Supreme Court halts latest wave of Alien Enemies Act deportations, for now

[rustynail]

Trump is in a tight spot.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

Trump is in a tight spot.

only the Left believes that.

The majority of Americans support him.

[Smokin Joe]

Not our problem.  If they didn't want to be deported to El Salvador, then they shouldn't have entered the US illegally and forfeited the due process of asylum through their own actions (or lack thereof).

If Bill Clinton can send Elian Gonzales back to Cuba without even granting him an asylum hearing, then Donald Trump can damn sure deport anyone entering the country illegally and allowing the asylum limitation statute expire.

QFT!

[kevindavis007]

The great American experiment ends here.

Something tells me you hate the Constitution.



 

[kevindavis007]

https://twitter.com/AnnCoulter/status/1913551314161656077

Yes, Herr Trump should just ignore the checks and balances

[Free Vulcan]

Something tells me you hate the Constitution.
 

Now if you could only repeal that pesky 13th Amendment, you could build your cheap Iphones here.

[MeganC]

Yes, Herr Trump should just ignore the checks and balances

No, President Trump should insist on the checks and balances and tell the goddamned courts to stop trying to run the country.

[Right_in_Virginia]

Something tells me you hate the Constitution.

I see you've started naming the voices in your head.  Good ---- this should keep you busy. 

[DCPatriot]

I see you've started naming the voices in your head.  Good ---- this should keep you busy.

    

[kevindavis007]

I see you've started naming the voices in your head.  Good ---- this should keep you busy.

You think we should be like El Salvador, Hungary, or Russia? Pick your favorite facist country and move there!

[kevindavis007]

https://twitter.com/amuse/status/1913632038046871987

@Right_in_Virginia


Of course you Magaoids love Andrew Jackson. He tanked the economy, blew up the national bank, and left behind a bad depression that made his successor a one-term joke. He ignored the courts, ruled by ego, and turned the presidency into a circus of spite. But hey, he yelled loudly and punched down — exactly your kind of “leadership.” Just a reminder he was a DEMOCRAT. Just like Herr Trump is.

[kevindavis007]

No, President Trump should insist on the checks and balances and tell the goddamned courts to stop trying to run the country.

@MeganC




Yes, nothing says “checks and balances” like demanding the courts shut up and do what they're told. I’m sure Madison is doing cartwheels in his grave.

[kevindavis007]

Now if you could only repeal that pesky 13th Amendment, you could build your cheap Iphones here.

@Free Vulcan


Nah, I’m not into slave labor — I just don’t feel like shelling out $9,000 for an iPhone built in some bloated union shop where half the money goes to a useless union boss stuffing his face at a steakhouse and the rest slips into an “envelope” for his buddies in the mob. If that’s your idea of ethical labor, so be it — just don’t expect me to pretend it’s noble while I’m getting fleeced.

[Canuck Conservative]

Of course you Magaoids love Andrew Jackson. He tanked the economy, ... and left behind a bad depression ...

Not sure you can single out Jackson for that ... depressions were a regular feature in the 1800s, almost like clockwork every 20 years.

There were "panics" (followed by depressions) in 1837, 1857, 1873, and 1893, usually started by private-bank failures. (The last one was the deepest, for a long time it was known as "the Great Depression", until the 1930s topped it).

[The_Reader_David]

only the Left believes that.

The majority of Americans support him.

Majority support is not an argument for doing away with due process of law.  There are reasons the Founders put anti-democratic measures in the Constitution, like super-majority and ratification requirements for amendments to the Constitution, the unelected Supreme Court, limiting on the suspension of "the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus" to times of war or rebellion, and all of the aspects of due processes and the enumeration of some natural rights as things the Federal Government could not infringe in the Bill of Rights.  As Kevin Williamson described the "here's a list of things you idiots don't get to vote on".  (Too bad the Progressives got rid of indirect election of Senators.)

[Free Vulcan]

@Free Vulcan
Nah, I’m not into slave labor — I just don’t feel like shelling out $9,000 for an iPhone built in some bloated union shop where half the money goes to a useless union boss stuffing his face at a steakhouse and the rest slips into an “envelope” for his buddies in the mob. If that’s your idea of ethical labor, so be it — just don’t expect me to pretend it’s noble while I’m getting fleeced.

Spare me the red herring. Only 10% of our labor force is unionized, so the likelihood of your bloviated scenario is pretty nil. But you have a mind of a frat boy so no surprise.

If you want super cheap stuff, slave labor is the way to do it. You have no problem with the Chinese doing it, so why not move it over here and save transportation costs?

[The_Reader_David]

I think you should all remember that the actual text of the Fifth Amendment includes,

"... nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;...

(emphasis added).

Notice, person, not citizen. 

It is for this reason that the courts are correct in their intervention against Trump's deportations which were proceeding without due process of law.  If we cease to be a government of laws rather than of men, liberty is lost whether it is Biden or Trump or Trump's successsor from whichever party who is casting aside legal niceties.  Everyone on this board ('Rat trolls excepted) was horrified by Obama and Biden abolishing due process for male college students accused of sexual misconduct.  The same horror should apply to abolishing due process for people accused of being in the US illegally, or of being members of some Latin American gang.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

Majority support is not an argument for doing away with due process of law. 

You miss the point entirely.

The Constitution is the Law.  In it there is zero reference to any court, whether it is Supreme or otherwise, being the sole arbiter of what is contained within that document.

Only the Judicial branch has taken it upon itself to declare only IT can do so.

To have the only unelected branch of government to be the sole arbiter without input from the other two branches which are actually elected into office, and tellingly is the only branch where the individuals enjoy lifetime tenure, is the very definition of tyranny, ie - rule by other than the people.  To accept this, Judiciary is the permanent king of our country.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

If you want super cheap stuff, slave labor is the way to do it. You have no problem with the Chinese doing it, so why not move it over here and save transportation costs?

As well as buying it tariff-free/

[Canuck Conservative]

nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law ...

But someone who has already had their immigration hearing and has been ordered deported has already had their "due process of law", correct?

(Trump Admin needs to secure this point at the SC!)

[IsailedawayfromFR]

I think you should all remember that the actual text of the Fifth Amendment includes,

"... nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;...

(emphasis added).

Notice, person, not citizen. 

It is for this reason that the courts are correct in their intervention against Trump's deportations which were proceeding without due process of law.  If we cease to be a government of laws rather than of men, liberty is lost whether it is Biden or Trump or Trump's successsor from whichever party who is casting aside legal niceties.  Everyone on this board ('Rat trolls excepted) was horrified by Obama and Biden abolishing due process for male college students accused of sexual misconduct.  The same horror should apply to abolishing due process for people accused of being in the US illegally, or of being members of some Latin American gang.

Really, really stretching things in your selective referencing, aren't you?

I suppose you also wish to stretch Art I Sec 2 be not only for citizens either so non-citizens can select our representation.

The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States

[Hoodat]

I think you should all remember that the actual text of the Fifth Amendment includes,

"... nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;...

(emphasis added).

Notice, person, not citizen.

No one is being deprived life, liberty, or property.  No one.

It is for this reason that the courts are correct in their intervention against Trump's deportations which were proceeding without due process of law.

"Due Process of Law" is a two-way street.  "Due Process of Law" means that they abide by current US law.  It means that they seek residency legally.  And in the event they cross the border illegally, "Due Process of Law" dictates that they file asylum claims within 12 months of entry.  And if these guidelines were not followed, then "Due Process of Law" dictates that they can be prosecuted and/or deported.  So all this talk of deportations not following "Due Process of Law" is pure unadulterated bullshit.

If we cease to be a government of laws rather than of men, liberty is lost whether it is Biden or Trump or Trump's successsor from whichever party who is casting aside legal niceties.

Let me see if I understand this correctly.  When these people illegally entered this country by the hundreds of thousands, no "Due Process of Law" was required.  No residency application.  No legal entry permit.  All legal requirements waived by fiat.  Yet when it comes to correcting this, you now insist that each one of these "illegal" aliens be granted a hearing?  Yeah, right.

Everyone on this board ('Rat trolls excepted) was horrified by Obama and Biden abolishing due process for male college students accused of sexual misconduct.

Care to expand on that?  Where are these male college students accused of sexual misconduct that were deported, much less denied due process?

[Hoodat]

Majority support is not an argument for doing away with due process of law.

Neither is lying about doing away with due process of law an argument for doing away with Article IV Section 4 of the United States Constitution.

[Fishrrman]

Might as well say it plainly:

I don't believe that illegals should be subject to the same Constitutional "protections" that citizens and legally resident aliens enjoy. No more than would be the soldiers of an invading army, or foreign terrorists.

I don't believe in such "equality" any longer.
Life has taught me otherwise.

Sorry if you don't like this post.

[Sighlass]

I think you should all remember that the actual text of the Fifth Amendment includes,

"... nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;...

Obviously the "person" is a legal citizen of the US... otherwise with super wide interpretation as you used. This would apply to people in other countries that we have no authorization over.