtroom in such a way that he had a better chance of leaving unnoticed.
Click to expand...
Jury exit led to a public hallway where there were agents. They didn't arrest him. Need proof beyond a reasonable doubt. She doesn't have to testify about her motives. How is the government gonna to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that she was trying to obstruct justice if the guy was led to a public hallway where there were agents waiting for him.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top