Trump: We must ‘immediately’ return undocumented immigrants ‘with no judges or court cases’

[roamer_1]

I guess the idea is that you might have to adapt to a busy border where people who shouldn't be are trying to cross all the time.

FYI - Big Bend is one of the most beautiful wilderness places in the world.  It has been a fact for many years that there are areas you don't want to go, because they are drug and other smuggling corridors.  Sad but true.

I can understand that some... I'd hope my contributions show something approaching normal along a border that works fine (for the most part).... There is plenty of reason not to have ID on ya. And hence, there is a need for some sort of due process before throwing a fish back... That's all I am saying.

[ABX]

It seems your examples give reason the citizen on private property 5 miles from the border should not be treated differently than the one in Kansas.

No, they shouldn't. Just like a citizen 5 miles from the border has the same 2nd Amendment rights as a citizen in Kansas. How much of a stretch do you think it would be for someone in the government to strip 2nd Amendment rights from everyone one, five, or ten miles in the border on the same justification? If I recall correctly, a Democratic congressman tried to add a rider to a bill that did just that about a decade or so ago.

[thackney]

I'm a ranch hand ... just hiking.

That's funny, right there...

@roamer_1

I missed your comment the first time through.

Funny indeed. 

[roamer_1]

Funny indeed.

 

[thackney]

In a similar line of thought, I recently was talking with a rodeo friend who was considering a gym membership.  Not a lot of farmers and ranchers with gym memberships, even us part-time wanna-be's.

[roamer_1]

In a similar line of thought, I recently was talking with a rodeo friend who was considering a gym membership.  Not a lot of farmers and ranchers with gym memberships, even us part-time wanna-be's.

LOL! How true... Something the iron-pumping jocks never could figger out is how a country boy could always kick their butts... *JUST* a couple haying seasons a year pretty well make a gym membership laughable.

[ABX]

Here is a take by Johathan Adler who used to be (I would hope still is) extremely revered in Conservative and Constitutionalist circles (you will probably recognize his blog the Volokh Conspiracy blog).  He is an extremely Conservative law professor who has led the charge against Obamacare (he argued King v. Burwell before SCOTUS).

https://reason.com/volokh/2018/06/25/a-quick-due-process-lesson-for-the-presi

[Free Vulcan]

Here is a take by Johathan Adler who used to be (I would hope still is) extremely revered in Conservative and Constitutionalist circles (you will probably recognize his blog the Volokh Conspiracy blog).  He is an extremely Conservative law professor who has led the charge against Obamacare (he argued King v. Burwell before SCOTUS).

https://reason.com/volokh/2018/06/25/a-quick-due-process-lesson-for-the-presi

I guess the question for me is 'what is due process?' It's always intimated as meaning 'in court' with hearings, trials and such, not just an ID check, proof of citizenship, etc.

I can go along with giving an opportunity to prove your citizenship to a Border Patrol officer, but a full blown court hearing for every person who comes across illegally and not at a port of entry, not so much.

[ABX]

I guess the question for me is 'what is due process?' It's always intimated as meaning 'in court' with hearings, trials and such, not just an ID check, proof of citizenship, etc.

I can go along with giving an opportunity to prove your citizenship to a Border Patrol officer, but a full blown court hearing for every person who comes across illegally and not at a port of entry, not so much.

I would say at the absolutely very minimum, before deporting someone the government has to determine: 1. Is this a US Citizen. & 2. Do they have the legal right to be there.

The mechanism doesn't have to be long and drawn out. I think one of the problems in this debate is the feeling that the extreme bureaucracy we have now has to be offset with swinging the extreme opposite way of no due process.

With modern technology, I believe we can work out an expedited way to move these people through a system while allowing at the very least a minimum amount of due process protections.

Naturally, much of the reaction is to the President's statement of 'no judge no due process' especially in light of the oath of office he took to defend the Constitution. Sure, we can chalk it up to either ignorance as to what due process is or just a reactionary tweet. But we shouldn't blindly accept (or worse cheer) eliminating due process.

[Hoodat]

I guess the question for me is 'what is due process?' It's always intimated as meaning 'in court' with hearings, trials and such, not just an ID check, proof of citizenship, etc.

I can go along with giving an opportunity to prove your citizenship to a Border Patrol officer, but a full blown court hearing for every person who comes across illegally and not at a port of entry, not so much.

Due Process means that there are a written set of rules in place that are to be followed.  Those rules may or may not include a judiciary.  For US citizens, we have a Constitutional right to petition the government with a list of grievances.  For non-US Citizens, it would be up to their governments to guarantee that right to petition their governments.

[Victoria33]

And when he insulted Congress and made enemies, that it was just brilliant negotiating tactics.

@Suppressed

When Dictator Trump insulted McCain over and over, McCain used his vote to defeat legislation ending Obamacare.  The McCain vote killed it.  Moral of story: Don't insult people over and over and expect them to "love" you.

[DCPatriot]

@Suppressed

When Dictator Trump insulted McCain over and over, McCain used his vote to defeat legislation ending Obamacare.  The McCain vote killed it.  Moral of story: Don't insult people over and over and expect them to "love" you.

???

The moral of that story as presented:    Don't put your GD petting ego above the welfare of the American family.

[Texas Yellow Rose]

There is a simple solution.... All you need is a computer and a link https://www.e-verify.gov/

[Free Vulcan]

@Suppressed

When Dictator Trump insulted McCain over and over, McCain used his vote to defeat legislation ending Obamacare.  The McCain vote killed it.  Moral of story: Don't insult people over and over and expect them to "love" you.

But that says to me far more about McCain than Trump if you are so think skinned that you can let simple words and comments throw you into a fit of pique till kill off legislation just out of spite. That's not what they were elected to do.

They hypocritical pearl clutchers like Flake, Corker, Collins, and McCain maybe should take a long look in the mirror. Of course they won't, because they think they are morally superior, but mostly they're just at contradiction with themselves.

[roamer_1]

I guess the question for me is 'what is due process?' It's always intimated as meaning 'in court' with hearings, trials and such, not just an ID check, proof of citizenship, etc.

I can go along with giving an opportunity to prove your citizenship to a Border Patrol officer, but a full blown court hearing for every person who comes across illegally and not at a port of entry, not so much.

I'd imagine Miranda and representation, as a minimum.

Now, that being said, perhaps an administrative immigration court could be formed, to take the weight off the civil courts... perhaps with reduced reach... something more along the lines for speedy processing...

[Sanguine]

I'd imagine Miranda and representation, as a minimum.

Now, that being said, perhaps an administrative immigration court could be formed, to take the weight off the civil courts... perhaps with reduced reach... something more along the lines for speedy processing...

Why Miranda? 


And if they're entering illegally,  they have the option of proving their citizenship and go straight to jail, or agree to turn around and go back across the border from whence they came.

[roamer_1]

Why Miranda? 


And if they're entering illegally,  They have the option of proving their citizenship or agree to turn around and go back across the border from whence they came.

You assume illegality. What if the detainee is indeed an American citizen? Or an undocumented natural born citizen? What if there is a legitimate claim for asylum?

All of these may well require representation, and as a matter of course, Miranda rights observe that eventuality.

[txradioguy]

You assume illegality. What if the detainee is indeed an American citizen? Or an undocumented natural born citizen? What if there is a legitimate claim for asylum?

If they are an American citizen then this is a non starter.  There is no such thing in America these days as an "undocumented natural born citizen" unless you're raised by a pack of wolves in remote Alaska.

A legitimate claim for asylum need to go through the proper channels.  The ones that have legitimate asylum claims DO go through the legal ports of entry.

Illegals coached by an attorney to automatically say "I need asylum" no matter what no matter when they are finally discovered do not have any interest in doing things the proper way.

[roamer_1]

If they are an American citizen then this is a non starter.  There is no such thing in America these days as an "undocumented natural born citizen" unless you're raised by a pack of wolves in remote Alaska.

I don't think that's right. A friend of mine threw a daughter down in Panama that he didn't even know he had. She got kicked back 3 times (twice near the border, once all the way in Northern California), till she made it to Oregon to find her father. He hired up a lawyer, got her a green card (or something) until her parental disposition could be formally verified.

A legitimate claim for asylum need to go through the proper channels.  The ones that have legitimate asylum claims DO go through the legal ports of entry.

Granted - usually so, but not always so.

Illegals coached by an attorney to automatically say "I need asylum" no matter what no matter when they are finally discovered do not have any interest in doing things the proper way.

That is more a problem with the system than the perpetrator. It does not justify ignoring the true cases.

Here is another reason: Suppose the perpetrator is a wanted felon? If you want prosecution to stick, you'd better damn well Miranda his ass and let him at a lawyer, right from the get-go...

[ABX]

Here is another reason: Suppose the perpetrator is a wanted felon? If you want prosecution to stick, you'd better damn well Miranda his ass and let him at a lawyer, right from the get-go...

That is a good point I didn't think of. What if it is a child sex trafficker bringing kids into the US? Do we just bounce him back to keep the cycle going or do we lock his ass up through the maximum legal authority we have, and stop the cycle? We may not know immediately what he is. That ever so tiny amount of due process would help ensure his case isn't tossed and he just gets a free bus ride home.

[txradioguy]

That is a good point I didn't think of. What if it is a child sex trafficker bringing kids into the US? Do we just bounce him back to keep the cycle going or do we lock his ass up through the maximum legal authority we have, and stop the cycle? We may not know immediately what he is. That ever so tiny amount of due process would help ensure his case isn't tossed and he just gets a free bus ride home.

Those aren't what if's they are reality already and we can play that "what if" stuff all day long.

[Victoria33]

The moral of that story as presented:    Don't put your GD petting ego above the welfare of the American family.

@DCPatriot

After getting vile statements said about you over and over, broadcast across the whole nation, said defamed person is going to take the opportunity when presented, to take that person down and it be known across the whole nation just as terrible words about said person were heard across the nation.  I believe the term is, "Payback is a bitch."

[DCPatriot]

@DCPatriot

After getting vile statements said about you over and over, broadcast across the whole nation, said defamed person is going to take the opportunity when presented, to take that person down and it be known across the whole nation just as terrible words about said person were heard across the nation.  I believe the term is, "Payback is a bitch."

But he didn't "take that person down....."

He allied with the Democrats to maintain socialized medicine, 'bankrupting' countless households across the country.

[ABX]

Those aren't what if's they are reality already and we can play that "what if" stuff all day long.

Everything is a 'what if' until you have a specific case in front of you. What if it is a felon? What if it is a citizen? Due process, even the basic amount, will ensure those 'what if's' don't derail everything if/when they become reality.

It is just like the 'what if it is a US Citizen', this isn't a one-off problem. As cited many times, twenty thousand US citizens have been wrongly deported recently. 'What if this is a child trafficker'?  That's not a one-off problem. These are huge problems. https://www.cbp.gov/border-security/human-trafficking Just tossing them back keeps the cycle going. If they are caught here breaking that law, we can lock them up and stop at least what was caused by that one trafficker. Without due process, they just get a free bus ticket to pick up more and start over.

Due process doesn't just mean finding people innocent, it also means weeding out the real bad ones and dealing with them harsher.

[jpsb]

@DCPatriot

After getting vile statements said about you over and over, broadcast across the whole nation, said defamed person is going to take the opportunity when presented, to take that person down and it be known across the whole nation just as terrible words about said person were heard across the nation.  I believe the term is, "Payback is a bitch."

One of the reasons I intensely dislike W is because he put his interests ahead of the nations
interests. Dido John McCain. McCain was elected to represent Az not John McCain.  Hopefully
soon Az can elect someone that will represent Az.