Trump Ignores the Courts

#2,351
#2,351
Ritzwatch said:
And if the judge is able to dispel his strong suspicion that a US citizen was deported illegally, what will be your response?

As I have asked many, many times, what process was not followed here? No one can give me a solid answer. You know why? Because no one has all the facts.

The judge himself is going to have a hearing to find out what happened. Good. If we deported a 2 year old American citizen unlawfully, heads should roll. Period and unequivocally.

What we should not do is roll those heads on our “strong suspicion.” The judge appears to understand that, therefore the hearing he has scheduled. He has not yet concluded anything was done improperly, because he doesn’t have all of the facts.

Neither do we have those facts. This may all turn out to have been done right. I don’t know, and neither do you. Hopefully the hearing will reveal the facts, and if there is any wrongdoing, it can be remedied here and prevented in the future.
Click to expand...
Once due process has been had, if the judge finds that the law was followed then I have no problem with the mom being deported (and the daughter going with her if thats the custodial parents' choice). Skipping these crucial steps and saying there was due process is the folly. You can't deny people access to legal counsel, the courts, or the ability to confer with family and say "due process wasnt violated" because that's precisely what procedural due process is.

The Trump administration is trying to circumvent it which is a big no-no for anyone who values living in a free society.
 
#2,352
#2,352
Ashevolle said:
Once due process has been had, if the judge finds that the law was followed then I have no problem with the mom being deported (and the daughter going with her if thats the custodial parents' choice). Skipping these crucial steps and saying there was due process is the folly. You can't deny people access to legal counsel, the courts, or the ability to confer with family and say "due process wasnt violated" because that's precisely what procedural due process is.

The Trump administration is trying to circumvent it which is a big no-no for anyone who values living in a free society.
Click to expand...
I wished the last guy didn’t destroy the border of the “free society” you speak of. Ironically the free society that this country used to be has been legislated and regulated into a shell of what it was intended to be.

There are only a handful of folks in DC that actually get this concept. We don’t live in a free country anymore.
 
#2,353
#2,353
Ashevolle said:
Once due process has been had, if the judge finds that the law was followed then I have no problem with the mom being deported (and the daughter going with her if thats the custodial parents' choice).
Click to expand...
We have to be very, very careful here, @Ashevolle, or we might find ourselves in agreement. 🤣

Ashevolle said:
Skipping these crucial steps and saying there was due process is the folly. You can't deny people access to legal counsel, the courts, or the ability to confer with family and say "due process wasnt violated" because that's precisely what procedural due process is.
Click to expand...
I agree that if steps are skipped, the deportation/removal is wrong. There are multiple lawful ways to deport someone. Each has their own rules. Expedited Deportation, for example, is different that the AEA process the Admin is using. (See previous discussions.)

Without knowing what the Govt basis is for any given deportation, I have no idea if due process was given or not.

Ashevolle said:
The Trump administration is trying to circumvent it which is a big no-no for anyone who values living in a free society.
Click to expand...

I think what the Admin is trying to do is deport as many people who are here illegally as they can. Perhaps some of these are by intentionally trying to circumvent established processed. I don't know. I will be interested in seeing what develops in the May 16 hearing.

Cheers,

RW
 
#2,354
#2,354
#2,355
#2,355
Ashevolle said:
Once due process has been had, if the judge finds that the law was followed then I have no problem with the mom being deported (and the daughter going with her if thats the custodial parents' choice). Skipping these crucial steps and saying there was due process is the folly. You can't deny people access to legal counsel, the courts, or the ability to confer with family and say "due process wasnt violated" because that's precisely what procedural due process is.

The Trump administration is trying to circumvent it which is a big no-no for anyone who values living in a free society.
Click to expand...
So do you believe we have to have 20 million individual trials in order to deport 20 million illegal immigrants? That would tie up the system for decades? (Or is that the whole goal anyway)?
 
#2,356
#2,356
OrangeTsar said:
FWIW; Kamala Harris passed the bar as well. She is an absolute idiot.
And most members of Congress have passed the bar as well. So that isn’t necessarily an indication of basic knowledge or competence
Click to expand...
Red flag when someone has to bring up their education to justify their position. I work in a field with some of the highest educated folks there are and we still have some idiots that make it through.

The person last in their class in medical school still gets called doctor. With DEI policies it’s worse than ever. Idiots are everywhere and they have no clue how they got there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OrangeTsar
#2,358
#2,358
Judge Dugan just suspended by the LIBERAL Wisconsin Supreme Court. “Temporary” but still a bit unexpected for me.

 
#2,360
#2,360

MSN

www.msn.com

In 2018, a Boston judge was charged with obstruction, etc for escorting illegal immigrants out of court to escape ICE arrests. Charges were dropped, but have been resurrected.

Interestingly, the MASS gov sounds in favor of the charges.
 
#2,361
#2,361
Orange_Crush said:
They didn't suspend her pay.
Click to expand...
Since she hasn’t been found guilty yet, I don’t really have a problem with that.
Speaking of pay, I think I read somewhere that she makes $174,000 per year. I wonder how she is affording a veritable legionnaires high powered nationality known defense attorneys. Wonder who is footing the bill? 🤔
 
#2,362
#2,362
OrangeTsar said:
Since she hasn’t been found guilty yet, I don’t really have a problem with that.
Speaking of pay, I think I read somewhere that she makes $174,000 per year. I wonder how she is affording a veritable legionnaires high powered nationality known defense attorneys. Wonder who is footing the bill? 🤔
Click to expand...
ACLU?
 
#2,363
#2,363
Tom Fitton
@TomFitton



DC Appeals Court reverses judicial coup against key @RealDonaldTrump moves to lay off workers and cancel grants, activities at Voice of America and other left propaganda agencies. Majority rules lower court had no jurisdiction, which means grantees must go to different court to litigate a contract dispute and employees must use the administrative personnel dispute process to fight about being fired. If upheld, this push back on judicial activism could largely destroy the Left's judicial coup against Trump's effort to restore political control of the administrative state. https://media.cadc.uscourts.gov/opinions/docs/2025/05/23-5273-2113957.pdf
 
#2,365
#2,365
jmacvols1 said:
Tom Fitton
@TomFitton



DC Appeals Court reverses judicial coup against key @RealDonaldTrump moves to lay off workers and cancel grants, activities at Voice of America and other left propaganda agencies. Majority rules lower court had no jurisdiction, which means grantees must go to different court to litigate a contract dispute and employees must use the administrative personnel dispute process to fight about being fired. If upheld, this push back on judicial activism could largely destroy the Left's judicial coup against Trump's effort to restore political control of the administrative state. https://media.cadc.uscourts.gov/opinions/docs/2025/05/23-5273-2113957.pdf
Click to expand...
District Court judges who get overturned should be required to stand before the actual bench and have to listen to the decision being read to them. A little shaming would be welcome.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jmacvols1
#2,368
#2,368
n_huffhines said:
Can't get enough of these activist judges who enforce that pesky bill of rights.

View attachment 740888
Click to expand...
Surprised (not). Clinton appointed “judge” trying everything in the book to slow down the Trump reforms overwhelmingly voted for in the 2024 election. And as many people are rightly pointing out, a Visa is a privilege not a right. It can be revoked at any time.for any reason
Whenever I am overseas I remind myself that I am a guest in their country and if I do anything to offend the authorities there, they can put me in a car and drive me to the airport and put me on the next flight home. No trial. No calling a lawyer. No right to demand “due process”
These entitled Hamas loving dweebs seem to constantly forget that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MemphisVol77, TrumpedUpVol and NEO
#2,369
#2,369
OrangeTsar said:
Surprised (not). Clinton appointed “judge” trying everything in the book to slow down the Trump reforms overwhelmingly voted for in the 2024 election. And as many people are rightly pointing out, a Visa is a privilege not a right. It can be revoked at any time.for any reason
Whenever I am overseas I remind myself that I am a guest in their country and if I do anything to offend the authorities there, they can put me in a car and drive me to the airport and put me on the next flight home. No trial. No calling a lawyer. No right to demand “due process”
These entitled Hamas loving dweebs seem to constantly forget that.
Click to expand...

The bill of rights applies to everyone, no matter how much you try to undermine the constitution
 
  • Like
Reactions: EasternVol
#2,370
#2,370
n_huffhines said:
The bill of rights applies to everyone, no matter how much you try to undermine the constitution
Click to expand...
And being in the United States as a non citizen still is a privilege not a right. And that privilege can be revoked at Will with no justification required. That is the due process that applies. No matter how much you try to undermine the constitution which gives sole discretion over matters related to aliens and immigration to the executive branch. Don’t you believe in the rule of law?

And the bill of rights is still intact. She is not being prosecuted for her speech. She will however be prosecuted if she ignores the decision to revoke her visa. She can continue to say anything she likes. She just can’t continue to stay here as our guest.

If I invite someone into my house and that person starts insulting me, I can and will ask them to leave. That is all that is happening here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceCoastVol, MemphisVol77, TrumpedUpVol and 4 others
#2,372
#2,372
n_huffhines said:
Apparently, you are talking about your "presumption" that due process was followed in one specific case, and I'm talking about the Trump admin trying to skirt due process wherever they can.
Click to expand...

If you had millions of people to deport, would you be attempt to increase or decrease the amount of due process required for each case?

I think the answer is evident
 
  • Like
Reactions: NEO
#2,373
#2,373
Orangeslice13 said:
Being escorted out is not a violation of any human rights.
Click to expand...
Yup, the First Amendment says specifically the “Congress shall make no law…..”. And indeed Congress has made no law whatsoever penalizing her speech. And she will never stand before a judge or jury and be forced to answer for her speech. The first amendment has not been infringed at all.
Any possible criminal or civil prosecution would have to be for choosing to remain here past the date when her Visa was revoked. Thousands of people are charged with this every single year. But this one snowflake gets to go before a federal judge and get made into a media darling, WHY exactly? Oh yeah, she hates Jews. So of course the democrats and the media (but I repeat myself) make her the cause célèbre of the week.
 
#2,374
#2,374
Well this seals it for me. After this totally unethical statement by “Wise Latina” Sotomayor, Trump would be justified in ignoring any SCOTUS rulings in which she is in the majority.
Judicial ethics require her to now recuse herself from any case involving the Trump administration. She has publicly thrown any presumption of impartiality out the window.


Ps. Any time someone like Sotomayor feels the need to tell you how wise they are, you can be pretty certain they are anything but.
 
#2,375
#2,375
OrangeTsar said:
Well this seals it for me. After this totally unethical statement by “Wise Latina” Sotomayor, Trump would be justified in ignoring any SCOTUS rulings in which she is in the majority.
Judicial ethics require her to now recuse herself from any case involving the Trump administration. She has publicly thrown any presumption of impartiality out the window.


Ps. Any time someone like Sotomayor feels the need to tell you how wise they are, you can be pretty certain they are anything but.
Click to expand...
I agree with your last comment. That absolutely describes our current POTUS even more acutely. You agree, right? It's a problem that exists at highest levels of the 3 branches
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top