Going to be a finding of “Ultra Vires” somewhere in the near future imo.
Federal District Court bootstrapping ability to formulate and execute Foreign Policy
- Thread starter LrgK9
- Start date
Going to be a finding of “Ultra Vires” somewhere in the near future imo.
These lower courts are assuming authority of the Supreme Court. It is disturbing when conservative and liberal leaning District Judges are stopping the executive branch of Democratic and Republican Presidents.
These are bought and paid for judges who contributed to the Biden war chest. Theyll be no match for Alina haba and the appeals judges
That thug couldn’t give a crap about the constitution. Yes the courts have a role to play in reviewing the legality of actions taken by the other branches. Seems like we need to learn about separation of powers
Yes an advocate for criminal activity- usually as part of an organized criminal entity.
These are illegal aliens. They can be deported. Period. With or without proving any additional criminal activity With or without invoking alien enemies act. That judge is a disgrace. I’m sure you’re aware he’s the fisa court judge that improperly granted spying on Trump campaign. He’s also the judge that refused to penalize the fbi agent for lying to the court in the spying case. He declared the agent had suffered enough by losing his job and enduring public scrutiny. Interesting how these same judges keep surfacing.
Last edited:
That is not an accurate statement of the law. We have laws and a process including review for eligibility for protection under the Convention Against Torture.
Biden crime family. I agree. Thugs. Shameful
How the media ignores pattern of Democratic attacks on the courts
Charles Schumer is the latest leader to make such threats.
thehill.com
Democrats’ Latest Attack on the Courts: Threaten Their Security Funding | Republican Leader
The official website of the United States Senate Majority Leader John Thune, Senator from South Dakota
www.republicanleader.senate.gov
At least we aren’t hypocritical or anything. 🤦♂️
Last edited:
Take it up with El Salvador. They were illegally here. Apparently they were convicted criminals there.
J
Relax. Joe's out of office.
A point of view supporting deportation:
The law supports Trump's deportation of violent gang members, despite judge's errant ruling
one thing for sure, the Democratic Party favorability rating is nose diving with the progressives supporting the violent gangs against deportation
I favor the rule of law. And if you think flouting the rule of law stops with one objectionable group of people then you are simply naive.A point of view supporting deportation:
The law supports Trump's deportation of violent gang members, despite judge's errant ruling
one thing for sure, the Democratic Party favorability rating is nose diving with the progressives supporting the violent gangs against deportation
Speaking of rule of Law:
8 U.S. Code § 1227 - Deportable aliens
Very long, but here is the start:
(a) Classes of deportable aliensAny alien (including an alien crewman) in and admitted to the United States shall, upon the order of the Attorney General, be removed if the alien is within one or more of the following classes of deportable aliens:
(1) Inadmissible at time of entry or of adjustment of status or violates status
(A) Inadmissible aliens
Any alien who at the time of entry or adjustment of status was within one or more of the classes of aliens inadmissible by the law existing at such time is deportable.
(B) Present in violation of law
Any alien who is present in the United States in violation of this chapter or any other law of the United States, or whose nonimmigrant visa (or other documentation authorizing admission into the United States as a nonimmigrant) has been revoked under section 1201(i) of this title, is deportable.
Yes- now read from Section 240 and 241 of the same Act that describes the legal process required for proof of such grounds of deportability and Section 209, 240A, and several other sections which describe alternatives to removal that aliens are entitled to be considered for even where they are removable. This is the law. If you don’t like the law, you can have your elected representatives change the law. You cannot just ignore the law.
Last edited:
You obviously did not read through 1227 of the 8th U.S. Code
I just don't understand liberals supporting this now. We have deported illegal aliens ( not immigrants ) for years this same way. Except during the Obama and Biden administrations anytime we have detained illegal aliens here , INS or Border Patrol took them and deported them within a few days under the auspices of 8USC 1227
obviously your concept of Rule of Law and mine are different. I keep it simple like the short version the ABA has:
- The doctrine that no individual is above the law and that everyone must answer to it.
- The maxim whereby governmental decisions are made by applying known legal principles.
- A state of order in which events conform to the law.
Last edited:
They keep find ing these judges. Then as they are exposed how much they contributed to get that job they disappear. Problem is there’s a ton of them.
Democrats touting the "rule of law" make me want to laugh and cry at the same time
1994 U.S. signed it, but the U.S. included several reservations, understandings, and declarations (RUDs) that limited its obligations under the treaty.
That is such BS. Trump doesn't get to make things up or make laws. He can't just declare "we are at war." With out courts we are a dictatorship. Sure I want criminal gangs deported, but there is a right way to follow the law and have due process. You break the rules/laws against the bad folks and then who says you/me are not bad folks next time. Trump, Stephen Miller, and some others are unhinged and evil men.
A federal judge has no power to usurp Executive Branch authority or dictate foreign policy to the president.
No, President Trump did not ignore Judge Boasberg’s order to halt deportations of alleged terrorists and gang members. The deportations occurred before the order was issued, and the administration argued that courts lack jurisdiction once the individuals left U.S. territory.
Yes, it would have been constitutional for Trump to defy the order. The Executive Branch has its own authority to interpret the Constitution, particularly in matters of national security and foreign affairs, as supported by the Founders’ view and historical precedent.
Judicial supremacy is a flawed concept that unbalances the constitutional system, and the president’s powers under the Alien Enemies Act are likely unreviewable by courts.
Beyond that, your post was completely rational.
At least hes consistent. Every post is moronic and nonsensical.A federal judge has no power to usurp Executive Branch authority or dictate foreign policy to the president.
No, President Trump did not ignore Judge Boasberg’s order to halt deportations of alleged terrorists and gang members. The deportations occurred before the order was issued, and the administration argued that courts lack jurisdiction once the individuals left U.S. territory.
Yes, it would have been constitutional for Trump to defy the order. The Executive Branch has its own authority to interpret the Constitution, particularly in matters of national security and foreign affairs, as supported by the Founders’ view and historical precedent.
Judicial supremacy is a flawed concept that unbalances the constitutional system, and the president’s powers under the Alien Enemies Act are likely unreviewable by courts.
Beyond that, your post was completely rational.
They give $50 million at Starbucks guy that spilled tea on himself. What do you figure this judge wants to give these poor gangbangers? $100 million each?
You clearly do not know what you are talking about. What you shared was like sharing the criminal code without understanding there is a criminal procedure and sentencing regs. It really isn’t worth talking to you about it any more.
It is called following the law
1227 of the 8th U.S. Code
Yes we can all complain about the bias of a particular judge or justice, including corruption like Justice Thomas. But be very careful about suggesting you can disregard a ruling of a judge or justice because you believe they are corrupt. That is a bright line. Because once you do that, you won’t like it when the shoe is on the other foot. That is the brilliance of the founders and separation of powers. If you believe a judge is corrupt then impeach him. There is a constitutional process for dealing with it.
I would like to encourage the democrats to continue to take great effort in doing things like this. Suing to keep 300 terrorists in this country is a political winner.
Almost as good as suing to keep the Hamas supporting “protestor” keeping Jewish kids from going to class….in good visa status.
Almost as good as sitting on their hands and not supporting kids with brain cancer.
Almost as good as the only applause in the state of the union being related to prolonging an unwinnable war that costs a thousand lives a week.
America loves this stuff.
Keep it up Dems.
Opening up the floodgates into our country is what is bs.
You overstate judicial supremacy and ignore the Constitution’s balance of power.
The Founders didn’t make judicial rulings sacred, each branch can resist overreach. Your “shoe on the other foot” overlooks context as executive defiance often targets security, not routine cases. Your response ignores the Executive’s Article II authority over foreign affairs and security, which has been upheld.
If deportations preceded a judicial order, no law was violated as courts lose jurisdiction post-removal. The Alien Enemies Act further boosts unreviewable presidential power in security matters. Both have been tested in court.
Impeachment’s a weak fix and rarely used while history show defiance is constitutional, not chaos. Jefferson, Lincoln, Jackson, and FDR all exercised it. Blind obedience elevates judges above the system, which Federalist 78 clearly rejects.
Some are lost on the fact of U S Code. The 8th U S Code is the codification of the Immigration and Nationality Act for the purposes of enforcement. This has been upheld by the Supreme Court ( but what do they know about rule of law).
The last guy contributed $700k. At least we know the going rate.
WRONG. But good try. Illegal entry is a minor misdemeanor on the level of littering in a national park. Due process rights apply to all “person
I think you mean Title 8. And yes you have revealed yourself to know only one section of that code. Nobody is disputing that these individuals could potentially be deported if the correct process were undertaken. Process matters.
Agree to an extent. My question is why is the left picking this legal battle with such ferocity? Specifically surrounding the quick deportation of violent illegal gang members? They seemingly totally ignored enforcing the law for four years.
In other words, if ever there was a time to let what is a gray area legal theory protecting illegals slide.....maybe it would be when known violent gang members are being removed from our Country. Feels like just another situation where if Trump is doing it, it has to be bad. And leading the left down these kinds of terrible political rabbit holes is becoming way too easy for him.
There is an exception. Any illegal alien found in this country within two years of entering and less than 100 miles from the border may be subject to an expedited deportation. They would not have to have a hearing before the judge. They also in this same circumstance do not have any protection from an illegal search and seizure
What rights do undocumented immigrants have in the US?
Amid reports of “enhanced targeted operations” conducted by the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcements in Austin, it begs the question: What rights do undocumented immigrants have in…
www.borderreport.com
This sounds fairly uninformed but not totally wrong. The scope of the president’s power over immigration is very high when it concerns an individual outside the US. So for example whether to exclude certain categories of individuals- or to interdict them in the open seas. The issue is far less simple when the individual is in the US or has been granted a status in the US. The President still has enormous power but not unlimited- it is limited by Congress’s plenary power to regulate naturalization (Art I, Sec 8, Cl 4) as well as the commerce clause and common defense clause. And the Supreme Court has specifically recognized Congress’s right to legislate in this area. So the President must act consistent with the law. He is further limited (less so than in other contexts) by considerations of due process.
You are correct about expedited removal but even those subject to expedited removal may be considered for protection from removal through the reasonable fear interview process. Basically even the most dangerous person can be protected from returning to the country where they would be tortured or killed. These are our fundamental principles as a country. This is why Trump is trying to send people to third countries. It’s not a bad idea, nor a new one, but it too must undergonthe same scrutiny. I can’t say oh well you will be tortured in your home country of Venezuela so I will just send you to North Korea. You have to afford the same review for the substitute country of removal.There is an exception. Any illegal alien found in this country within two years of entering and less than 100 miles from the border may be subject to an expedited deportation. They would not have to have a hearing before the judge. They also in this same circumstance do not have any protection from an illegal search and seizure
What rights do undocumented immigrants have in the US?
Amid reports of “enhanced targeted operations” conducted by the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcements in Austin, it begs the question: What rights do undocumented immigrants have in…www.borderreport.com
Similar threads
