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

[The_Reader_David]

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

Really?  Perhaps the fellow deported to El Salvador, despite having legal status (you can argue it was dubiously attained, but he had it), on the claim that he was a gang member (substantiated only by administrative courts denying him bail) would disagree about not being deprived of liberty.

[DCPatriot]

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.

Exactly, the manner of interpretation shared at this end.   

However our Declaration of Independence states..."all men are created equal".  Not 'all citizens', so I'm having a bit of conflict here. 

[The_Reader_David]

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.

Had the Founders meant citizen, they would have written "citizen".  They did not, they wrote "person".  As to its application to people in other countries, seeing that the United States seems to think our laws apply extraterritorially to people like Manuel Noriega and Julian Assange, I'm not sure who these "people in other countries that we have not authorization over" would be. 

[roamer_1]

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.

But wait a minute friend... Wouldn't that mean that illegal aliens could be shot on sight... that illegal females could be raped without recourse... Could be sold into slavery and forced to serve?

No. Law is law, and at some point must be applied to the person, regardless.

Don't get me wrong. I stand in general agreement with you, but @The_Reader_David 's point cannot be swept aside.

There must be the meanest (poorest) form of constitutional protection, even for the illegal alien. What that should be, outside of full rights has not been quantified herein.

Perhaps they should be treated in the same fashion as military combatants under military code - with a way to declare/request asylum somewhere along the way.

But even in that, I think they should be treated humanely, and have some form of representation - Remember a good share of them are here because our government has let them, with a wink and a nod... The process of reversing that should probably have some guidelines. And that, in absence of what law would proscribe, must needs fall upon the courts, I think.

And in that, the culprit is again, a worthless Congress.

[MeganC]

@kevindavis007

@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.

Tell me: What can't the courts do?

[Right_in_Virginia]

Had the Founders meant citizen, they would have written "citizen".  They did not, they wrote "person". 

It mentions it now in the 14th Amendment passed in 1868.

[DCPatriot]

They entered the country without due process!

Why do they deserve due process
for us to send them back?!

[roamer_1]

They entered the country without due process!

Why do they deserve due process
for us to send them back?!

Send them back WHERE? Finding that out is part of due process. There is interest in treating them criminally, and in that due process IS the process. That is how they are ID'd, fingerprinted, interviewed to determine where they are from,  wants and warrants, etc, etc...

[Right_in_Virginia]

However our Declaration of Independence states..."all men are created equal".  Not 'all citizens', so I'm having a bit of conflict here. 

Our Declaration of Independence is nothing close to law, it is a declaration of war. @DCPatriot

Should a citizen of another country be afforded all rights, privileges and protections of a citizen of the United States -- even those whose first act is to knowingly break our laws upon entering our territory?

[Right_in_Virginia]

Send them back WHERE? Finding that out is part of due process.

No it's not.  We owe no guarantee whatsoever that they'll be returned to Grandma or a place of their choosing.

[DCPatriot]

Our Declaration of Independence is nothing close to law, it is a declaration of war. @DCPatriot

Should a citizen of another country be afforded all rights, privileges and protections of a citizen of the United States -- even those whose first act is to knowingly break our laws upon entering our territory?

@Right_in_Virginia

No!  As I posted in a later reply #56 here.  

[Right_in_Virginia]

@Right_in_Virginia

No!  As I posted in a later reply #56 here.  

 

[DCPatriot]

Send them back WHERE? Finding that out is part of due process. There is interest in treating them criminally, and in that due process IS the process. That is how they are ID'd, fingerprinted, interviewed to determine where they are from,  wants and warrants, etc, etc...

@roamer_1

LOL!

I'm thinking of all the movies and pilot episodes that begin with prisoners escorted to the exits thru electronic gates and doors to the parking lot or sidewalks with just the clothes on their backs. 

Anything more than that will tie up our court systems for a decade...which IMO, is the RAT plan all along!

[roamer_1]

No it's not.  We owe no guarantee whatsoever that they'll be returned to Grandma or a place of their choosing.

So what? You thimk you can pack em all in cattle cars and send em back to Mexico?

[rustynail]

Some should read The Camp of the Saints.  We could be 'due processed' out of our country..

[roamer_1]

@roamer_1

LOL!

I'm thinking of all the movies and pilot episodes that begin with prisoners escorted to the exits thru electronic gates and doors to the parking lot or sidewalks with just the clothes on their backs. 

Anything more than that will tie up our court systems for a decade...which IMO, is the RAT plan all along!

You don't get it @DCPatriot ... in order to send them, that means a destination. That means a positive ID, and clearances from the accepting nation... passport. That's all part of due process.

[DCPatriot]

You don't get it @DCPatriot ... in order to send them, that means a destination. That means a positive ID, and clearances from the accepting nation... passport. That's all part of due process.

NO, @roamer_1   YOU don't get it.

You take them to an border entry point and push them thru the ...gate...door...hatch...booth...whatever.

With nothing but the clothes on their backs.

Let Canada or Mexico deal with them.  And that includes those flown in here from Asian countries by the DEMS in the middle of the night.

[cato potatoe]

You don't get it @DCPatriot ... in order to send them, that means a destination. That means a positive ID, and clearances from the accepting nation... passport. That's all part of due process.

Our modern notion of due process will not allow for 20 million illegals to be deported.  The system we have is not working, and it will not work.  It needs to be adapted. 

Republicans could try.  They could eliminate the filibuster and expand the court system, fund detention centers, facilitate the transportation, etc.  One judge after another would shoot it down.  The ACLU is committed to the destruction of American society, and will devote every resource it has towards that end. 

The only way this gets done is if Trump follows the lead of Eisenhower.  I’m sure the lolbertarians will crow about “muh freedom” but there is pretty much zero chance the people who drafted the Bill of Rights would have tolerated a third world invasion of this magnitude, and would have taken care of matters in their own way. 

[cato potatoe]

Alito blasts 'unprecedented' SCOTUS move

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/alito-blasts-unprecedented-scotus-move-halt-trumps-venezuelan-deportations-legally-questionable

[Hoodat]

Really?  Perhaps the fellow deported to El Salvador, despite having legal status (you can argue it was dubiously attained, but he had it), on the claim that he was a gang member (substantiated only by administrative courts denying him bail) would disagree about not being deprived of liberty.

It is beyond the jurisdiction of the United States to guarantee liberty outside our borders.  We are not the ones depriving Abrego Garcia of his liberty.  We are simply deporting him back to his home country because he does not have a legal right to reside in the United States.  It really is that simple.

[Hoodat]

Don't get me wrong. I stand in general agreement with you, but @The_Reader_David 's point cannot be swept aside.

There must be the meanest (poorest) form of constitutional protection, even for the illegal alien. What that should be, outside of full rights has not been quantified herein.

Perhaps they should be treated in the same fashion as military combatants under military code - with a way to declare/request asylum somewhere along the way.

In 2019, Garcia was brought before an immigration judge.  He has resided illegally within the US for a period of eight years.  At no time during those eight years did he apply for asylum.  Based on those facts alone, he is eligible for deportation.  "Due process" was already served.  It matters not that he beat his wife.  It matters not that he was/is a member of MS-13.  It matters not that he was caught smuggling illegals in the last few years.  All that matters is that he is in this country illegally, his request for asylum seven years after the deadline expired, and that deportation was authorized (except to El Salvador).

No, he doesn't get a do-over.  He doesn't get special consideration because some Maryland politician has a man-crush on him.  He gets deported because he broke the law entering the country and continue to live here illegally for fourteen years.  He already had his day in court.

[Hoodat]

Our modern notion of due process will not allow for 20 million illegals to be deported.

I disagree.  Arrest 20 million.  Hold them in jail while they await their 'due process' hearing.  If any have been deported before, then charge them and begin prosecution proceedings (2-year sentence).  It's not that difficult.

Sure, it make take years before they get their hearing.  But the fact that they are here illegally in the first place should be cause enough to keep them locked up until their hearings come up.

[Hoodat]

You don't get it @DCPatriot ... in order to send them, that means a destination. That means a positive ID, and clearances from the accepting nation... passport. That's all part of due process.

The best part of building a wall is that you then have something to throw them over.

But yes, there has to be a nation willing to receive.  El Salvador is one of those nations.

[cato potatoe]

I disagree.  Arrest 20 million.  Hold them in jail while they await their 'due process' hearing.  If any have been deported before, then charge them and begin prosecution proceedings (2-year sentence).  It's not that difficult.

Sure, it make take years before they get their hearing.  But the fact that they are here illegally in the first place should be cause enough to keep them locked up until their hearings come up.

Where are you going to store 20 million people, while the ACLU spends years trying to get them all released?  There isn’t enough prison space for ten percent of that.  The annual cost of federal incarceration is $45,000.  Multiplied by 20 million is 900 billion dollars per year. 

[MeganC]

Where are you going to store 20 million people, while the ACLU spends years trying to get them all released?  There isn’t enough prison space for ten percent of that.  The annual cost of federal incarceration is $45,000.  Multiplied by 20 million is 900 billion dollars per year.

The ACLU will go bankrupt trying to defend 20m invaders. Good.